 32,526—20,0502—0. Mae y dypa am gyfan i'r eu bydd, gan gydy'r gwybod cymor i'r sweth i gymryd i'r mwydylion 14807 yn y mynd, sydd yn ei ddath regeneration. That is great to be back in the chamber to talk about the digital economy so soon after our most recent debate on digital participation. Now November 20 is not normally a date that springs to the forefront of people's minds when they reflect on the history of the digital economy. On this day in 1985, so the history books tell me, Microsoft changed human interaction with machine learning because it was on this day that the first mass produced personal computer graphic package, Windows 1.0, was released. It's from that moment that digital technology truly began to enter the workplace and our lives and of course the lives of people worldwide was transformed over the course of the last few. Indeed. I feel a history lesson coming on, Mr Stevenson. Unfortunately, the minister has been badly advised as digital research produced the graphical environment G-GEM some 10 years earlier. I'm grateful to Stuart Stevenson being in the chamber for an update to that history lesson and I'm sure he can tell me further later on. Back in 2018, which is where I prefer to exist, over 102,000 people are employed in digital occupations in Scotland and the digital and the IT sector are currently worth £5.2 billion in GVA to the economy and is forecast to be the fastest growing sector in Scotland by 2024. Yet, despite that, it's a sector that still needs more work to keep up with the pace and the demands of change and requires an extra 12,800 new employees every year just to stand still. The interesting thing is that this is a sector that's not just dominated by multinational companies but, instead, it's being shaped by smaller SMEs who require more support to meet those demands. For example, in Edinburgh, jobs in digital tech increased by over three times the UK average between 2014 to 2017 and there are now an estimated 10,000 people in the city working in the sector across 213 businesses creating £1.4 billion of turnover. Those figures are, of course, replicated in Glasgow and to a degree in Dundee, Aberdeen and Inverness. The latest tech nation survey found that digital tech workers are more productive on average by £10,000 per worker and that jobs requiring digital tech skills command higher salaries at £42,578 compared to £32,000 for those who do not. What those figures illustrate is a growing and innovative sector, one that holds a distinct opportunity for Scotland's economy and our future ambitions. However, we do not have to be a tech business or a startup to be able to take advantage of the digital opportunities and the emerging technologies. Since taking over this ministerial role in June, I have tried to travel the length and breadth of Scotland to meet as many small businesses as possible who are taking up digital as a way of improving their business processes, their capabilities and their productivity. Many of those indeed. Patrick Harvie I am grateful to the minister for giving way and she is clearly enthusiastic, as I think we all should be, for the opportunities, the positive opportunities. However, is there not also a danger that if we only frame this debate in terms of positive opportunities, we may miss a trick? There are downsides and risks from the agenda. Without wanting to pour any cold water, we will only maximise the opportunities if we identify and take action to mitigate any downsides and risks in terms of worker protection and a whole host of other issues. I wonder if the minister would reflect on that. Minister I thank Patrick Harvie for that comment, which he also made during the digital participation debate. It is a point that I take very seriously. In response, I would say that there are three main concerns that I have. The first is what we are doing with data and making sure that ethics are right at the heart of our strategies on data. The second is protecting our people, particularly perhaps young people who are coming through school at the moment and only know and engaging with others online. In conjunction with Young Scott, we are supporting the five rights campaign, which I am sure he has come across, which is young people's rights to remove information, to know what their rights are, to safety and support online, to have informed and conscious use of online and to be digitally literate. The third point is making sure that, as he said, when it comes to automation and workers' rights, those are at the heart. Minister, do not worry about taking interventions. There is time in the hand, so there is plenty to do. In conclusion to Patrick Harvie's point, those are issues that are shaping our whole strategy when it comes to economic growth because of digital and also supporting workers and people that are using digital. Moving back to the economy, many of the businesses, whether it was Swanson's fruit company in Inverness, Woodblocks in Dingwall or Prater contracts in Lanarkshire, are not necessarily tech companies and were initially far removed from the digital technology that they are now using. However, thanks to Government-backed programmes such as Digital Boost and the recently launched digital development loan, they are now finding new ways to get digital and to enhance their digital presence. It is companies such as this that are the lifeblood of the local Scottish economy that we have to encourage to become more digitally aware. I often hear on my travels, not least as a Highland MSP, that connectivity, especially in rural areas, is a barrier to small businesses getting online. Although that may be true in many of the hard-to-reach areas in this vast country of ours, it is still the case that even those that are connected are still not making the most of what we have in terms of the infrastructure. A recent