 That concludes topical questions. The next item of business is a debate on motion 4294 in the name of Claire Adamson on behalf of the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee on inquiry into the Scottish Government's international work. I'd be grateful if members who wish to take part in the debate were to press their request to speak buttons now. I call on Claire Adamson to speak to and move the motion on behalf of the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I'm delighted to rise as convener of the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee or SEAC Committee to bring this debate to the chamber and move this motion. This is a large area to cover and we have been grateful for everyone who gave evidence to the committee and to our clerks for organising our evidence sessions and also I'm very grateful to my committee members for their endeavours in this area. This is something perhaps we should take a step back from and widen the lens to see the bigger picture of what we were trying to look at. External Affairs is one part of a remit in the committee but one that represents a vast policy area and the themes from our inquiry into the Scottish Government's international work are fivefold. I won't be able to do justice to them all today but I'm sure my committee colleagues will pick up some of the issues that I will miss today. But in outline, our report highlights the importance of adopting a strategic approach, the need for prioritisation of policies to flow from that approach and an emphasis on effective collaboration across Governments. The report also highlights challenges inherent to measuring impact and the no small matter of how we improve parliamentary scrutiny of the Government's work in this area. I will offer some context for each of those while also setting out our key findings under the headings of updating the international framework, a relationship with the EU, international relations more widely and international development. Since devolution began, successive Scottish Governments have sought a European presence as well as a wider international engagement. Scotland's international framework was published five years ago but it has not been revisited since Brexit. The Scottish Government was committed to publishing a revised document and yesterday they published Scotland's new global affairs framework. That is a very welcome development. However, I'm sure that the cabinet secretary will appreciate that the committee hasn't had time or opportunity to consider its content but I will look forward to hearing more this afternoon. I will necessity need to keep my own remarks to within the parameters of our inquiry. The Scottish Government's global affairs framework, which I appreciate few of us have had time to look through. However, as convener, are you expecting more from the update of the international framework, which, as you say, is now five years old? I'm sure that the committee is looking forward to all the developments in this area because it's very important that we have the most up-to-date information from the Government. I'm sure that the cabinet secretary will elaborate on that in his own contributions this afternoon. This is not simply a question of who we engage with but also how and why. The focus on Europe is expected to be a priority but we also take the view that wider external engagement is necessary. Engagement that must be informed by a strategic approach and with clear geographical and thematic rationale. We believe that a revised international framework should link to and flow from the national performance framework. It should meet the heart of the Scottish Government's approach to external affairs and it should provide a foundation for all other relevant frameworks, strategies and policy documents. Such an approach will provide a better understanding of the Scottish Government's priorities. We also recommend that the revised framework sets out values and objectives, stipulates a long-time framework, prioritises countries, regions and themes. It should also provide a clear rationale for that prioritisation, links to relevant aspects of economic, cultural and education policy and it should also integrate international offices into its strategy. The revised framework should explore how to better inform the public and the media of that work and to take into account the findings of our report and that it should also be published as a draft for consultation. Furthermore, with so much of the focus on trade, we suggest that there should be a read across with key economic strategies, including the report of the advisory group on economic recovery, Scotland's national strategy for economic transformation and Scotland Outlook 2030 responsible tourism for a sustainable future. In terms of the European dimension, we consider it crucial that Scotland continues to have a strong relationship with the EU. This is a very evolving situation prospectus and I believe that the Queen's speech has more developments in that area and I look forward to the cabinet secretary's response to those. We recommend that the Scottish Government publishes a strategy setting out how they intend to approach that engagement. The strategy should include the priorities in relation to alignment with the EU law, operation of the trade and cooperation agreement, engagement of Scottish institutions in EU programmes and a UK-wide approach and soft power and informal engagement. Until today, the Scottish Government is still to respond to the committee's report on the continuity act. We are concerned since we published this on November, but I hope that the cabinet secretary will be able to elaborate on the matter during his own remarks. I will now turn to the wider international relations and soft power. Dr Kirsty Hughes of the Royal Society of Edinburgh told us that Scotland's trade, cultural links, soft power reputation and more extend globally so prioritising some external affairs work beyond the EU is clearly necessary. James Hampson, director of the UK region and external affairs of the British Council said, we are in the optimism business. We help people to realise their ambitions and aspirations. The British Council spoke about research undertaken with Creative Scotland and University Scotland. Work that showed the impact of soft power on business, tourism, international study and diplomacy. As a former cultural and external affairs secretary, does she agree with me that soft power is something that you actually do, but it is not something that you advertise in a soft power strategy? From the committee's point of view, what we want to do is be able to understand the priorities of the Government and to celebrate the good work that is being done out there, which we think deserves more coverage in the media and for the public to be aware of that work taking place. In a recent study carried out by the University of Edinburgh, the stress potential returns from investment in this area. A 1 per cent increase in the implications covered by cultural institutions, for instance, showed that almost 0.66 per cent increase in inward investment for the parent country, a figure that would have generated £1.3 billion for the UK in 2016. The Scottish Arts and Humanities Alliance, SAHA, highlighted a reputation and climate policy digital economy and human rights legislation. Where are the areas of improvement? Professor Murray-Pittock, co-chair of SAHA, pointed to the relatively poor recognition of Scotland's cutting edge position in science as one of the most sighted countries in the world. We pride ourselves on being a science nation, but perhaps we have to promote that just a little bit wider. As someone who was introduced to Professor David McMillan, Nobel Prize winner from Scotland in the Royal Society of Edinburgh just recently, those opportunities are there for us. The aim in SAHA's view was to modernise the image that we present to the world while not losing the vitality of its appeal. The Scottish Government plans to produce a cultural diplomacy strategy. We recommend that this includes a career rationale, setting out priorities and objectives, again linking to and flowing from the revised international framework, and also setting out how it will interplay with the UK approach to foreign policy. Our view is that issues prioritised in external relations ought to be driven by match and inform domestic priorities. Policy coherence, being the phrase used by the academics and commentators, according to the United Nations, policy coherence can help policy makers better understand how their policy choices today can affect the future population and how their choices could impact on the wellbeing and sustainable development elsewhere. The harmonisation of policy will be important for mainstreaming the international agenda across government. But it is not just policy makers. We are all only to understand how our actions and our behaviours impact on other communities, however far from these shores. Professor Kirk Mills, University of Dundee, and Dr Andrew Burdsell University of Edinburgh told us that human rights should be embedded in all aspects of international engagements. They commend the Scottish Government's commitment to develop a feminist foreign policy and highlight initiatives around climate justice, human rights and peace building. Alasdair Allan. I thank the member for giving way. She refers to human rights and, of course, as I think she has alluded to in the Queen's speech just today, we have heard reference to UK human rights legislation. Can she indicate whether she feels that this is going to have an implication on Scotland's work in human rights, the area thereof, given that we don't really know why the UK intends to replace this legislation in the first place? I thank Dr Allan for his intervention. Yes, I think that Scotland has shown its commitment to human rights and I think that this is something that the committee will be looking into going forward following the Queen's speech. I'm afraid that I haven't been able to take on all the details of that as yet. The committee is concerned that any tensions between ambitious commitments, whether in the realms of trade, education or cultural exchange, are subject to parliamentary scrutiny. We need good information to gauge where there is policy coherence, where it may be lacking or where the case can be made for trade-offs and compromise. The Law Society of Scotland argued for greater transparency. They told us a clearer and detailed strategy would be easier to assess in terms of outcomes and delivery. Similarly, the Royal Society of Edinburgh said that more regular and detailed reporting could enable further scrutiny. We recognise the challenges in measuring the impact of diplomacy and soft power. Such work can be difficult to quantify in direct and immediate benefits. However, there are initiatives that seek to address this, including the now formally launched Scottish Council on Global Affairs. This is an independent academic network that is supported on a cross-party basis. As Professor Phillips O'Brien, chair of the strategic studies at the University of Andrews, has said, it is the right institution at the right time. We encourage the Scottish Government to keep exploring how it can measure the impact of its international work. We also recommend that it publish an annual report detailing the contribution of the international offices. International development is the final area that I want to cover, Presiding Officer, and we wish to acknowledge the importance within the international strategy. Written responses to our inquiry suggest that policy should be based around developing thematic expertise in areas of climate change, gender and migration, the latter including support for refugees. The committee has been looking separately at the humanitarian response to the crisis in Ukraine, and we have taken powerful evidence from the Disasters Emergency Committee, the Scottish Refugee Council and the Red Cross and other. In the wider context of international development policy, we recognise that the budget, welcome as recent incantation has been, remains relatively modest. I have run out of time, Presiding Officer. I have been able to cover everything that I would have liked to, but as I said, I am sure that the committee members and other members in the chamber will pick up on some of those areas, and I move the motion in my name. Thank you to the convener for her remarks. I very much look forward to debating her committee's excellent report and hearing from members across the chamber who serve on her committee. I would first like to reflect on how much the world has changed between my committee appearance in early February and now. I am sure that all colleagues are sickened by the evidence that continues to emerge of war crimes committed by Russian forces in Ukraine, and I welcome the decision to suspend the Russian Federation from the UN Human Rights Council. The Russia must be held accountable for any abuses it commits on Ukrainian territory, and it must fulfil its human rights obligations, including its on-going liability for breaches of the European Convention on Human Rights. Above all, and I am sure that I speak for everybody in the chamber, we salute the courage and perseverance of the Ukrainian people and will continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with them for as long as it takes. To the committee's report specifically, I warmly welcome its publication and this debate. The Scottish Government is going to respond to the report as a whole in the coming weeks. For now, there are four main areas of the committee's report, which I wish to focus on in the time that I have allotted. Firstly, the programme for government and its commitment to publish a new global affairs framework to guide Scotland's international engagement. Secondly, the role of the Scottish Government's international offices. Thirdly, Scotland's relationship with the European Union and fourthly, the Scottish Government's international development work. On the global affairs framework, I am pleased that the committee and its Government agree in a number of areas in regards to the global affairs framework in particular, but not limited to the importance of ensuring join-up between our various domestic and international strategies. In the face of the invasion of Ukraine, nations are being tested on whether they support not just the principle but the reality of a rules-based approach to protect their values. That is why it is so important that we set out clearly what our values are and what we hope to achieve through our international work. Scotland's commitment to internationalism and upholding those values can be found in the global affairs framework that we published yesterday. The framework sets out the values and principles that underpin our international activity, recognising in particular that, increasingly, the global and regional context impacts the achievement of domestic objectives. For that reason, it is imperative that Scotland becomes more active internationally on issues that matter most in helping Scotland flourish. We are a nation that prides itself on being open, welcoming and connected, and we have demonstrated that we can make a constructive contribution to addressing global challenges. We have an important role to play in demonstrating high international standards and showing global leadership. While I believe that Scotland's contribution on the global stage would be increased with the powers of independence, we must work within the limitations of the devolution settlement in the meantime. The global affairs framework shows how we can best do this. It highlights our determination not simply to make Scotland a fairer and a more prosperous country but also for Scotland to play its part in building a fairer and a more prosperous world. I was delighted to indeed be happy to. The document that was published yesterday is rather thin, if not a bit flimsy, but why is there no mention in this document about the Scottish Government leveraging Scotland's place in the United Kingdom by working within the United Kingdom to promote the values that Angus Robertson is talking about? Why no mention of the United Kingdom as a partner? Absolutely delighted to do just that. In fact, I did it only last Thursday when I was at Scotland House promoting Scottish culture in the rest of the United Kingdom. It is something that we take seriously in that area and in others. On the international network, I was delighted to see the committee's enthusiasm for and consensus on the excellent job Scotland's international officers do on a day-to-day basis. The committee asked how we measure the contribution made by the international officers and they recommend an annual report. The committee also recommended detailed justifications being produced for why specific equations were chosen for our international officers and also how they fit within our own strategic objectives. We support the idea of an annual report. All of the Scottish Government's international officers measure activities, their output and successes on an on-going basis to inform the focus prioritisation and rationale for work. We have a continuous process to make sure that our work is measurable, transparent and available to the public. On future locations, the programme for government commits to reviewing our approach to future policy and economic engagement with a view to enhancing Scotland's global reach and presence. This will build on the processes that we already have in place and will be alongside our work establishing new offices in Copenhagen and in Warsaw. Willie Rennie. That is all fine, but what we really need to get to is the substance of where the Government has not been progressing. The Erasmus scheme has been reported in the Herald today. There is still no scheme for Scotland, like there has been in Wales for a year already. Why is the Government dragging its feet on getting the replacement to the Erasmus