Scotland's rural college report about unlocking digital potential of rural areas in Scotland and across the UK stated, and I quote, even when such concerns about network connectivity are put aside, more than half, at 52 per cent, of the rural businesses surveyed identified some other constraint that has reduced their ability to go digital. There are clearly barriers other than connectivity that we need to address, and that is why I hope that this debate in particular will be constructive in doing so. Some of those barriers are, of course, structural, but others are personal and about aspiration. It is that ambition that we want to see unlocked and digital represents a huge opportunity for Scotland. Digital also enables the most excluded from the job market, be it mothers of young children or disabled people or young people with fresh ideas, affords them the same chances to participate as anybody else if we ensure that our support is right. The other advantage of the digital economy is that it enables businesses to become more productive, to streamline processes and to become more efficient. A recent CBI Scotland report said that Scotland's productivity falls short of overseas countries and differs across Scotland with an up to 50 per cent variation between local authorities in Scotland. The report stated that one of the contributing factors to productivity was a skilled and diverse workforce. It quoted research that suggests that firms with a high level of gender diversity outperform rivals by as much as 15 per cent and firms with high levels of ethnic diversity outperform rivals by as much as 35 per cent, but I shall take the member's intervention. Dean Lockhart, thank you very much for the minister giving way. On the subject of skills, does the minister share my concern about the significant decline in teachers' teaching maths and computer science and the negative impact that might have on the future workforce in the digital economy? I think that that is why the Deputy First Minister's commitment to ensuring that there are more teachers in STEM subjects in particular is so welcome. Things such as the career in changing bursaries of £20,000 to those who want to move into teaching STEM subjects are so vital. I believe that if we want the skills and the next generation, particularly digital skills, not just so that everybody comes out at the other end of school as software engineers but become teachers, become doctors, become nurses, become carers with the digital skills that they need, we will see transformation right across the public and the private sectors. There are great examples of Scottish tech companies that are striving to address the need for partnership between business and government in order to spread good working practices and to change workplace culture. Many companies have, in partnership with the Scottish Government, signed up to the 50-50 by 2020 initiative aiming for a gender-balanced board in order to ensure that we have that higher level of productivity. There are businesses who identify the challenge of engaging with the public sector as one of the hurdles that they have to overcome. Now imagine that if we could harness the power of digital so that that business does not have to provide the same information multiple times to the public sector and that the time taken to make a decision is reduced from 28 days to one day. Imagine that if there was a single place where a business or a citizen could access information on the progress of an application on a device and at a time of their choice. That is what the Scottish Environment Protection Agency's anticipated time reduction will be following the introduction of its common licensing platform. All that because SIPA has automated repetitive clerical tasks and joined them up by allowing staff to focus on where they can truly add value. That is what we want to see right across the public sector so that we support businesses, citizens and entrepreneurs as much as possible, to achieve their ambitions. Of course, we need to do that in a way that ensures that we are operating in a safe and secure way online. That is why we are putting cyber resilience at the core of everything that we do in the digital world. Our public sector action plan was published last November and is now well advanced, with NDPBs, health boards, local authorities and universities and colleges all working hard to ensure a common baseline of cyber resilience. Earlier this year, the Deputy First Minister published our private and third sector action plans on cyber resilience, setting out how the Scottish Government will work in partnership with leading businesses and charities and the National Cyber Security Centre to help to make Scotland a world-leading nation in cyber resilience. Everybody will be well aware of the strength of Scotland's financial sector. There is a depth of talent and expertise that we have in Scotland, particularly in Glasgow and Edinburgh. That is one reason that companies are continuing to choose to invest in Scotland, whether it is Barclays recent announcement of its commitment to a new facility in Glasgow or just this morning, I was visiting Clyde Stale Bank to see the ways that they are supporting their businesses and their customers with better online platforms. Advances in technology, especially in the field of data, mean that the world of financial services is changing. Scotland is particularly well placed with its strong financial sector and its world-renowned data and analytical expertise to exploit those opportunities. The value of data-driven innovation to the economy is forecast to be up to £20 billion over the next five years, and there are aspirations for Scotland to become a global centre of excellence in this field, with positive developments beginning to happen in oil, healthcare and fintech. We cannot allow unwanted and unneeded barriers to jeopardise those aspirations. As I close, much of what I have spoken about this afternoon is looking at the positives that we possess as a country and the opportunities that we have in adopting digital. Our refresh digital strategy in 2017 has a vision of digital for everybody at its heart. Of course, work needs to be done to realise our ambitions, but we are starting from a solid base. My encouragement to every member in this chamber today is to champion the message of digital to constituents and businesses and to consider the challenges that Patrick Harvie has set out when it comes to the ethics that are required, the rights of our people and the way in which we protect users and businesses. However, I hope that, over the course of this debate, we can look at the way that the digital economy provides for the businesses and the citizens in every local area across Scotland. I move the motion in my name. Before I do that, can I ask all members who wish to speak in the debate to press the request to speak buttons, please? Some have not done it. I now call on Finlay Carson to speak to move amendment 14807.1. Again, I can be generous if you take interventions. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am pleased to open today's debate from the Scottish Conservatives, as my party's spokesman on the digital economy. It's only a few weeks since I closed for our party on digital inclusion, which brought many pertinent issues surrounding people's access to digital access as technology continues to develop at a rapid pace. We are indeed in the rapidly developing and enveloping fourth industrial revolution in Scotland, as it has been in the previous three revolutions should be leading it. No cabinet secretary, minister, shadow minister or back bencher would be fulfilling their parliamentary duties without the recognition of the pivotal role digital technology will play in all our futures. It's therefore fitting that the minister has brought forward another debate surrounding digital industries to the chamber. There is much in the Scottish Government's motion and indeed the Labour's motion that those benches here will agree on. Ms Forbes should and I have no doubt will be a regular contributor to parliamentary debates and her role as digital economy minister because there is not one aspect of our future that won't be shaped by decisions taken around the fourth industrial revolution. I welcome recent research which suggests that the take-up of digital devices has been happening faster in Scotland than in any other part of the UK. However, there is much more that can be done to ensure that we can go further to ensure that Scotland does have a bright digital future, as my amendment refers to. As an MSP for a rural constituency, not a day goes past when I'm not contacted by an individual or organisation pushing for greater urgency when it comes to delivering better connectivity in their homes or premises. It's clear that far too many businesses are still not properly equipped when it comes to digital technology, which in turn negatively affects productivity and innovation. I genuinely hope that R100 can deliver for rural Scotland despite the start warnings from Audit Scotland, because when it comes to digital revolution, we can't afford to leave anybody behind. We often hear the term digital divide, and that so often simply refers to internet connectivity. The divide used to be between those who had broadband and those who had dial-up and those who had superfast, but there are still those who still have connectivity and those who simply don't. With the pace of change ever increasing, the digital divide could potentially get wider, and the real divides would not only be economic opportunity, but even more so in social health and wellbeing dimensions. We can't allow it to happen. I did have a constituent contact with me after the last debate to make sure that we didn't forget about the potential for people being excluded who suffered from digital autism. We know that the digital economy business survey was carried out last year, just how important developing our industries for digital future is to them. It's concerning that only one in four businesses say that their employees were fully equipped with the skills to meet their digital needs, which was down from 37 per cent in 2014. When you combine that stat from the fact that over three quarters of businesses said in the very same survey that digital technologies are essential or important for the current operation of their business, and it's more clear than ever that action needs to be taken to address the imbalance in our businesses when it comes to the new technologies. We are seeing some positive changes, certainly. Stuart McMillan, I thank Finlay Carson for taking the intervention and on his point regarding business, but also on the amendment that the Conservatives have put forward regarding city deals, I see the effort content that his Government and Westminster is actually under funding the city deals by over £400 million. Finlay Carson, I don't agree with that. I'm involved with the Borderlands deal, and I'm looking forward to an announcement in the spring where some of the digital technology improvements that we need in rural Dumfries and Galloway and the borders will be addressed. We have seen advancements particularly in health and social care. Scotland is certainly leading the UK when it comes to developing these new applications, and Scotland's universities also have a global reputation when it comes to the development of artificial intelligence. When we see the expansion of the expertise at the Edinburgh School or Edinburgh Centre for Robotics and the University's Artificial Intelligence Applications Institute, that all links very positively to the UK Government's industrial strategy, which aims