scheme set up? I will be coming on to that point later. Incidentally, I am also summing up in this debate as well, so I will be able to reflect on members' contributions. Returning to the international offices, which is what I was addressing when Willie Rennie intervened on another issue, we will be happy to keep the committee updated on this work as it develops in the months ahead. In preparing their report, the committee was able to hear from our offices at first hand. I have to say that the visits that I have made in recent weeks to Ireland, to the United States, to Canada, Germany and indeed to London entirely support that conclusion. Not only was I impressed myself but I heard and I saw at first hand just what a positive impact our external network makes. In March I visited Dublin to meet with the Irish Government for the first annual review of our bilateral co-operation framework. Scotland and Ireland have an ambitious joint work programme to deliver improved government relations, business and economic ties, health collaboration as well as co-operation in the fields of academia and research, community and diaspora as well as rural, coastal and island communities. In early April I visited the United States and Canada. There was a focus on businesses involved in high-tech and high-value jobs in digital markets from infrastructure to gaming as well as other high-growth areas such as sustainable tourism. I was also able to build on engagements from COP26 and take part in Tartonday, a timely reminder of the importance of friendship and community between Scotland and the United States and Scotland and Canada respectively. In late April I visited Bavaria to take part in the Ludwig Ehad summit, the German Davos, which brought together top decision makers from politics, research and industry. Being part of this high-profile event ensured that we could reinforce the potential of Scotland's considerable renewable resources, including green hydrogen, to contribute to security of energy supply in Europe. It is a good example of what Clare Adamson highlighted as a need to promote Scotland's excellence in science and technology. Those visits emphasise the breadth of work that is covered by our international work, the product of sustained long-term in-country engagement from health collaboration in Ireland to high-tech industry in North America to green hydrogen in Germany. Those areas of focus will help to create domestic opportunities, to broaden our horizons, to attract interest and investment and ultimately benefit the people of Scotland. On a relationship with the European Union, the EU represents what might be the most successful peace project in world history and we will continue to advocate Scotland's place in both it and the world. As a fully integrated part of the EU for half a century, Scotland was woven into the very fabric of Europe, our economy benefiting from access to the world's largest market and our social and regulatory protections reflecting the highest global standards. Scotland shares its fundamental values with the EU, including the rule of law, democracy, human dignity and equality, and is why the Scottish Government is committed to remaining close to the European Union. We will continue to do that with constructive engagement on our priorities with the EU institutions through the work of Scotland House in Brussels, with member states bilaterally and through our expanding network of international offices in Europe. Consistent with that is Scotland's commitment that we will seek to align with the European Union in a manner that contributes towards maintaining and advancing our world-class standards across a range of policy areas. Doing so helps to protect the health and wellbeing of people in Scotland, it maintains Scotland's international reputation and by protecting the standards that Scotland enjoys, we will ease the process of Scotland's eventual return to the European Union. Until that point in time, we will maintain alignment where possible with the EU through primary and secondary legislation, including through the powers granted under the UK withdrawal from the European Union Continuity Scotland Act 2021. This act provides Scottish ministers with an essential power to maintain their ability to align with the EU where other legislative methods may not be available or the most appropriate. Our approach to using this power was set out in draft for parlance consideration on 29 October 2021. I would also like to thank both the constitution and the rural affairs committees for their helpful consideration of the draft documents and the on-going engagement between our respective officials in support of this. I believe that the comments received will improve the effectiveness of ministers' considerations of the use of the continuity act power and the overall alignment policy, and I am pleased to report that this morning we laid in Parliament a revised policy statement reflecting Parliament's contributions. Of course, happy to. I'm really glad to see it's going to be on the parliamentary website, it's not quite there yet, but it wouldn't have been helpful before this morning to put it out so that we could have actually reflected on it in today's debate. My apologies that Sarah Boyack hasn't had it in good time and yes I agree it would be good for all members to have such documents at the disposal before debates. The revised policy statement includes revisions in respect of a number of key areas all designed to improve transparency. It includes a commitment to provide regular information on our legislative intentions that will assist Parliament, stakeholders and the people of Scotland to better understand and scrutinise how ministers will approach decisions about alignment. I look forward to engaging further with the committee to consider and work towards implementing these commitments. On international development, I pay tribute as ever to the cross-party support that the Scottish Government's international development work finds in this Parliament. We do not take that support for granted, particularly in light of the cuts to aid that we've seen made by the UK Government, with devastating impact on the ground in the global south, particularly during a global pandemic. The committee raised a number of important points, including the importance placed on policy coherence by the OECD and the United Nations. Our commitment to policy coherence for sustainable development, or PSD, is well documented. It already forms a key plank of our international development strategy. We are clear that international development finance is only one part of the development toolkit. The impact that global north countries can make is equally, if not more important, than their financial investment, not only across their government policy, but through encouraging their populations to think about their impact of their actions on others, whether in relation to climate change behaviours or fair trade choices. We have been taking a strategic approach to PCSD across government and ministerial portfolios, such as climate energy, education, health and procurement. I will end on the point that I made before on an intervention to Willie Rennie. I will be summing up at the end of this debate, so any ground that I have not been able to cover or other members have yet to raise in debate, I will be happy to reflect on in my conclusion at the end of the debate. I now call on Maurice Golden up to nine minutes, please, Mr Golden. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I start by welcoming the committee's report on its inquiry into the Scottish Government's international work and to note that the Scottish Conservatives support the findings of their report? I would also like to thank the clerks and committee members for their contribution. Scotland has so much to offer the world in terms of our business exports, our culture, our ideas and innovations and as a destination for tourism and investment. We wholeheartedly agree with the stated objectives of Scotland's international offices, which are to, and I quote, improve Scotland's international profile, attract investment to Scotland, help businesses to trade internationally, promoting and securing Scotland's research and innovation capability, partnership and funding and to protect and enhance Scotland's interests in the EU and beyond. Anything that promotes Scotland in this way is welcome. However, it is a concern the degree to which the SNP Government appears to be operating these offices outwith this stated objective. The Scottish Government has outlined its intention to use its international relations to develop a separate foreign policy from the rest of the UK. That is something that we strongly oppose, given the strength and global reach of the UK's diplomatic service. If the SNP Government wants to best serve the interests of Scotland, then its international activities should work in conjunction with the UK's foreign commonwealth and development office to best promote Scotland, utilising and maximising the collective resources of the Scottish and UK Government. We know that underlying agenda of the SNP Government is the promotion of independence and it is of significant concern the degree to which the SNP are using their international work to promote this agenda. The SNP have stated on their website that they are seeking to keep close ties with Europe in order to prepare for an independent Scotland. Their website says, and I quote, we will prepare to rejoin the EU by keeping a close relationship with Europe. We will strengthen our Brussels base and make Scotland House the hub of our diplomatic representation across Europe. Strengthening Scotland's Brussels base in order to promote independence should not be the focus of our interactions with the EU. Angus Robertson further reiterated this approach when he said in an interview about the SNP Government's international work, for those Governments that are interested in the future of Scotland, the future of the UK, they want to know what is happening in relation to the forthcoming independence referendum. According to the Centre for Constitutional Change, the SNP sees developing an international persona as a key part of its plans for independence. We know that the SNP are using and will continue to use their international work to promote independence contrary to the stated objectives of their international offices. That makes it ever more important that the findings of this report are implemented. In terms of those findings, we agree with the committee that Scotland's approach to international work should be centred on a revised international framework linked to the national performance framework. This would enable a better understanding of the priorities of the Scottish Government's international work and would allow for greater scrutiny of their activities. It is disappointing therefore that the SNP broke their promise to publish their updated international framework in the last financial year, although I recognise that they have now published it. While working closely with the EU will mean a key priority for the Scottish Government's international work, the Scottish Conservatives share the view of the committee that the Scottish Government should publish a clear strategy and priorities in relation to its engagement with the EU. This is necessary to allow for effective scrutiny of the Scottish Government's interactions with the EU and to ensure that the Scottish Government is promoting Scotland's interests across the EU. Although it is right that the EU remains a key engagement partner, there are global opportunities, networks and cultural links that should be further developed and we agree with the committee that the Scottish Government's global outreach should be informed by a strategic approach with clear, geographical and thematic rationale. We know that a 2009 Scottish Government paper put the global number of those claiming some degree of Scottish ancestry at between 28 and 40 million and the Scottish Conservatives outlined in their 2021 manifesto that we would like to see the Scottish Government making better use of the Scottish diaspora so we welcome the committee's call for more detail on how the Scottish Government intends to maximise its engagement with the Scottish diaspora and for the inclusion of that approach in the revised international framework. Many of the recommendations of the report focus on transparency and accountability. We know that transparency and accountability is not the Scottish Government's strong point but reform is needed. Scottish Conservatives are aligned to a number of the recommendations from the committee in terms of its views on transparency and accountability. As the Scottish Government looks to expand its international work, it is right that the Scottish Parliament has a role in scrutinising that work. The Scottish Government should make its objectives from its international work clear, detail how it will measure the impact of its work and how it will report on its work. It is important that all the Scottish Government's international offices are part of that process. Up to now, evaluation reports from each office have only been available under freedom of information requests. As recommended by the committee, the scrutiny would be supported by the publication of an annual report to set out the contributions made by the international offices and how those contributions measure up against the aims and objectives of the revised international framework. Transparency and accountability throughout the Scottish Government's international work is required more than ever because those offices should not be used to discuss and promote the SNP's independence agenda. Any attempt to do so would be contrary to its stated aims and objectives and would be abuse of taxpayers' money. We have a moral and political duty as an advanced developed nation to develop and implement a progressive approach to international development to build relations to support the wider ambitions of tackling our climate emergency, building recovery from Covid and eradicating inequalities both in Scotland and through our relationships with our neighbours and those countries. I also want to thank the parliamentary staff who have supported our committee, helped us to reach a range of stakeholders to enable them to give us their views and to help to scrutinise the work of the Scottish Government. As our convener said at the start, we have a very wide brief and even in this report we are covering a lot of ground. It is important that other subject committees can see the detail. The committee is very clear that there is a lot more work needed by the Scottish Government to deliver a strategic approach, address the priorities and deliver more effective collaboration and coherence within the Scottish Government's own work, whether it is on trade, on climate change, delivering human rights and tackling inequalities. Just to take one example, we export 15 per cent of our waste. It does not sound like an awful lot but that is a four and a half times increase since 2004 so we are going in the wrong direction. There is a lack of progress by the World Trade Organization, for example. It means that we are not seeing access to vaccines in countries in the global south where they urgently need it now. There is something about making sure that it is not just making good statements but delivering in practice. I think that that is why our committee was so focused on the need for demonstrating impact, namely at the end of the day what difference does the Scottish Government spend on international development and its work deliver in terms of long-term systemic change on the ground. I am very grateful to Sarah Boyack for taking that intervention. Does she agree with me that it is disappointing that we do not have a Government response to this committee report, which would have allowed this debate to explore possibly those areas, including how we hold the Government to account? One of two of us have already commented that it has been slow because it was actually in November last year that we asked for the update on trade and co-operation agreement and that came out this morning. The new statement that was published yesterday and the eve of today's debate, Scotland's global affairs framework, I looked forward to that on the eve of this debate, but then realised that it was just so that the First Minister could get off to the US. We have to have a much more coherent approach. On inter-governmental relations between the UK and Scottish Government and Brexit work, it is absolutely vital that we get clarity and transparency so that businesses, the agricultural sector and environmental and climate experts can help us to look at what the Scottish Government is doing. We need people to be able to track and input to the trade and co-operation agreement. It is very disappointing that the follow-ups that we requested have been so slow. That was one of the things that I think when we look at what the witnesses were telling us. Things such as Erasmus, which has already been mentioned, education and cultural relations are absolutely critical to success for us as a country. We urgently need to see that they are requested by a range of witnesses about how we develop post-Brexit but also post Covid in building and rebuilding relationships. Stakeholders were clear that they gave us constructive evidence that there is a lot more that needs to be done in terms of academic and cultural links that would deliver on a soft power agenda, but it would also benefit us in terms of the economy, academic and research networks. There is much more that needs to be done. I have mentioned the Scottish Global Affairs Network framework today. It does not answer many of the issues that we have raised. It disappointingly focuses on independence rather than on interdependence, which should be our focus. In many ways, it is what Scotland is particularly good at because we have lots of neighbours and we have the capacity, whether it is pushing the UK Government to do more in international work, whether it is working with our former states in the EU but also other European nations as well. The one thing that I would support in the global framework today is the statement in favour of a feminist international approach, but that should be hard baked into all of the Scottish Government's work as a matter of course. Tackling gender inequalities means practical action on developing clean water supplies, particularly in the four countries that the Scottish Government is working with, helping to deliver basic health infrastructure, not just on vaccines, training, development, best practice and knowledge, to ensure that girls and young women get the access to education, which gives them the skills and knowledge that are absolutely critical to success, and actually gives us the solidarity that we say, but we need to deliver it. All the more important, given the cuts that the Scottish Government is currently making in terms of international development investment, go back to the point that the committee makes about focusing on cross-departmental work, cross-government work, and that is something that we talk about in terms of trade, culture and environmental policy. All those issues also need a gender perspective, so it's not just enough to talk about it, it's got to be delivered in practice, and if we don't tackle the climate agenda, we will see the inequalities that women currently face in many countries getting much, much worse. We will also see huge numbers of people. I think that 216 million people at the last estimate will be impacted by climate change because their countries will not be able to produce food, so there's so much more we need to do. Our work is a broad area, but it's about looking for a more co-ordinated approach from the Scottish Government's international offices, as has been mentioned a couple of times. We are really looking for a focus on the purpose of each office, not just a general, they're doing good work, which we're not going to disagree with, but what are the actual priorities, what are the actual funding implications, where are the clear performance indicators and reporting mechanisms, and making that accessible to everybody. I just want to finish really on thinking about the issue of sustainable development. It's also got to be baked in with all the Scottish Government's international development work, and it's critical in relation to scrutiny. We need to see that, as the cabinet secretary mentioned, United Nations and OECD frameworks. The reason we need transparency is not just for us as MSPs, but it's for key groups across Scotland to actually be able to question what's happening on the ground. For example, the Scotland-Malawi partnership was critical of the ending of small grants because of their multiplier effect, the potential to develop the in-country infrastructure, both in terms of people and the physical infrastructure that's needed to bring about the radical change. We didn't accept as a committee there's a conflict between small grants and bigger investment, but we want more scrutiny on that issue. I was a key point made by the international development alliance. They made the powerful point in which the committee agreed that we cannot see value for money unless we see it connected to everything else that's going on in the Scottish context. That joined up thinking and delivery has got to be there. If we're going to have soft power globally to deliver transformative change with trade, attacking the climate crisis, or giving young people and Scotland opportunities, it's got to be a joined up approach with on-the-ground changes in the countries that we are supporting, their international development programme. A clear strategy, greater transparency and scrutiny, and a focus on priorities, rebuilding relations post-Brexit and post-Covid, they have to be the key outputs that we see from the Scottish Government in answering the raft of questions in our committee report. We very much look forward to a detailed response from the Scottish Government. I believe in forging strong relationships, lasting relationships and progressive relationships across the world. I support the report and the intention of the Government to work across. I think that there will be less on independence and more on the progressive lasting relationships, but nevertheless I think that it's important. Yesterday's document, I'm afraid, was a rather flimsy attempt at an international strategy. I'd like to see a little bit more substance, not on the grand words that we heard from the minister in his contribution, but on some of the delivery. I think that, as Sarah Boyack set out, there's an awful lot of progress that requires to be made. The minister's contribution was a masterclass in evasion. He completely avoided my question about Erasmus, which I'm going to come back to in a second. I have to say that it was rather insulting to launch the document this morning on the keeping pace approach to the EU. Just before this debate, when this report from the committee was actually dealing with a major part of it in its report, we would have expected an opportunity to be able to scrutinise the Government's response before this debate this afternoon. I have to say that it was rather disrespectful of the minister to wait until this moment, six months after the committee had asked for a response to its report. It means that we're not able to scrutinise it. It means that we're not able to look at whether the Government has eventually caught up with its grand and lofty ambitions to keep pace with the EU as it was setting out through the Brexit negotiations. Something that we supported, we support the keeping pace measures with the European Union. We just thought that the Government knew what it was talking about when it actually talked about it itself and therefore we are surprised that it's taken so long after the act was agreed by the Parliament for it eventually to come up with a prioritisation strategy and something that will deliver what it set out originally back in 2021 and before that as well. Turning to Erasmus, I'm just flabbergasted at the Government again making lofty claims that it was going to replace the Erasmus scheme for Scotland, that the Turing scheme was inadequate, that it was only a one-way scheme rather than a reciprocal scheme, that even a year ago after the Welsh, thanks to Kirsty Williams who was the Welsh Liberal Democrat minister at the time, a year ago launching a scheme worth £65 million, was for a reciprocal scheme, better than the Turing scheme, was able to work within the UK context but still, as has been revealed in the Herald today, we still don't have even a date for the consultation for the replacement for the Erasmus scheme for Scotland. We can have all the great and lofty speech that the minister made earlier on but unless we deliver on that stuff it means absolutely nothing at all. They talk more about independence, they talk more about these things rather than actually getting on and delivering for people right now. We could be young people right now that could be getting educated in other parts of Europe and the world if we were able to replicate the scheme that they've got in Wales but the Scottish Government still don't have a date for even consulting on the Scottish version of the scheme. I'll stick it on with this stuff rather than having lofty speeches as we've heard earlier on today. Then we also had an acceptance somehow that Scotland's got a great record on international human rights. That's not what I remember six years ago when this Parliament was debating the £10 billion Sino-Fortun deal, the China Railway Company number three engineering group and the human rights abuses in Africa. We heard that today. We heard it six years ago and the Government shame-facedly had to rip up that agreement that the First Minister had signed even though the Norwegian oil fund had blacklisted the China Railway Group several years before because of widespread corruption, even though Amnesty International had published a report that tied the China Railway Group to illegal forced evictions in Africa. Even though all of that had been on the record and available, the Scottish Government turned a blind eye and signed this £10 billion deal with Sino-Fortun. Turned out, by the way, all they owned was a pub in the middle of England, so even then the Scottish Government were duped. If you look at the treatment of the Dalai Lama when he visited a few years earlier, the First Minister at the time refused to meet him after pressure from the Chinese officials so much for human rights. He was not mentioned by Humza Yousaf when he did a visit over there in 2013. He was advised not to. He was not advised to mention a very important human rights issue. It seems quite clear at the time that this Government was prepared to turn a blind eye in order to secure the finance from those countries. I do not think that that is a glowing human rights record. We should hear less about Scotland's global reputation on human rights, especially when that is the track record of this Government. We perhaps focus more on developing a progressive internationalist approach, working together with Europe, keeping pace with Europe, developing the Erasmus scheme, getting on and delivering rather than making lofty, very evasive contributions in the chamber this afternoon. I hope that the minister will respond to every single one of the points that I have made, because he said that he would to the Erasmus scheme and that I want to hear his response to the human rights issues as well. How on earth will his Government improve its reputation globally, rather than publishing flimsy documents, as we saw yesterday? Before we move to the open debate, could I remind members who wish to speak in the debate to please ensure that they have their cards in and have pressed their request to speak buttons? I now call Jenny Minto to be followed by Dean Lockhart's speeches of six minutes. I, too, would like to thank my fellow committee members and the clerks for the collegiate way in which our work was conducted. I would also like to thank all the organisations and individuals who provided written evidence and those who provided thoughtful answers to our questions in sessions. As both Claire Adamson and Sir Boyack have said, the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture is a committee with a wide-ranging remit. Some might suggest from hard power to soft power and the committee's inquiry into the Scottish Government's international work covered that full range. Covering international strategy and international development, looking at the Scottish Government's policy, implementation and policy coherence, how Scotland maintains its relationship with the EU currently as a constituent part of a non-member country and how Scotland can nurture and grow wider international relations. It is the wider international relations that I am going to concentrate on in my contribution to this debate. I would note that the evidence submitted by the Royal Society of Edinburgh was that there is no clear dividing line between domestic and international policy. The Royal Society called on the Government to prioritise areas where Scotland can offer expertise such as in transition to net zero and protecting human rights. Most respondents who addressed the question of international relations suggested that the Scottish Government should use culture and soft power to promote Scotland internationally. In his evidence to the committee, the cabinet secretary said that the Scottish Government would pursue an internationalisation agenda to influence the world around us to the issues that matter most. Joseph Nye introduced the concept of soft power about 40 years ago, suggesting that a country's soft power rests on three resources, culture, political values and foreign policies. The British Council in its submission described soft power as a very competitive space and other organisations have urged Scotland to rise to that challenge. Glasgow Life highlighted the role of culture, sport and major events as key drivers of soft power and the Scottish brand. It encouraged the Scottish Government to develop an explicit soft power strategy integrated with other economic, environmental and social strategies underpinned by the national performance framework, suggesting that more clarity and planning could deliver on better outcomes. I would suggest that we are already doing that. We have greater cause for optimism. Two weeks ago, I attended an event at the Royal Botanic Gardens in Edinburgh hosted by the Alliance for Scotland's Rainforests. Minister Mary McCallann described the fantastic support that the Scottish Government is providing to preserve the biodiversity and expansion of Scotland's rainforests, the policy element of soft power. As the Scottish Parliament's champion for Celtic rainforests, I was there to introduce the premiere of a film, another great soft power that Scotland has. The film is called The Ghost Rainforest, which tells the story of five indigenous leaders from the Amazon rainforest who came to Scotland for COP26 to stand up for their rights as indigenous peoples and the important role they play in looking after nature. They took some time out to visit and bless the Cormannachan rainforest near Lochgoilhead in Argyll and Bute. In the village hall afterwards, the Scottish Caley tradition took a very Amazonian twist, with strong songs from our two cultures intertwining like the works and lichens or passion flowers and orchids of our respective rainforests. A commitment to restoring our environment shared by different cultures on two different continents, the cultural element of soft power. The connections made at COP26 by the Scottish Government and events like these all help the internationalisation agenda that the cabinet secretary talked about in his evidence to the committee, and is a great example of mainstreaming international principles, in this case preserving biodiversity within Scotland and around the world, across portfolios. As Scotland's international development alliance said in evidence, Scotland, despite its limited funds, could become a world leader in areas such as food security, educational outcomes for women and girls and in the global south and the cancellation of debt. It spoke of a need to change narratives and support new ways of thinking. It takes leadership from significant small sub-state actors such as Scotland to change that narrative. The Scottish Arts and Humanities Alliance suggested that the Scottish Government policies should focus on promoting the distinctive qualities of the Scottish brand, proposing moving it on from nostalgia to the reputation that Scotland now has for climate policy, the digital economy and human rights legislation. It got me thinking about my own constituency. Argyllun Bute has international connections both from a nostalgic and modern perspective. Lachlan Macquarie from Ulva was the fifth Governor-General of New South Wales, moving it from a penal colony to a free settlement. Major-General Alexander McDougall and Isleman was described by George Washington as one of the five pillars of American independence. While those two islanders are examples of hard power, they also link into the awareness of Scotland and Scots throughout the world, soft power. The families who left Argyllun Bute for America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand created many reminders of home by the place names of the new countries that they settled in. The Scottish diaspora now serves as a fertile ground in which to develop with new international partnerships. The whisky industry, for example, combines both nostalgia with the modern in their approach to tourism and the work that they are doing to get carbon neutral through new power sources, reducing their use of water and changing their packages. Meanwhile, Samsa Robyn plays a major role in global seaweed, a project that creates an ambitious network of partners tackling emergency issues in seaweed cultivation, using a combination of two-way knowledge transfer and community-oriented research activities. To conclude, our evidence highlighted the distinctive approach that Scotland can achieve in international relationships and the Malawi partnership, which described its work as one based on friendship, human understanding and dignified partnership. It is clear that Scotland has a lot to offer the world across culture and policy areas, and the Scottish Government, as the committee recommends, must provide a clear rationale, including priorities and objectives for its approach to its international relations. I welcome the opportunity to respond to the committee's inquiry. Let me start by agreeing with one of the report's central recommendations that the Scottish Government should prioritise its international engagement through a thematic and geographic focus. The report also highlighted the importance of increasing trade as being fundamental for the development of Scotland's future international relationships. Given that, I would like to focus my contribution on three interlinking trade themes covered in the report. First of all, exports and trade. Secondly, international trade offices. Thirdly, the important role of the Scottish diaspora. Turning first to exports, we really must do more to promote exports from Scotland, because at the moment just 70 companies account for more than 50 per cent of our international exports. We clearly need to expand this export base. We also need to do more to increase our exports to the fastest-growing economies across the world. At the moment, only 2 per cent of our exports go to China, 2 per cent less than 2 per cent to Singapore and only 1 per cent to India. Clearly, we need to do more on the export front. However, a number of things need to change. First, as the report highlights, we need domestic policy to be much better aligned with international policy. I