to put the UK at the forefront of the industries of the future, and at the heart of that is making the UK a global centre for innovation. As my amendment today states, this is where I believe the Scottish and UK Governments can work together, along with stakeholders, in order to ensure that the UK is not left behind when it comes to the Fourth Revolution. The city and region deals that have been brought together by the two Governments working together are a perfect opportunity for ensuring that our industries have the investment to develop new technologies and to open up new opportunities for communities, and particularly communities in rural parts of Scotland, where it is harder to bring new technologies into action. That is why I hope that the Scottish Government takes seriously the recommendations from the SCDI. Most pressingly, it says that Scotland currently lacks a strategic leadership for the fourth industrial revolution. It points out that this lack— Minister. He welcomes the appointment of the First Minister for the Digital Economy and the Scottish Government. Mr Carson, be gallant. Absolutely. I would prefer if he would become a Cabinet Secretary, because as your shadow, that might have put me in the shadow. I have helped to hold you to account. As the SCDI points out, the lack of leadership is not exclusively down to the Government, and it again highlights the importance of everyone working closely on future strategy. We must have a national focus on what Scotland can do to harness the opportunities that come in order to boost the economy. As the minister will remember, we had a fruitful discussion surrounding data, and soon after that, she was appointed into a new role. I am heartened by the SCDI's belief that data is fundamental to the latest industrial revolution, and they believe that it is the current strength of a lot of the technical companies in Scotland. If we can develop a strong data strategy, we can alleviate the risk that some associate with personal data, and then Scotland can truly unlock its potential. On that front, I would like to urge the Scottish National Party Government into quicker action today when it comes to the digital growth fund. The First Minister launched this fund worth £36 million in March 2017, but the first payments from the fund were not made available until June 2018. That is simply not good enough when we always need to be keeping up with advances in technology. As for the automatic for the people report, as it points out, there has always been winners and losers from any industrial revolution, and with accelerated growth in Scotland's cities, productivity has widened in comparison with rural areas. Any future digital strategy must address that geographical imbalance. Many of our vital sectors—whether it is food and drink, tourism and education and health services—are at risk of being left behind if their demands are not met with the latest digital strategies. We are at a critical point in terms of how our economy will develop for the next generation, and who will be able to access them is all important. The UK-wide industrial strategy white paper is a hugely important piece of work and outlines just what can be achieved through working together and addressing the current imbalances. It has been a pleasure to bring forward the suggestions today and to highlight more of the same in the amendment to which I now move my name. I now call James Kelly to speak to move amendment 148 to 7.2. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I move the amendment in my name. That is the third debate that we have had on digital issues in a number of months. The minister is right to highlight the important contribution that the digital economy can make in Scotland and how we have to get this crucial area of the economy absolutely right, because it is going to continue to grow and it is going to be a test as to whether we do properly have an economy that is fit for the 21st century. To me there are two issues that I want to bring to the fore in terms of my contribution. Getting more people access to the technology and ensuring that we address the skills issues that are required in order to ensure that we make the biggest potential possible of our digital economy. I think that, listening to reflecting on the past couple of debates, there is a slight element in terms of some of the discussions that there is a bit of a bubble debate going on at Holyrood in terms of whether people get concerned about connectivity speeds and what particular types of technology are available in different parts of the country. There is a lack of recognition that, sadly, for too many people in the country and in too many areas, they do not have access to the internet at all and never mind information technology devices. The reason for that is that there are areas where there is a lot of child poverty, 230,000 kids still living in child poverty, 487,000 people not being paid the living wage. In one of the wards within the Glasgow region, I represent, rather than going central or north, nearly just short of 28 per cent of children are living in child poverty. What that means if you have been brought up in a house like that is that it is difficult to make ends meet. It is difficult to pay the bills. It is difficult to put proper nourished meals on the table. Therefore, there is not the money available that people have got in other areas to enable access to information technology. That is not only detrimental to those individuals, but also detrimental to the economy. If people do not have access to information technology, a lot of people—the economic access that digital connectivity gives companies nowadays—is restricted if there are areas where people do not have access to the appropriate digital devices. It is a bigger debate in terms of the budget about how you lift