do not have time, so I am going to leave domestic economic policy for another day. However, I want to touch on the Scottish Government's approach to free trade as a means for developing international relationships. He talks about promoting trade by ensuring that we are aligned with international practice. Does he feel that a good way to do that would be to keep pace with Europe legislatively to ensure that we are aligned in just that way? As the member will know, if you look at Scotland's trade, 60 per cent of our trade is with the rest of the UK. Only 16 per cent is with Europe, so I am okay with keeping pace. However, if keeping pace with the EU regulations means diverging from the rest of the UK, that would harm the Scottish economy. With that caveat, keeping pace should be considered, but only if and not at a detriment to Scotland's trade with the rest of the UK. I was talking about free trade as a means of developing international relationships and the SNP's approach to it, because the approach is confusing. On the one hand, we hear the SNP talk about attending events like Tartindey in New York and increasing international exports, but the reality is that SNP members have failed to support a series of major free trade agreements that would do precisely this, both at an EU level and UK level. We hear constant scaremongering from the SNP over a free trade agreement with the US, our single largest export destination market that accounts for 8 per cent of our exports. What I would say to the cabinet secretary is that voting, campaigning or agitating against free trade agreements sends a highly negative message to our trading partners and does not help to build or encourage international relationships. That is something that I would encourage the cabinet secretary to bear in mind in respect of future free trade agreements, including the very important free trade agreement that we hope to secure with the US. We see further confusion when it comes to the SNP's strategy surrounding international trade offices. There is simply no strategic logic behind the location of SDI offices worldwide. We have an office in Taiwan that accounts for half a per cent of our trade, but we do not have an office in New York, the financial capital of the US, which I just said accounts for 8 per cent of our trade. That lack of strategic planning is something that the report highlights. It recommends that the Scottish Government must provide detailed justification for any new international office and report on their contributions. That is all the more necessary, because if you look at the cost of those offices, it costs the Scottish taxpayer up to £10 million a year for those offices and there is no way of measuring the return on that investment. It is quite interesting, if you look at where those trade offices are based. Of the 35 international SDI offices, 26 are located within a British embassy, consulate or high commission. I am okay with that, because it shows the unrivaled strength of the UK's international network, but what is not acceptable is at the practice of this Government to signpost Scottish companies to SDI offices alone at the exclusion of the unrivaled global connections of the UK trade network. Time after time, we see Scottish companies directed towards SDI and not the UK's department for international trade. Scottish companies can, should and need the advantage of both networks, and the Scottish Government should be doing much more to promote the global network and access of Scottish companies to the global network for the department of international trade. The final point that I want to address is the important role that could be played by the global Scottish diaspora. I was a bit surprised at how little attention that got in the report. It is tempting to look only at government agencies when considering international trade, but the Scottish diaspora could play a much more significant role in driving international trade and relationships. The reality is that we fail to leverage the massive potential of the diaspora for decades. In 2019, there were only 650 members of the global Scots network. From personal experience, there are countless senior and very well-connected Scots across the world not tapped into the global network, or those who are members are rarely, if ever, connected or contacted by Scottish exporters. I know that the Scottish Government has introduced a global Scots digital platform. That is a welcome development, and it remains to be seen how that will provide an open-ended dynamic global platform to connect overseas Scots with expertise with Scottish companies looking to export. I want to finish on a topic that the report seems not to have covered. That is the massive potential for Scottish University alumni to grow our international relationships. Over 50,000 international students attend Scottish universities. The vast majority will eventually return home overseas, and a great many will end up in senior positions in business, government or academia. We do very little to stay connected or to build relationships with future decision makers. That is an area of huge potential that the cabinet secretary has shaken his head. I would be interested to know precisely what we are doing to build on that alumni network. I have more to say, but I appreciate that I am up against the clock. Let me just say that the overall impression that the Scottish Government's approach to international relationships is one of confusion and an approach that lacks strategic direction. I hope that the cabinet secretary, in his closing remarks, will address some of those issues. Thank you very much indeed, Presiding Officer. I would like to begin by thanking the committee for the work that it is doing and welcoming the publication of the Scottish Government's eagerly anticipated global affairs framework. It sets out the key principles that will guide and focus Scotland's international engagement as we move out of a post-Brexit and post-Covid context. Since the UK left the EU, the world has endured significant shocks and international crises as a result of Covid-19 pandemic, and we are only now just beginning to come out of this. In Scotland, as we move forward, we have the opportunity to re-evaluate our international engagement and priorities. The Committee on External Affairs set about to do this, and yesterday's publication of the global affairs framework addresses the calls for clarity of strategy and principles from the Scottish Government in the post-Brexit international climate. The committee requested that there be alignment between domestic policy and external action, and that there should be a clear geographic and thematic rationale in any forthcoming strategies. This is a recommendation that I strongly agree with. Moreover, I was glad to see principle 5 articulated in the new framework, which emphasised the upholding of human rights and the rule of international law. That draws our attention to the fundamental principle of protecting citizens' peace and security. Right now, as we watch the war unfold in Ukraine, we are all across this Parliament acutely aware that the people of Ukraine and potentially the global community are facing a new and significant international security crisis. The people of Scotland have responded admirably by opening homes to refugees fleeing the conflict. However, aside from this important domestic response, we must also remain conscious of the international security ramifications that this war may have in Europe. The threat reinforces the importance of our domestic discussions around how we carefully approach international security and peace and how Scotland engages with the international community in this regard. We are yet to see what Putin's response will be to the fact that he has not won victory in Ukraine despite yesterday's events across Russia to promote the propaganda that is mission to take over that country has been somehow successful. I prefer in today's debate on Scotland's approach to international relations that, as a nation with a unique perspective and role in nuclear disarmament, we engage with the forthcoming first meeting of states parties on the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons, considering the threats that have been made by Mr Putin, and all political groups in this Parliament consider sending representatives to these events. As the prospect of Scottish independence grows, we in this chamber must remain attuned to the diplomatic negotiations of the TPNW and be proactively engaged in this matter. To this end, I will be leading a contingent on behalf of the cross-party group on nuclear disarmament in Vienna next month. Although Scotland is a small nation, we have big ambitions to positively shape international affairs and support and promote key global agendas. That is a part of our mandate as set out in the Scotland Act which allows the Scottish Government to assist the UK Government on international matters that may have an impact on devolved policy areas. I have been delighted to be involved in the running of two cross-party groups with specific international outlooks over the past three parliamentary sessions. I have had the privilege of convening the cross-party group on nuclear disarmament and just last year I became deputy convener for the cross-party group on human trafficking. Both groups in the Scottish Parliament engage with expertise found in Scotland and on international matters. Both groups also strongly resonate with the third, fifth and seventh guiding principles of Scotland's global affairs framework, namely gender equality, respect for human rights and the rule of law and Scotland's culture. I would like to highlight that the Scottish Government has led by the SNP committed to implementing a model for Scotland policy into legislation. This legislative change is one of the policy areas that could have the most reach in helping those who are truly most vulnerable and that can have a pivotal impact internationally in harming the operations of organised crime, while at the same time it would contribute to shifting international norms on how to tackle mass sexual exploitation and abuse, such as prostitution and human trafficking. Putting a model for Scotland campaign into legislation directly tackle the demand for prostitution, which in turn fosters the demand for human trafficking, by shifting criminality on to the men sexually exploiting women and children. That shifts criminality away from those who are sexually exploited for profit and potentially trafficked. It should be articulated that a third of trafficking victims for sexual exploitation are children who are victims of child abuse and grooming. When this legislative change happens, as promised to voters, it will engage with critical international efforts to tackle sophisticated, lucrative criminal activity of mass exploitation that profits on the misery of vulnerable women and children. We are told by NGOs that traffickers are now targeting Ukrainian refugees and that the OSCE has found that searches for Ukrainian women for sale have increased by 200 to 600 per cent across multiple languages and countries. That is an area whereby through domestic policy we can engage with international efforts to tackle organised crime. I would recommend that the Scottish Government works with international regional organisations such as OSCE and the UN to determine the most effective strategies to undermining criminal activity and making Scotland hostile to human traffickers and modern slavery. As we re-evaluate our approach to global affairs, I urge the Government to put nuclear disarmament, human trafficking and exploitation of women and girls atop of its strategic agenda. My report speaks volumes in part for the reason and importance for this debate today because our international reputation, our international network, our international connections need to be linked to the local economic, educational, cultural connections that we have here. My report highlights truly the challenge that the Scottish Government faces in doing this but also highlights the importance of joined-up thinking. It is not sufficient merely to sit in separate silos, the thinking. Following Bill Kidd's contribution speaks volumes for why interconnected thinking is so important on this matter. I echo his comments about the Ukraine and the future that Europe is facing. It is a time for clever, imaginative, intelligent thinking to protect our democracies both here at home, across Europe and indeed across the wider world. That brings me to the first aspect of what I would like to discuss, which is the updating of the international framework, because I think it sits within that that we should see the Government's vision. But not just a vision, not just slogans, we need to see measurable achievements. We need to be able to show people, those outside of this country, those that work for the Scottish Government abroad, we need to see where that thinking goes. We need to see where their route map lies to taking this country forward. I think it's interesting in the document that was published yesterday, Scotland's global affair framework. There was talk for any government the global and regional context inevitably impacts the achievement of domestic objectives. That is why it is imperative that Scotland becomes a more active internationally. I don't think anyone can disagree with that, but I think it is important that we see how that route map leads us forward. I would draw attention to paragraph 36 of the report, which invites the Scottish Government to clarify its position on the status of the 2013 Concordat with the UK Government and also whether or not it agrees it's now being superseded by the most recently published review of intergovernmental relations. I think it is just as important that we see how the relationship is or perhaps I dare say is not developing with the UK Government. The major aspect however that I would like to talk about is in relation to education and young people. In yesterday's document in section 2, maintaining the closest possible relationship with the European Union, examples of engagement included on supporting young people. I think it's important given the status of Erasmus and the fact that certainly very senior members of the European Union are of the view that we are not going to be able to participate in Erasmus Plus. That in part perhaps the communication, perhaps the statements that come out from the Scottish Government are amended because we still see, and rightly I do not disagree, we still see a desire to rejoin Erasmus, but I don't think that's going to happen. What I do think our young people deserve is a proper pathway to how they can study not just in Europe but around the world, how we can see exchange of our lecturers and our professors, how we can see the exchange of postgraduate students and indeed postgraduate teams across both the European and the rest of the world. Because it is in those connections, we've heard about the Scottish diaspora and the effect that they can have on improving more than well. Bob Doris. I wasn't participating in this debate but you've mentioned Erasmus and brought it up by several members. Would you agree that Erasmus Plus is somewhat perhaps even more significant than Erasmus because that was getting young people from the most deprived communities right across Europe who otherwise may not leave their city left alone in the country? That was a really positive thing within the European Union. We have to replicate that somehow irrespective of what the UK Government does. I welcome that intervention because of course it is in the clarity of language that we should practice and indeed Erasmus Plus is so important to that. But it has already been said today that in Wales under a Labour Welsh Government they are already investing in our future generation, £60 million so that from this academic year through to 2027 young people can travel abroad, can study and can learn. Frequently we hear from both Scottish Government ministers and indeed backbenchers comments derogatory perhaps in nature about Wales. So I return the compliment and give the minister the opportunity to say where is our plan, where is our imagination, where is the fulfilment of the promise to our young people that they can travel, they can study, they can make those cultural attachments around the world. Because it is in that outward looking Scotland that our real strength applies. So can we reflect on the committee evidence in relation to Erasmus Plus and the Turing scheme and Scotland's Saltaire scholarships and look at what opportunities are available to replicate those and to take the benefit forward so that supported academic links can be developed and opportunities for our students and young people? We need an international development strategy that is based on substance, ambition, not empty words, not slogans. This is the only way we are going to tackle global cries, help the world's poorest and build partnerships with other countries that we can be proud of here and that we see the effect of elsewhere. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I now call Stephanie Callaghan to be followed by Mark Ruskell. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I also thank Clare Adamson and the External Affairs Committee for their hard work throughout the inquiry into Scotland's international affairs. While I am not a member of this committee, it is an area of interest for me and it should be for every member across this chamber. This inquiry underlines the Scottish Government's work to strengthen our international relationships, increase trade and investment and ultimately achieve the overarching objective of sustainable economic growth in Scotland. Every country takes a slightly different approach to conducting its international affairs and policies will reflect that country, its culture, politics and how it sees itself in the world, and Scotland is no different. Look at other countries' Scotland is facing unprecedented challenges, whether they are responding to global concerns such as climate change, Covid recovery or the cost of living crisis. The Scottish Government is showing leadership and amplifying the need for actions that are underpinned by the need for social, economic and climate justice. We might be a small country but our values have beaconed outwards for centuries, forging alliances and becoming a prominent voice in the global community. Just look at the Scottish diaspora. Scots have bred themselves across the world. A community of people with proud Scottish roots contributing so much to their home countries but forever tied to the Scottish nation. Scotland's diaspora, estimated to be over 40 million people, is a powerful cultural, economic and political tool. We may not yet be an independent nation but, my goodness, Scotland's presence is already strong across the globe. Indeed, when the First Minister visits the United States next week, she will be visiting a country that is home to 20 million Scottish Americans, an outstanding foundation to further an independent Scotland's global interests. The UK Government has proven itself incapable or unwilling to tap into the significant potential of Scotland's diaspora, choosing instead to focus on a failing UK construct. Engagement goes both ways and Scotland has benefited enormously from people coming over and enhancing and enriching our society, too. Scotland's message to refugees has been a welcome one where new Scots are treated with dignity and respect as the flourishing settle in the new home. Compare and contrast with post-Brexit Britain, where the UK Government continues to conjure up a hostile environment for migrants, restricts trade and the movement of labour and alienates itself from international alliances. If there was ever any doubt about the need for good international relations, the Covid-19 pandemic, the climate emergency and the war on Ukraine 2 have all reaffirmed how international cooperation is essential. The recently published global affairs framework, highlighted by the Cabinet Secretary and others today, sets out the values and principles underpinning the Scottish Government's international work and the basis in which the Scottish Government will prioritise its international activity. As the nation moves its political agenda beyond its borders, it does so based on the issues and the politics that are cared about internally, international affairs must always link back to our domestic ambitions. As a country committed to social, economic and climate justice, with the ambition to rejoin the EU and be part of a progressive international institutions, our domestic politics provides the foundation for us to be leaders alongside other forward-thinking nations in international development, climate policy and human rights. I welcome the working leadership of the Scottish Government to incorporate the feminist foreign policy framework that Claire Adamson and others have also mentioned today. Feminist foreign policy is moving away from what might traditionally come to mind when you think about foreign policy like military force and violence, instead prioritising topics like peace, gender equality, environmental issues and human rights. A feminist foreign policy listens to marginalised voices and aims to remove gender, racial, sexual and social economic boundaries, among others. It is empathetic, sensitive, caring and relational. Scottish politics are inherently feminist. Scottish voters have noted their interests in politics and policies that emphasise equality of all kinds, including parity, justice and fairness. Scottish policies aim to create a society focused on social, economic and climate justice, and enacting those principles in our foreign policy is not only the right thing to do, it is something that comes naturally to us. With that realisation comes bitter disappointment that so much of our foreign policy is limited by Westminster. Finally, for the Scottish Government to realise its potential as a good global citizen, we must listen and act in response to often unheard voices, including the young and those from the global south. The world's first climate loss and damage fund, established by the Scottish Government, sets an impressive tone. Of course, that financial contribution will not change the world alone. However, our role as a small, progressive country is to be a leader and encourage others to follow us in addressing past and present injustices. We can play an outsized role in international development by drawing on our social, economic and cultural ties. Scotland must seek to establish partnerships with other members of the international development community, especially smaller EU member states such as Ireland, as well as non-EU members such as Norway. Such strategic partnerships could bring about active funding partnerships with some of those donor countries aligned with their priorities. The Covid-19 pandemic and the climate and biodiversity emergencies prove in the starkest possible way that we live in an interconnected world. That is why it is imperative that Scotland becomes more active internationally. We have a unique place in the world, one of cultural, social and economic connection, a rich history of alliances and the domestic appetite for global justice. Scottish independence is the number one thing that will unlock our true potential, and that work is well and truly under way. In the months to come, we will all be taking part in a fresh debate on the constitutional future of the UK. As last week's election results across Scotland and Ireland underlined, much has changed since 2014. Changes in political circumstances we would hardly expect to see in two generations, let alone one. However, while we brace ourselves for that debate to come, now is an important time to look again at how Scotland is recalibrating its relationship with the rest of Europe and the world in these changing times. The launch yesterday of the Refresh Global Affairs Framework is welcome, and the recognition of the climate crisis as the single biggest international issue of our time within that document is critical. To deliver on climate, we will need to work even closer with the rest of Europe, seeking greater collaboration with EU institutions and building even stronger relationships with research bodies and universities on areas such as Greenhine has already mentioned by the cabinet secretary. Scotland's role on climate was in strong evidence that caught 26 last year as a small nation with soft power presence, and the announcement made by the Scottish Government to take a unilateral lead on climate loss and damage fund showed that leadership at exactly the right time. It recognised the climate debt that industrialised countries like ours owe the global south and the need for real reparation and climate justice. Although the sums of money were small and some may say insignificant given the scale of the challenge, the symbolic and practical action of being the first country in the world to set up a loss and damage fund was an influential move in the global politics surrounding COP last year. I am pleased to see the relationships between Scotland and the global south develop further, not least through the £36 million climate justice fund and also through the excellent climate dialogues work that was done in the run-up to COP. The Scottish Malawi Partnership has been a huge success supporting communities on the front line of climate change, but I would ask the Scottish Government to not lose sight of how important small community funding will be to deliver the improvements and sustainable development that we need on the ground. We saw at COP how small nation states can repeatedly play a strong role in leading the world. Costa Rica galvanised action through the High Ambition Coalition, building new initiatives running alongside COP, driving confidence that more far-reaching agreements are possible and essential. For a Glasgow summit focused on coal, cars and cash, oil and gas would have been largely ignored were it not for Denmark working with Costa Rica to launch the groundbreaking beyond oil and gas alliance. Through the alliance, states and regions have now committed to phasing out oil and gas production over time, delivering a just transition for communities dependent on those sectors. It was such a strong show of hope and determination to see the launch of this alliance in Glasgow, right at the point where the energy was starting to drain out of the talks and fresh impetus was needed. We saw green ministers from Ireland, Sweden and New Zealand taking the stage with ministers from Wales, France, Quebec and Italy alongside Denmark and Costa Rica to launch the alliance. I am not going to pretend that it was disappointing that Scotland was missing from that launch event, but I do hope that the Government will join the alliance soon. In so doing, inspire others, including Norway, to join the conversation and make the long-term commitment to move away from fossil fuel production, because only by countries learning about the just transition together can we wean ourselves off of oil and gas responsibly in a just way. Our climate will be a strong focus for Scottish Government's international work going forward, and I am pleased that the imminent launch of an office in Copenhagen will cement the relationship with the Danes further. The early commitments for the two countries to work together on heat decarbonisation, for example, is so critical given the cost of living crisis. Denmark's response in 1970s to last energy crisis has given us a big toolbox of solutions, and I know that the Minister Patrick Harvie is determined to insulate homes and isolate Putin as quickly as possible. I know also that the Cabinet Secretary sees great potential in our creative sectors working together, especially TV drama. The work with Denmark will be important geographically by linking us to the Nordic countries, but also in delivering a wide range of thematic priorities from climate to culture. The launch of an office in Warsaw 2 will provide a link to central and eastern Europe. If there was an initial skepticism from some about the strategic focus of this office, then the events of the last three months underlies just how important it is that we establish a strong presence. The question of Scotland's constitutional future is a question that must be revisited again, but regardless of how that question is answered, our values and our priorities are clear. Scotland will be an outward looking country, eager to collaborate, eager to build interdependence and to play an increasing role on the global stage. I'm not a member of the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee, so I am speaking today more as a citizen of this country, which is something that Scotland's international work really does make me proud to be. I'm also proud to be a member and representative of an outward looking internationalist party, one that prioritises imagining, building and strengthening links with foreign nations, including Norway, England and Canada. From the strong but touching remarks that the cabinet secretary has made in explicit support of our European neighbours in Ukraine to the First Minister's repeated unequivocal support for new Scots here and for women and girls across the world, it is one of those issues where we can see real leadership being shown within the constraints of devolution and indeed despite them. Our First Minister is a UN global women advocate, and I don't think that that was supposed to happen. I think that Scotland was meant to stay in its box there, but our redevolved government has gained global influence and global respect. What I'm seeing here is not just leadership of a government and a party, but global leadership. It's not just whisky that we're putting out there, although I don't underestimate or under-appreciate that particular export. We are seeking to become the first country in the UK to adopt a feminist foreign policy. We know that climate change, wars and unstable economies are gendered issues. Women and girls are worst affected. Feminist foreign policy was not a term that I had ever heard growing up, but it is absolutely needed and it's commendable that the Scottish Government is taking this forward as a pioneer within the UK. We don't just have a presence on the world stage now but an influence. World-leading human rights legislation is being taken forward in here against racial discrimination, discrimination against women and to improve the rights of disabled people. World-leading legislation coming out of this place, I just think that's fantastic. It's no longer stop the world that Scotland wants to get on, it's stop the world that Scotland has ideas and you're going to want to hear them. The Tories call that a waste. It's a disappointment though not a surprise that the party of Brexit Britain thinks it's a waste of money to invest in international relations, but I have to disagree. He cannot realistically put a number on the value of strong European Nordic and worldwide connections. In the Highlands and Islands, perhaps more than anywhere else, the sharing of knowledge, innovation and talent in sectors from renewable energy and transport to equalities and property and land rights is, I have no doubt, worth more than the 0.05 per cent of the Scottish Government's budget that's being invested, because it is an investment and a worthwhile one at that to retain and strengthen the ties that successive Governments down south have treated with disrespect at best. Those efforts being carried out by the Scottish Government in international work are beneficial in any case. I will. First of all, I'd like to clarify that we are on these benches supportive of international offices. Secondly, you mentioned these international offices as a success. Can you tell the chamber which metric you're using to define that success? I think that if the member had listened, I just covered that and said that it's really tough to put a number on the value of strong connections worldwide, which is what these offices are providing, and certainly if Scotland does become independent, they will be the foundation for international relations going forward. The remaining vote in Scotland is something that is still heartbreaking for me to think about. A European country torn out of the European Union despite its citizens showing up at the polls to state clearly that that's not what they wanted. That's not democratic and I suggest it's simply not one of many options but something that is incumbent on our Government for it to do what it can to retain in all possible ways the influence, benefits and relationships that we enjoyed as a member of the EU. I also looked at examples such as the efforts on Cymru Street in Glasgow last year and I don't think that it's out of turn to point out that perhaps however coherent or incoherent the UK Government's policy currently is on reserved issues, the people of Scotland aren't happy with it. Our international work is that of a country which is welcoming, progressive and aspirational and that vision to me sits in stark contrast of the statements that I'm hearing from down south which are often insular, laden with world war, two metaphors and display I want to go back to the good old days before those pesky regulations and rights which put simply keep disabled people like me alive were introduced. My principles and the principles of the SNP, the party which has won the last 11 elections in this country, are too often not reflected or even contradicted by the UK's policy. Brexit is stark evidence of that truth but it is not the only example so I am delighted to see the work that is going on internationally off our own backs, sharing best practice like the baby box and promoting human rights across the globe. I do believe that we require independence in order to be the best that we can be. I think that it is that simple. England is taking the UK in a direction that Scotland doesn't agree with and folks' patience for that is really running out. But in the meantime it is right to celebrate the progress that we have made and are making with one hand tied behind our back. I have a privilege to speak in this debate on the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee's report on the Scottish Government's international work. I congratulate the committee, led by convener Clare Adamson, on a thorough and important piece of work. It is very wide-ranging, I think, as reflected in the diversity of speeches that we have enjoyed listening to this afternoon. The key themes emerging from the committee inquiry were the importance of adopting a strategic approach, the need for a prioritisation of policies to flow from that approach, an emphasis on effective collaboration across government to encourage policy coherence in relation to both external affairs and how this interacts with domestic priorities, challenges in measuring impact and on how to enhance scrutiny. Scotland is a nation with a strong European heritage outlook and values. People voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU in 2016 and, of course, subsequently in every election following have endorsed the pro-European SNP. The committee report acknowledges the Scottish Government's position that the founding values of the EU, human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights are the Scottish Government's values. The publication of the global affairs framework sets out with clarity the values and principles underpinning the Scottish Government's international work. I agree with the cabinet secretary that it is important to note that the Scottish Government's global affairs framework is being published at a time when the face of the invasion of Ukraine, all nations are being tested on whether they support not just the principle but the reality of adopting a rules-based approach to protect their values. As the new global affairs framework sets out and consistent