people out of poverty, how you increase household income but ultimately we need to address those issues if we are going to ensure that there is greater coverage in the country for digital connectivity. That is a direct input into business. It is not just about the individuals themselves. The other issue that needs to be looked at is making the most of this area. Only 3 per cent of companies in Scotland are in the top rating in terms of their digital capability. That means that we have a lot further to go. The other thing about that is that it is getting the right people into these companies. When I speak to businesses, one of the shortcomings that they see is that—I acknowledge that I know that the Government has made some progress in this area, but it feels that those graduating from colleges and universities are not quite skilled enough in the technologies of the jobs that they are putting in place. The other thing is that it is a very fast-moving area. We need to ensure that we have people coming out, not just with the appropriate skills but the appropriate capability to be able to pick up and develop the technologies quickly. I take and agree with a lot of the member's points. Has he got any thoughts on supporting the current workforce with reskilling and upskilling so that they have the digital skills no matter what jobs they have? That is an important point that Kate Forbes makes. One of the issues is automation. As we automate more, there are tremendous advantages in that for business and also for individuals. Unfortunately, there are people who do not necessarily at this moment in time have those IT skills. I think that there is a job to be done in terms of individual businesses as they change their focus to try to make sure that they take their employee base with them and give the employees the opportunities in terms of upskilling. I think that there is a link into the Government's strategy and into the higher and further education sector to ensure that people have proper training opportunities. It is absolutely key that automation does not mean that people are left behind and ultimately disenfranchised and potentially left out of a job. That is an important issue. The other issue that needs to be taken into account is how we get more women into STEM positions. Sadly, women only make up 19 per cent of the tech workforce, so we are not making the most of it in terms of bringing women forward for those positions. That goes all the way back to the school level. In 2012, in terms of computer-related subjects, the women made up 32 per cent of the qualifications that they achieved, and that recently is deteriorated to nearly half to 18 per cent. That shows that there is a real issue there in not bringing through girls and young women into those positions. We are lacking therefore to make the most of our potential. In summing up, Deputy Presiding Officer, I think that that is a massive issue for the Government, for the Parliament, particularly looking ahead to building a successful Scottish economy. What it requires is an overall strategy that ensures that we give as many people access to the technology as possible so that they can contribute into the economy. We ensure that we have a joined-up strategy running through from schools, universities and employers to ensure that we have people who are properly skilled to make the most of the advantages in the 21st century. That is an important debate with some big areas and issues to discuss. There are some real opportunities, but there are also some challenges that we need to address. There is a savage irony for me as I start to speak in this debate in that today, much against my better judgment, I was foolish enough to trust this thing with my notes and now the screen has frozen. It is unusable, so I am going to have to wing it. I do remember that the first thing that I was supposed to say was to draw attention to the fact that I am a member of the open rights group, just as I did at the start of the debate three weeks ago. I will be expanding on some of the themes in that debate that we touched on. There is a great deal of overlap. My experience with the device in front of me is a reminder of one of the first feelings of frustration that I had on being elected here and knowing that I would be locked in to a Microsoft environment, not one that I would have chosen rather than members of this Parliament being given the option to spend a fixed budget on IT and meet their own needs. We are told that we have to live within a walled garden and that is clearly still a frustration for me. I do not know whether others are experiencing the same. Are you offering to unfreeze something here? Would the member agree that the feeling that he is experiencing now is a feeling that is shared by many rural constituents, including those who are sitting in the gallery today from a farming company, that they are experiencing on a daily basis when their internet connectivity goes down and we need to accelerate that roll-out? Mr Harvey. I certainly recognise that frustration. One of the arguments that I put in the last debate—I put it again now—is that, while we should be concerned that everyone has adequate access, the obsession with the idea that absolutely everybody in the country must have super-fast speeds—I am not sure that I would prioritise somebody in my street in Partick getting super-fast speeds rather than people in other parts of the country getting what is good enough. I think that we need some discussion about what is good enough in terms of access to networks and access to broadband rather than thinking that, if people do not have 30 meg connections, they are somehow digitally deprived. That roll-out, uptake and ability to access networks is not the only thing that we should be debating. I want to raise three broad themes. One is on the impact on the workplace, one is on the framework of laws that protect things such as copyrights and patents and the other is on a digital rights agenda. James Kelly mentioned the impact of automation on people who may, in future, not have a job or certainly not have a job that pays them a livable and secure, reliable income. That is something that we have been debating on a number of occasions. In particular, the impact of the gig economy and employment standards are there. The vulnerability that people can live with when their income is temperamental or unpredictable, or when the companies that operate the platforms on which they get access to their work do not treat themselves as having employers' responsibilities towards them. They may not be doing tech work, they may not feel that they are working in a tech industry, but if they are working across a platform provided by a tech business, they are affected by it. We see a great many people effectively working for significantly less than the minimum wage, let alone the living wage, or indeed not having any security around holiday entitlement, sick leave and so on. There is a whole host of workplace protection issues there. Even for the big tech businesses, there are also issues. I will mention our neighbours, Rockstar North, in this context. I mention them in particular only because they have had some recent negative press attention in terms of workplace issues. I want to recognise that, amongst that press attention, there have been some individuals quoted saying that things are getting better. They have been conscious about the need to improve. However, that consciousness about the need to improve reminds us that big tech industries can often and have often been very exploitative in expecting huge amounts of overtime, including unpaid overtime, particularly in what is called in the games industry the crunch period, the final frantic phase of development of a new game or other product, where people are expected to work way over, above and beyond their contracted hours. We do want a fair economy. We recognise that the Scottish Government has a fair work agenda and we need to think about what are the new aspects of that agenda that have to develop in relation to the tech industries and the digital economy. The second theme that I wanted to talk about is what is generally loosely called intellectual property. I have used that phrase myself. I have been persuaded now that it is a confusing term. We should be talking differently about copyright, patent and other forms of trade protection, trade secret protection, trade mark protection. They have different purposes. In particular, in relation to copyright, as we see copyright and patent both being used in different ways in relation to software, we should be asking whether they are the right forms of protection, are they stimulating genuine innovation or are they merely protecting those who own one of those walled gardens, whether they serve us well or serve us poorly on any one day? Is the copyright and patent framework the right way to achieve the maximum social benefit? It should not just be about maximising the profit of intellectual property owners. It should be about maximising the social benefit and the social utility that comes from creativity. I do not think that the arguments on copyright ought to be playing out in the same way in relation to the latest Hollywood blockbuster, as they do in relation to a piece of code. However, it seems to me that what we are at the moment doing is using a legal framework that protects the profitability of the biggest businesses and the owners of the most profitable bits of IP. We are not protecting those who want to earn an ordinary living doing creative work, whether in the digital industries or elsewhere. We are not necessarily doing that or stimulating the greatest creation of creative goods or dissemination of creative goods. We need a fundamental debate, and it has to be on an international basis about the reform of intellectual property laws. Finally, on digital rights, something that I have spoken of in the past, I am pleased that the Labour amendment uses the phrase digital democracy, because there are fundamental questions in the wake of the deliberate hacking of the democratic process, both here and in the US and in other countries. Even analogue democracy can be hacked digitally, and we need to be looking at a whole host of digital rights in relation to privacy, surveillance and the operation of basic democratic systems. Those are unanswered questions as yet, and I do not expect the Government to have all of the answers, but it needs to be on the agenda, rather than simply seeing this as one of growth, growth, growth, growth. I think that I need a footnote for analogue democracy, but somebody may... Thank you very much. Bits of paper with Xs on it. That is my language. I now call on Mike Rumbles, Mr Rumbles. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The first line of the Scottish Government's motion today makes it clear that Parliament should recognise the benefits of the digital economy to every business, every region and every citizen of Scotland. I would be surprised if anyone in the chamber who does not see the huge benefits to be had from promoting our digital economy by connecting businesses and individuals, developing new technologies with innovation, education and creating new skills and high-paid jobs that can and should take advantage of changing global markets. But none of that matters one jot if it is not backed up by world-class digital infrastructure. For many people living in rural and remote communities, the feeling is that they have been simply left behind. The minister knows that in places like Aberdeenshire and in her own constituency in the Highlands and Islands, communities have not had anywhere near