with the evidence given to the committee inquiry, Scotland's international work will be guided by some key areas of focus, good global citizenship, maintaining the closest possible relationship with the European Union, gender equality, climate crisis and climate justice, respect for human rights and the rule of law, the role of our international networks and Scotland's culture. I would like to focus my remarks on gender equality. The Scottish Government has stated its commitment to employing a feminist foreign policy for Scotland for filling an SNP manifesto promise. Making Scotland the first country in the UK to adopt such a policy will join a small number of nations across the world, including Sweden, who were the first in the globe to do so in 2014. A feminist foreign policy includes moving away from what might traditionally be considered foreign policy and prioritising topics such as peace, gender equality, environmental issues and human rights, focusing on the wellbeing of the world's most marginalised people, including women and girls. Thinking about foreign policy and international relations from the viewpoint of the world's most vulnerable groups, thereby taking an intersectional approach to challenging existing power structures such as racism, colonialism and male domination. Sweden's feminist foreign policy is based on the conviction that sustainable peace, security and development can never be achieved if half the world's population is excluded. The policy is a response to the discrimination and systematic subordination that still characterises everyday life for countless women and girls all over the world. Feminist foreign policy is an agenda for change to strengthen the rights, representation and resources for women and girls. There are many examples of Sweden's feminist foreign policy contributing positively to the world, including new legislation prohibiting the purchase of sexual services in several countries. Sweden has co-operated closely with countries reviewing their legislation on prostitution, and in recent years Ireland, France and Northern Ireland have adopted legislation that is equivalent to that in Sweden. They have improved opportunities to combat domestic violence in China, co-financing a study on employee and employer knowledge of China's legislation prohibiting domestic violence with the aim of strengthening the private sector's efforts against violence. There have been hundreds of thousands fewer unwanted pregnancies in East Africa with Sweden intensifying its work on sexual and reproductive health and rights. One example is that a Swedish backed programme is estimated to have prevented hundreds of thousands of unwanted pregnancies and unsafe abortions in East Africa. They have helped thousands of new midwifes per year in Afghanistan, Myanmar, South Sudan, Zambia and other countries by funding training for midwifes, leading to perhaps millions of women being able to give birth with the support of trained staff. I would like to endorse the remarks made by my colleague Bill Kidd in terms of nuclear disarmament and trafficking and sexual exploitation. I understand that the Scottish Government will review Scottish Government policies and programmes where they have an international dimension to ensure that they reflect a feminist approach to foreign policy and that they will seek to learn from other countries in this area. In doing this, our Government needs to be alive to our domestic policies as well as international. While Scotland approaches this from a relatively privileged position and with some world leading legislation and many sound policies, we are not there yet in terms of eradicating the discrimination and violence, which is an everyday reality for far too many women and girls in Scotland. There is still a gap between policy intention and legislative reality in some areas, for example, equally safe. Work in action requires some urgency. Scotland's international work can create domestic opportunities and attract investment. Being a good global citizen and strengthening relationships with countries and continents can only be of benefit to the people of Scotland. I can remind the chamber that we still have a little bit of time in hand, so if you are taking intervention, you will get that time back. I call Stephen Kerr to be followed by Paul McClendon for a range of six minutes. It is a pleasure to follow Ruth Maguire's speech, which I greatly appreciate. She is a fellow member of the Education, Children and Young People's Committee. I am grateful to follow her. I am grateful to be able to stand and respond to the European Constitutional Affairs and Culture Committee's inquiry report on Scotland's international work. However, let me say straight off the bat that there is a slightly surreal feel to many of the speeches that I have heard from the SNP and Green Benches this afternoon. They seem to be living in a parallel reality. They never mention the United Kingdom. They seem to have made some kind of solemn binding oath that they will not mention the United Kingdom. Let me remind the members of this Parliament that foreign policy is reserved. Do we understand that in this chamber? I hope we do. I will give way to Alasdair Allan. Alasdair Allan, can you wait till your microphone comes on a second? Can we have Dr Allan's microphone? Does the member feel that his role or his party's role is to tell us a place on these matters, just a matter of days after his party has been trounced on local elections in Scotland? I don't think we've been trounced in any elections. That's another surreal remark, if I may say so. The purpose of my remarks is to remind members of the fact that we are part of the most successful partnership between two countries in the history of the world, in the United Kingdom. I remind the chamber again that foreign policy is reserved and that Scotland already benefits from a superlative global network through the work of the United Kingdom Diplomatic Service and associated trade missions. One of my finest memories, as a member of Parliament at Westminster, was the opportunity to—would the cabinet secretary like to take the floor, because he seems to be muttering? I would be absolutely delighted. I'd be grateful if Stephen Kerr could tell us when his comments are going to move on to the committee report, which is actually the subject of this afternoon's debate. Ironically, while he was muttering and waving papers from his position, I was moving on to the subject of the debate. I feel like I've been talking about the subject of the debate since I stood up, but I understand that he wishes to distract me through his antics from a sedentary position. I was saying, cabinet secretary, that one of my finest memories, as a member of Parliament at Westminster, was the opportunity to visit Kenya with fellow colleagues from the all-party parliamentary group on malaria. On that trip, I got to see up front in close quarters the horrors that millions of people around the world face in their everyday lives, and this suffering will never depart me. I also got to see the positive impact of the British overseas aid that was being dispensed and the effect that that was having on those most in need. The duty, diligence and care shown by our foreign diplomatic and aid services made me incredibly proud both to be Scottish and to be British. As part of our United Kingdom, Scotland is part of the strongest and most well-regarded foreign diplomatic and aid service in the world. We in the Scottish Conservatives believe that the Scottish Government has a responsibility to work with and in support of the UK's foreign diplomatic and aid services to promote the interests of Scotland's business and culture overseas. I also will give way to the cabinet secretary. I would be disappointed if he did not intervene. Cabinet secretary, we are now four minutes into the contribution of Stephen Curry. He still has not addressed the subject of this afternoon's debate, which is consideration into the Scottish Government's international network. When will he start to address this? Cabinet secretary, it is for the chair to determine whether or not any speech is relevant to the motion. I do not think it has deviated from the motion any more than some of the other contributions. Stephen Kerr. I am very grateful, Presiding Officer, and clearly I have excited Angus Roberts in this afternoon. He is quite agitated simply because I am reminding the chamber of what is reserved and the tremendous part that Scotland plays and benefits from the United Kingdom's overseas activities. The Scottish Government should not be using international activities to undermine the United Kingdom Government's foreign and Commonwealth and Development Office, nor should it be using it to push towards its independence agenda. SNP stubbornness to adapt to the UK's departure from the European Union is limiting the trade, cultural links and soft power of Scotland around the world. Can I ask the Presiding Officer how many minutes I have left in my speech? You can have time back for the interventions. I said that it was around six minutes. We have a little bit of time in hand. I cannot always tell from the clocks, as you know it is one of my pet subjects. Our departure from the European Union changed our relationships with countries across the world. Any Government wishing the best interest of Scotland would have adapted its international framework to reflect this changing position. The new framework that was released yesterday does not. SNP has not updated its framework, meaning that SNP has not actively sought to seek the benefits that leaving the European Union can provide. Although it is important to have a focus on Europe, it is vitally important that the Scottish Government seeks to engage with countries around the world. In her contribution to the Constitution of European External Affairs and Culture Committee, Dr Kirsty Hughes from the Royal Society of Edinburgh wrote, Scotland's trade, cultural links, soft power reputation and more extend globally, so prioritising some external affairs work beyond the EU is clearly necessary." When in government, the Scottish Conservatives will adopt an international framework which would focus on boosting Scottish trade, cultural links and soft power across the world and not just in the EU. The SNP are too busy playing constitutional politics with international policy, with its serality, to promote and implement such a positive vision for Scotland. In an interview with Euro News in December last year, Angus Robertson made clear that taxpayers' money is being used to discuss a future independence referendum with foreign governments. They are using our international connections to further the cause of the Scottish Nationalist Party and not the Scottish people. It is shameful for a Government of a modern democracy to put party before country. The Scottish Conservatives would push aside that party political separatist obsession and develop a forward-looking and truly global international framework which allows Scottish trade, cultural links and soft power to increase in all parts of the world. Mr Kerr, we now move to the final speaker in the open debate at Paul MacLennan for around six minutes please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Now that was a surreal speech, Mr Kerr. Delighted to be speaking in this debate this afternoon, I thank the committee convener Claire Adamson and the committee and of course all those who contributed to the inquiry. The inquiry underlines the Scottish Government's work to strengthen our international relationships, increase trade and investment and ultimately achieves overarching objective, sustainable economic growth in Scotland. Scotland is, always has been and always will be a European nation. As a good global citizen, the Scottish Government has has to listen and act in response to those who need our help. The new global framework, a fair framework, sets out with clarity the values and principles underpinning the Scottish Government's international work. The committee report in its own words looks to consider the current approach to that engagement with the EU and beyond. The interaction of the Scottish Government's external affairs policies with those of the UK Government and how Scotland supports international development. Devolution is still relatively young in its development. The framework needs to look into the future as best as it can. Our constitutional arrangements within the UK and within the European Union have changed so much in the past few years. Following this weekend, we now have the two largest parties in Scotland and in the North of Ireland that oppose the union. The implication of shin range success last week is still to be felt and time will tell if its impact in the months ahead. Just now, Scotland is still, as it is placed in an unbalanced union, looking to promote its culture. Only last week we had Labour pair George Fouck saying that Scots wasn't a real language. We have a long way to go before we talk about promoting our own culture to others when others talk us down. Scotland as a nation is still evolving, evolving its cultural, trade and international links. I want to focus on how we increase trade and investment and what more can be done in that regard. I believe that Scotland's international network creates domestic opportunities, attracts investment and ultimately benefits the people of Scotland. The Scottish Government maintains a network of eight offices worldwide who work to promote Scottish interests overseas and strengthen relationships with countries and continents. Those offices are in Brussels, Berlin, Dublin, London, Paris, Beijing, Ottawa and Washington DC, all over the world. The CAC Committee report acknowledges the good value for money of the international offices and the Scottish Government recognises the excellent work that has been undertaken by representatives in Scotland's offices around the world. The external affairs budget in 2021 totaled just 0.05, the overall Scottish budget. As part of the latest programme for government, the Scottish Government committed to opening up new European hubs, first in Copenhagen and then in Warsaw, while strengthening the role of the office in Brussels. The Copenhagen office builds on existing efforts to tighten relationships with our northern European neighbours following the renewed Nordic Baltic policy statement of 2017. That will increase Scotland's economic and cultural visibility in the Nordic regions by promoting co-operation around shared challenges and opportunities. Mark Ruskell touched on this earlier on opportunities such as energy transition, decarbonisation and renewable technologies. As I said earlier, the Scottish budget for external affairs is 0.05 for overall budget. However, we have the Tory benches in the past and today, only today, with Andrew Bowie MP Argyn that visits such as the FM visit in the US this week are a waste of money. That must be the only Parliament where he would see members argue against trade opportunities. I am proud of telling people who I meet in this job. Scotland will always aim to be a good global partner. I want that to be as an independent country able to make its own decisions, which would allow us to stop selling arms to the likes of Saudi Arabia and move nuclear weapons away from the Clyde. That has been a good global partner. Not exporting refugees to Rwanda, which would also mean that we would be a good global partner. COP26 showed that the Scottish Government must follow through on its commitment to listen and act in response to often unheard voices, especially those of women and young people and from the global south. To be a true global partner, we must also ensure that we must do all that we can to ensure vaccine equity. The Global Affairs Framework commits Scotland to strive to ensure that our global environmental footprint is sustainable, playing a full role in tackling the global climate and nature crisis. It also ensures that no-one in Scotland is denied rights or opportunities because of their gender. Its policies and actions abroad should be consistent with its focus on equality, inclusion and human rights at home. I want to commend the Scottish Council on Global Affairs, the SCGA, which will provide a hub for world-leading expertise on international issues. That was launched at the end of April, with the support of the universities of Glasgow, St Andrews and Edinburgh, as its founding partners are promising a new forum for global affairs in Scotland. Our universities are world-beating. Let's not forget about that. In conclusion, the Scottish Government's vision is for Scotland to be a thriving, inclusive and entrepreneurial country, delivering a just transition to a net-zero nature-positive wellbeing economy. We should all be determined that Scotland is seen to be a good global citizen, making a constructive contribution to the world. We can progress with actions that we have been proposed now, but we can make even greater strides when we come an independent nation soon. Thank you, Mr McLean. We now move to the closing speeches, and I call firstly Fousal Tewdry for around about seven minutes, Mr Tewdry. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. It is a pleasure to close this debate for Scottish level. I would like to join with all those who have thanked the members of the committee for their hard work on this report, which is considered and valuable. I look at the Scottish Government's approach to the external affairs and international development. I appreciate the committee's overall view that there needs to be a more strategic vision of external affairs from the Scottish Government. The convener of the committee emphasised the reason that this is important. We have heard from my colleague Sarah Boyack about the moral duty of the Scottish Government to engage in international development in a cohesive and transformative way, particularly in the current. Martin Whitfield and Willie Rennie have also highlighted that more needs to be done after the withdrawal of the heirsness. Just one area where Scotland's soft power can be used to try to bolster international relationship on opportunities for our young people. Maurice Golden made the point that the Scottish Government should not duplicate the resources of the UK Foreign Office and instead leverage its own advantage. I note that the committee's report recommends that new international offices are justified against strategic objectives. The Scottish people and the Scottish Parliament need their transparency to see that money is being well spent and that international offices are achieving objectives rather than existing for their own sake. Several witnesses of the inquiry called more scrutiny by this Parliament. Come and share it with greater emphasise from the Scottish Government on external affairs. The committee also encourages the Scottish Government to assess the impact of its external affairs work. I would suggest that this should be a matter of urgency. Sarah Boyack also highlighted the point about transparency. This Parliament, including the committee, must have confidence that the Scottish Government knows what it is seeking to achieve and is providing the level of transparency that will allow us to measure the progress towards those achievements. Several members raised soft power. Jenny Minter highlighted the importance of the Scottish diaspora as one of the sources of the soft power. It is certainly one area that any strategic vision should focus on to promote Scottish interests and values across the world. Wilcade spoke powerfully about the importance of Scotland maintaining a role in international security structure, particularly in protecting women and girls against abuse and human trafficking. Several members have highlighted the issue of Scotland having a feminist foreign policy. Amorodic spoke to the value of this as a symbol of Scotland's value. I think many of us have heard or seen first hand the value of the empowerment of women when it comes to international development. The committee highlights that this need to be a current policy approaches based on human rights and not just brand and we agree. On that issue of international development, and issue dear to my heart, I want to thank the committee for again highlighting the issues of policy coherency. Allah raised this issue in the debate on the good food nation bill. Nothing is absent in that piece of legislation and it remains a loose thread in the Scottish Government programme. The Scottish Government rightly makes sustainable development prominent in its rhetoric, but the committee's report, nothing the importance given to the matter by the OECD and UN, highlight the lack of coherence to tie this together across policy areas. The Scottish Government's action in sustainable development must match its warm words and the apparent lack of strategy for implementing it currently across government is something that is addressing with some urgency. To bring my remarks to a conclusion, I again thank the committee for bringing this report to the Parliament and its ongoing work scrutinising this increasingly important aspect of the Scottish Government's work. Since devolution, Scottish Labour has been in favour of the Scottish Government having a role in the world and we continue to be. However, we agree with the committee that this must be part of the strategic vision and be backed up with openness and transparency to see if that vision is being realised. I hope that the Scottish Government pays a close attention to the report and its recommendation and as many members have in this debate today. I am pleased to close the debate today on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives. Many of my colleagues in the chamber have raised numerous critical points concerning the committee report's findings and I will come back to that at the end of my speech. The Scottish Conservatives do recognise the importance of Scotland having an overseas presence, however this is true if it does not jeopardise the work of the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, the CDO, and provided that the Scottish Government is not using UK's taxpayers' money to push their independence agenda abroad, as mentioned in the new international framework. The Scottish Government must also recognise the significance of being part of the... sorry? Bob Doris. I would like to first of all thank the member for acknowledging Scotland's international role. That is really important to the Conservatives, put that on the record, unlike Stephen Kerr, but you mentioned that our work could jeopardise the work of the UK. Do you have an example of that? Your independence agenda. I think that we need to work together because I think that we will achieve more if two Governments work together than having a separate agenda for independence. The Scottish Government must also recognise the significance of being part of the UK in the global stage. The UK benefits from seats in every major multinational organisation, including NATO, the World Bank, G7, UN Security Council. While the Scottish Government is attempting to increase Scotland's soft power and perplexed by its desire to separate itself from the international work of the UK Government, particularly after the UK was recently ranked second in the world for soft power after the United States. Scotland benefits greatly from the UK's soft power, which includes education, revenues from tourism and foreign investment, while also increasing its political influence. For instance, it was the UK's influence and leadership in tackling climate change that brought the COP26 climate summit to Scotland. If the Scottish Government is as ambitious as it claims in its new international framework, it should do everything in its power to follow the lead of the UK. It was the UK that became the first country in the G7 to legislate for net zero emissions. The FCDO takes advantage of the UK's combined wealth and power to implement a wide range of humanitarian programmes around the world, as was demonstrated with the recent crisis in Ukraine. The FCDO takes a lead and provides a response to global crises effectively. It also supports the wonderful work of Scottish charities such as the Halo Trust, EMS International and the Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund. Scotland plays an important role in the FCDO's plans, as it plans to bring around 1,500 additional roles to East Kilbride by 2025. I would like to raise several important points on my speech that I think need to be reiterated. To begin with, the Scottish Government has stated repeatedly that it wants to build and pursue a Scottish foreign policy distinct from that of the UK, as well as making various commitments to increase its international activities. We did not see an updated international framework until yesterday, which was supposed to be released the previous year. It appears to me that the cabinet secretary did not approach that with sufficient urgency. It appears that the framework was published for the sake of it, as it is very general and does not include commitments. The committee discovered that the delay has made it difficult to answer basic questions on what, why and how is the Scottish Government delivering its international work. Secondly, I agree with the committee's conclusion that the SNP Government must take the required steps to improve transparency and oversight of its international objectives. Those actions should include, among other things, delivering annual reports on the operation of overseas offices and updating the international framework, which was ultimately completed yesterday. Maureen Wightfield. I am very grateful to the cabinet secretary, Presiding Officer. I am very grateful to the shantari. Does she agree with me that perhaps, as well as an annual report, an annual debate would be helpful to hold these offices to account? I can give you the time back for both of those interventions. Absolutely, I totally agree with that. I would like to elaborate on the distribution of Scotland's worldwide offices and the Scottish Government's transparency in this section. According to the Scottish political analysis firm European Merchants, there is a lack of a defined plan to justify the opening of an office in Warsaw. Anthony Salomon, the firm's founder, described it as a weird allocation of resources, and I understand why. If the Scottish Government's goal is to improve strategic connectivity in the EU, Rome, Madrid or the Hague would be more sensible choices. I had hoped that a new international framework would provide some answers and justification, but it didn't. It is worth acknowledging that, in 2019, the UK had 149 embossies or high commissions abroad, which is the sixth highest number in the world. Scotland already enjoys the benefit of having dozens of those British embossies and high commissions. Furthermore, the functioning of Scotland's international offices must be completely transparent. The goals of those offices, as we all know, are to encourage investment, assist Scottish enterprises in foreign commerce and raise Scotland's international profile, among other things. The SNP, however, sees cultivating an international profile as a major component of its independent schools, which would be an obvious waste of taxpayers' money. A new international framework goes on about how culture is at the centre of everything that the Scottish Government is doing, but I did not see those ambitions reflected in this year's budget. For instance, the Scottish Government states that it will continue enhancing Scotland's international profile by promoting our world-leading festivals through international touring and festival appearances by the national performing companies, but the budget for national performing companies has decreased in real terms for the past two years. Several critical points were raised in the chamber in that debate. For example, Maurice Golden stated that the SNP Government should work in conjunction with the UK's FCDO, utilising and maximising the collective resources of the Scottish and UK Governments. Dean Lockhart mentioned the need to increase our exports into the fastest-growing economies, but the SNP has failed to support every single free trade agreement that the EU or the UK has entered into over the past 15 years. Stephen Kerr mentioned that we are part of one of the most successful partnerships in the world. Clare Adamson mentioned the need for a strategic approach and collaboration between Governments. Sarah Boyack said that the report covers a lot of areas and other committees need to be involved and much more needs to be done. Willie Rennie said that we are getting on and delivering and not making lofty speeches, so he will be glad to know that that will be finished soon. Jenny Minto said that we need to provide a clear rationale with priorities and objectives. Bill Kidd said that we need to focus on the exploitation of women and girls to be at the top of the agenda, which was also echoed by Ruth Maguire. Martin Whitfield commented on the challenges that we face and the need for joined-up thinking. I look forward to seeing the progress that has been made from the committee's report and hope that it is made at pace. The Scottish Conservatives believe that the SNP Government should make better use of the UK's international infrastructure to promote Scotland, boost trade and help our businesses. Instead, they are preoccupied with developing a foreign policy separate from that of the UK and focusing on their ambitions for independence. The recurring theme that I have heard across the chamber was the lack of transparency and it must be addressed. The SNP Government cannot continue promoting its independence plans abroad and must provide more clarity and detail on its objectives. We now need more scrutiny from the Scottish Parliament and greater transparency from the Scottish Government, given the Scottish Government's heightened focus on international relations. I begin by taking the opportunity to reflect positively on the contribution of most members of the Parliament this afternoon. In particular, Clare Adamson, Jenny Minto, Bill Kidd, Stephanie Callaghan, Mark Ruskell, Emma Roddick, Ruth Maguire and Paul MacLennan. Largely, in those contributions, there was particular encouragement and it was good to hear that for the dozens of people who work internationally, tirelessly, to promote Scotland abroad. I think that it's worth putting on record and we certainly do as a Government the appreciation that we have for everybody working both in Scottish Government offices and in Scottish Development offices around the world. In addition to that, there were good points made across the parties about opportunities for environmental leadership, for trade promotion in regards to the Scottish diaspora and alumni of the feminist foreign policy that the Scottish Government is introducing and the importance of combating human trafficking. Much was said on the importance of delivery and I agree and that's why the Scottish Government isn't just talking, we deliver and deliver strategically when it comes to external affairs. For example, huge progress in Germany in hydrogen and renewable energy, memoranda of understanding with four of Germany's Bundeslenda and a series of delegations here in the weeks and months ahead. Many regions and towns around the world persuaded to sign up to the Edinburgh declaration on diversity over 30 alone in France. Delivery of a very successful COP26 event with unprecedented international engagement and real progress in persuading other countries to sign up to our declaration of women's leadership on climate as well as pathbreaking commitment to loss and damage. Leadership worldwide on the group of wellbeing economies, opening up new opportunities in the Nordic and Arctic, including as a partner with the Nordic Council with new offices about to open in Copenhagen. A 50 per cent uplift in international development, which we have reported back publicly annually on our impact and we will report back this year. A huge impact internationally for our cultural offer with a series of very successful culture summits and the presence of many high quality Scottish performers both at international festivals but at the excellent cultural activities organised by our offices overseas. I've got quite a way to go, forgive me, in talking about the successes, which I think are important to put on the... I've said I'm going to make some progress and that's what I intend to do. Transformative trade and investment support, which has resulted in Scotland. I know that Tory benches don't want to hear this but it's important to put on the record. I've already said that I'm going to make some progress with this list because I think it's important that it is on the record. Transformative trade and investment support, which has resulted in Scotland being the most attractive part of the United Kingdom outside London for foreign direct investment. We've immediately stepped up to the mark on Ukraine, generously and innovatively £4 million in crucial humanitarian finance and super sponsorship scheme. Similar response to Brexit, widely admired and supported to our much valued European Union citizens. Joint work with Ireland on many issues, including health culture and our world-leading CivTech, all driven by an unprecedented bilateral framework. Those are just some of the issues that have been delivered strategically and not just talked about. Presiding Officer, it's worthwhile in putting on record appreciation to members genuinely interested in supporting the improvement and work of the Scottish Government internationally. I'd like to echo the thanks from committee members to those organisations and individuals who took the time to provide written and oral evidence that has helped inform the inquiry. I'm pleased that today's debate has been largely in keeping with the Government's warm welcome for the committee's work. The debate has emphasised the constructive, largely constructive cross-party nature of this report and an ambition to make the most of our international activity. I still have to make some progress before getting to Erasmus, which I suspect is what Willie Rennie would wish to ask me about, and I will be answering his points. The report emphasises prioritisation of policies, effective collaboration and coherence across government. Underpinning that is a recognition of the value that a continuous process of improvement in measurement of impact adds to our work. On the global affairs framework, Scotland is determined to be a good global citizen. The global affairs framework publication yesterday underlines that point and provides that focus on a strategic approach for our international work. As the committee's report emphasises, Scotland has a huge range of businesses and civil society groups, either operating overseas or focusing on issues of global importance. Collectively, our country has huge strengths, not only in international affairs but in related areas such as human rights and conflict resolution, international development, climate justice, energy security and public health. The framework provides a structure for the Government to promote those strengths internationally. If I can take the opportunity, this is the first time that we have met since the foundation of the Scottish Council on Global Affairs, and I was pleased to see a representative of all the parties at its launch. I think that it is great news given that Scotland has lacked a central institute that could bring knowledge and expertise together in an international context. That we now have a Scottish Council on Global Affairs in our programme and delivered having been stated explicitly at an aim in our programme for government. I look forward greatly to the work of that Scottish Council on Global Affairs in the months and the years ahead. Before concluding, I would like to return to the query posed by Willie Rennie in relation to Erasmus. The Scottish Government was hugely disappointed by the decision of the UK Government not to associate with Erasmus Plus, which currently prevents Scotland from participating fully in its own right after 2022-23. The Scottish Government recognises the importance of educational mobility and, since the UK Government decision, we have continued to engage in dialogue with the European Parliament and European Commission on how we can maximise our institution's access to the EU programme. In our programme for government, we have committed to develop a Scottish education exchange programme to support the international mobility of staff and learners and work to re-secure Scotland's access to the Erasmus Plus programme. That is exactly what we will do. I will not. I am winding up now. In conclusion, engagement, partnership and collaboration are cornerstones of the committee's work. We are proud that they are existing cornerstones of this Government's approach to our work internationally. Through areas such as the great work of our staff in our international offices, sharing good practice such as our fair and inclusive policies at home, drawing influence from constructive partnerships overseas, continuing to maintain alignment with the European Union, supporting and empowering our partner countries through our international development programme, playing our part in tackling global challenges including poverty, injustice and inequality and continuing to amplify global south voices on issues such as climate change and vaccine equity. We will be able to strengthen Scotland's engagement with partners across Europe and around the world. I commend the committee for its report. I look forward to continuing positive relations with the Scottish Government. Constant improvement is a shared endeavour, and I look forward to that taking place in the weeks and months ahead. Cabinet Secretary has wound up slightly earlier than anticipated, but I would be grateful to Donald Cameron, who is concluding the debate on behalf of the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee, if he could take us up to around about five o'clock in decision time, Mr Cameron. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Fifteen minutes. I will try my hardest. Deputy convener, I am very pleased to close this debate. What has been a very wide-ranging debate covering different themes and different parts of the world, much in the spirit of the committee's recommendation to do this in terms of the policy of a geographic and thematic approach. There have been a lot of lofty speeches to keep Willie Rennie happy. Speaking on behalf of the committee, it is our hope that both the report and the debate this afternoon will help the Scottish Government in its consideration of the many important issues that we raise. Before I respond to the contributions that have been made this afternoon, I would like to add a couple of comments on some of the topics mentioned by the convener in her opening remarks. Can I focus on the role, firstly, of international offices and how the work of the Scottish Government interacts with UK foreign policy and, in the context of international development, the approach to funding, including the matter of small grants that was raised by various speakers? With regard, firstly, to the Scottish Government's international offices and the important issue of how we judge the impact of their work, the Scottish Arts and Humanities Alliance told the committee that we need, and I quote, some measures, key performance indicators, if you like, of hub activity that has led to successful outcomes in driving forward trade relationships, positive research funding and so on. That was a view echoed by the Royal Society of Edinburgh, the Law Society of Scotland and European Merchants, all of whom felt that a clear strategy would promote accountability and transparency. It is something that has arisen this afternoon. How do we measure the efficacy of these international offices? What metrics do we use? I'm not quite sure we've been able to answer that this afternoon, but it is something that is of concern to the committee and the Scottish Government should take away and consider. Accordingly, we recommended a detailed justification for any new international offices, including location choice, the fit with the international offices' own strategic objectives and, in turn, those objectives are the revised international framework, the national performance framework and Scotland's national strategy for economic transformation, of course. I very much thank the deputy convener for taking intervention. It's really helpful that he's outlined the range of different witnesses who made those comments, because the committee's recommendation, just to clarify to the cabinet secretary, was not about criticising staff who do fantastic work on those offices. It was about being clear, having set priorities and enabling us to have some kind of transparency. When you think about the budgets, there have been a couple of comments about the international budget not as much as we would like it to be. There have to be priorities, so there have to be trade-offs. The more clarity we can get, we can see more where the political priorities could be, not just in the international offices but in international projects across the world, where we think we can make a distinct and really important contribution from Scotland. That should help with your 15 minutes, Ronald Cameron. She was more than welcome to carry on. I can acknowledge what she said and endorse entirely those views. As the convener mentioned, we also, as a committee, recommended that the Scottish Government publish an annual report setting out the contribution made by international offices when it comes to promoting the values, objectives and priorities of the revised international framework. In respect of UK foreign and diplomatic policy, our witnesses felt that the Scottish and UK Governments in fact shared many of the same priorities. It was suggested with developments to inter-governmental working that the devolved administrations could play a more significant role in shaping the UK Government's post-Brexit foreign policies. Dr Kirsty Hughes, who has already been quoted this afternoon, has thought that in many ways there is clear complementarity between Edinburgh and London, certainly in principle, both Governments want to support and promote the same things that could be trade, human rights and net zero. We recommend in our report that the forthcoming culture diplomacy strategy sets out how it will interact with the UK Government strategy as detailed in the document Global Britain in a competitive age. I will first to Stephen Kerr and then to Fiona Hyslif. I'm grateful to my friend for giving away and I hope that this is helpful to him in his pursuit of the decision time hour. Dr Kirsty Hughes quoted in reflecting on the commonalities that exist in terms of priorities around these foreign policy objectives. He may not be able to comment on that because I know he's speaking as a deputy convener, but doesn't that make it even more bizarre that in the framework document there is not one reference to the United Kingdom, there's not one reference to working in partnership with the United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth and Development Office? I can't properly comment on that as speaking so neutrally as the deputy convener, but I acknowledge what has been said now and indeed what was said in Stephen Kerr's speech. We'll take an intervention from Fiona Hyslif. I have two points to make. One in my experience is that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is very good at dealing with the Scottish Government compared to other departments. Perhaps it's because they're very used to operating and dealing diplomatically with lots of different Governments across the world. Does he agree with that? Secondly, is he aware that in the development of the UK Government's global Britain approach there was real controversy internally as to whether you should be so explicit in setting out what your diplomacy is, whether it's cultural, whether it's soft power, whether it's anything else? Actually, the Scottish Government should be very careful in how it sets out its cultural diplomacy aspect, because as I intervened in Clare Adamson, sometimes soft power and cultural diplomacy is what you do and make an impact broadcasting it. It's perhaps like a football manager sharing their tactics. I listened very carefully to Fiona Hyslif making that intervention and I know it's a fascinating point. I'm not sure I entirely agree and speaking personally here that it matters if the elements of soft power, if we call it that, are indeed outlined, because actually it's about how that policy is enacted in practice day to day across the world. It's a really interesting point and I acknowledge what she said about the work of the Foreign Office for the FCDO in its role. Can I turn to the subject of international development funding? There are a couple of issues that I'd like to highlight. The Scotland Malawi Partnership suggested competitive calls were the most transparent and effective mode of grant making. We would invite the Scottish Government to give a breakdown of its current international development grants in terms of competitive or non-competitive awards and provide the rationale for that approach. We also heard quite a lot about the cancellation of the small grants programme. We asked to be kept updated on any developments, including what may flow from meetings with the core funded organisations. Although the committee acknowledged the logic of the process and the criteria applied, our view is that there should still be a role for small initiatives by which we mean those innovative community-led projects with the potential to grow and attract more funding. I thank the member for giving way. I have to admit that I don't sit on the committee but was fascinated by the balance between small grants and doing things of scale with partnership countries and the committee wrestled with that. Does the committee look at small grants in relation to international aid for emergency countries in the emergency crisis? I know lots of small organisations in Scotland who would not necessarily have the scale to apply through a pan-UK approach to international aid for emergency crisis situations. I can think of charities in my constituency who support Afghanistan and Sri Lanka, for example. Does the committee look at international emergency aid as well as international development? We certainly looked at emergency aid in general, but I am not sure that we specifically looked at the point that he raised. It is something that I will take a when and try to clarify with him after the debate. We ask the Scottish Government what support they plan to provide for the grass-roots initiatives as a committee. Briefly, I cover some of the excellent and thoughtful speeches that were made this afternoon. Maurice Golden spoke about support for the report on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives and the party's belief that the Scottish Government's international effort should act in conjunction with the UK Government's approach. Sarah Boyack spoke on the focus on the need for demonstrating impact, a recurrent theme, and on the importance of gender inequalities and the Scottish Government's commitment to a feminist foreign policy. Willie Rennie expanded his view that it was disrespectful of the Scottish Government to delay a response on keeping pace and delay the announcement regarding the replacement Erasmus programme. Jenny Minter spoke about the yes. Willie Rennie, I thank the member for taking an intervention. Was he surprised that the minister did not address the fact that the Welsh Government has gone further and announced a £65 million equivalent of the Erasmus scheme, which is a year old now? Was he surprised that the minister did not respond to that? What was the committee's discussion on the Welsh programme? Does he think that that could be applied to Scotland? I can't express a view on that, but in terms of the Erasmus scheme, we took evidence on Erasmus and Turing. I can't remember specifically whether we addressed the issue of what Wales was doing, but I acknowledge the point that he's made. No end of help now. No end of help and assistance. Indeed, at paragraph 80 of the report, the committee talked about the evidence of Erasmus plus the Turing scheme and said that they sought the Scottish Government's outline of what work is being undertaken to support the academic links and develop opportunities for students and young people. Would the committee hope to get a more positive response than perhaps some of us did today from the Scottish Government? I'm sure that the Scottish Government will respond to your course. I think that the point has been powerfully made by both Willie Rennie and Mr Whitfield today, so I'm sure that we'll get a response. Deputy Presiding Officer, I'm not entirely sure how much time there is left. If you could take us up to about a minute before 5 o'clock that would be enough. I will quickly run through other contributions. Jenny Minto spoke of the cultural elements of soft power and of a visit in her constituency during COP of some Amazonian Indigenous people who shared her constituent's commitment to environmental recovery. She spoke very powerfully about the nostalgia on the one hand and modernity driving international affairs policy. Dean Lockhart agreed with the committee on the need for a thematic and geographic approach. He spoke about trade, about exports, trade offices and the diaspora. His view was that there was a lack of a strategic plan and a failure to leverage the power of the diaspora. Willie Rennie spoke of the shocks of Covid and the Ukraine in that it was now time to re-evaluate its strategy and policy. He made a very compelling speech about his work and experience on various CPGs, nuclear disarmament and human trafficking, engaging with the expertise found in Scotland and focusing especially on the trafficking of women and girls. Martin Whitfield stressed the importance of joined-up thinking. He focused on education, young people and again the need to speed this up. He asked where is the Scottish Government's plan and imagination. Stephanie Callahan spoke about the strong presence of Scotland across the world and her belief in an independent Scotland and her view that new Scots were treated with respect and dignity here in contrast to the approach of the UK Government. Mark Ruskell spoke about climate change. His view was that to deliver on climate we need to develop even closer links to Europe. He spoke about Scotland being the first country to set up a loss and damage fund as well as the benefits of the Copenhagen offices. We heard from Emma Roddick, who was one of many speakers to speak about a feminist foreign policy and her belief that the Scottish Government is a pioneer in that regard. Ruth Maguire again spoke of that and focused on gender equality. He was thinking about foreign policy from the perspective of vulnerable groups. Stephen Kerr expanded his view that the Scottish Government was living in a parallel reality given that foreign policy is reserved to the UK Government. He also spoke about his visit to Kenya and working with those suffering from malaria and how UK aid is being dispensed in practice. We heard from Paul McLennan about trade and investment and how we must increase this. He spoke about the Scottish Council on Global Affairs, which was backed by the University of Glasgow and Edinburgh and was launched recently and was a launch that I was delighted to attend. Faisal chargery summed up eloquently for labour and concentrated on sustainable development and the need to tie this together across various policy areas and that we need more than warm words. Finally, Sharon Dowie spoke about the UK Government and her view that it was the UK Government that brought COP to Glasgow, the UK Government that was the first country to legislate for net zero emissions. She spoke about cultural performances as well as the need for increased scrutiny of Scottish Government work. The committee welcomes today's wide-ranging and stimulating debate of our report on the Scottish Government's international work. I suspect that as a subject we will return to before long and I support the motion in the convener's name. Mr Cameron, with the assistance of colleagues, 15 minutes goes by in a blink of an eye. That concludes the debate on the inquiry into the Scottish Government's international work. It's now time to move to the next item of business. The next item of business is consideration of business motion 433, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau on changes to this week's business. Any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press the request-to-speak button now, and I call on Stephen Kerr to move the motion. Thank you very much. No member has asked to speak against the motion. Therefore, the question is that motion 433 be agreed. Are we all agreed? That is agreed. The next item of business is consideration of Parliamentary Bureau motion 4334 on committee meeting times. Again, I ask Stephen Kerr on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau to move the motion. The question on this motion will be put at decision time, to which we now come. There are two questions to be put as a result of today's business. First question is that motion 4294, in the name of Clare Adamson, on behalf of the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee on inquiry into the Scottish Government's international work, be agreed? Are we all agreed? That is agreed. The next question is that motion 4334, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau on committee meeting times, be agreed? Are we all agreed? That is agreed. That concludes decision time. We now move on to members' business. Would members leaving the Chamber please do so as quickly and as quietly as possible?