the same level of access to the technological revolution that some other areas have. In fact, the number of people without access to broadband in Aberdeenshire is second only to the minister's own region, the Highlands and Islands, and citizens advice report that around four in 10 rural consumers have had problems with their broadband signal in the past year. I want to know from the minister what the Scottish Government is doing to deliver on its commitment to connect to thousands of homes and businesses that have been left behind. If I could answer in two points, the first is that the member will know about our commitment backed up with £600 million to connect 100 per cent of properties to superfast broadband. If he knows it well in his constituency, I know it even better in my constituency about the frustration and the need to see that delivered. The second question that I would throw back to Mr Rumbles, which I asked him in the participation debate that we had, was that, in light of the quote that I had earlier, even when there is connectivity, we need to do more to support the skills, the businesses and the citizens to make the most of digital. How does he propose that we do that where there is infrastructure for over 95 per cent of the country? Mr Rumbles. We have to make sure that we do not put the cart before the horse. It is useful to have the infrastructure before we can actually talk about all the other things that we need to progress this whole thing. If you have not got the infrastructure in the first place, how can you possibly address what needs to be done? Quite frankly, I have to say, the R100 programme, the Scottish—well, we are halfway through this Parliament and the minister must know that progress has been glacial to get everybody connected. We are now at the 11th hour of the Scottish Government's election promise—oh, it will be a moment from the S&P backbenchers—for 2021 to achieve 100 per cent coverage by May 2021. Fergus Ewing has often said in his chamber, amazingly, that target date of May 2021 has moved to December 2021. Finlay Carson. Intervention. Do you agree with me that it is utterly ridiculous that the S&P Government are going back in their commitment to delivering a road map in July next year, just to give businesses a level of security that fast broadband is going to come to them? Mike Rumbles. Mike Rumbles makes an absolutely good point. BT has said that 100 per cent coverage is achievable. It is achievable, but it will require unparalleled partnership and collaboration between the contracted supplier, the Scottish Government and Scottish Public Sector, communities, businesses and citizens. Unparalleled, not glacial. That is not the level of effort that we are seeing from the Scottish Government on this matter. As technology develops and digital connectivity becomes an ever-important, if not essential part of modern life, it is vital that connectivity is reliable and digital infrastructure keeps up with the rest of the country. I believe that rural areas have the most to gain from digital inclusion, both economically and socially, and that good connectivity is the answer to some of the challenges of rural living. The Scottish Government's own research shows that four fifths of Scottish businesses say that digital technology is essential or important to the future growth or competitiveness of their business. Improving Scotland's digital infrastructure was identified by the Federation of Small Business as the second top small business priority. Why would that be any different for rural areas? Fast and reliable access to the internet and a dependable mobile phone signal is no longer a luxury. Good connectivity is now an essential service. There are other things that the Scottish Government can do to improve the situation for those that already have reasonable access. How fortunate are they? Such as upskilling workers, as the minister asked before, as job markets change and businesses embrace new technologies, automation and even artificial intelligence. Scottish Government could also help by supporting UK and international efforts to strengthen the domestic and international regulation of the big tech companies in the interests of consumers. However, for rural communities that are at the back of the queue, none of that will have a meaningful impact until the infrastructure is in place. At the moment, the only answer is to wait for public investment and commercial operators to fill the gap, and wait and wait, we do. By which time, the rest of the country will have moved forward again, marvellous for some of the cities in Glasgow and Edinburgh. I support the motion before us today. It is not the motion that I would have been brought forward, and I am disappointed. I understand the reasons, and we cannot challenge why amendments are not taken. There are reasons for that. I am disappointed that we are debating the motion before us today. The amendments could have been written somewhat in a stronger focus. I urge the Scottish Government to focus not on warm words, which we see in the motions and amendments before us about our digital economy, but to demonstrate some real progress for our rural communities by completing the 100 per cent coverage by the date that they said that they would do in their manifesto at the last election. I declare my membership of the institution of engineering and technology. I am a fellow at the Royal Society of the Encouragement Arts, Manufactures and Commerce, and I am a professional member of the Association for Computing Machinery. In relation to some of the history, the last one is perhaps in some ways the most important. On 9 December 1968, at a meeting of the ASM, Douglas Engelbart demonstrated a system that had windows, hypertext, graphics and video conferencing, and it showed the first mouse in action. There is a video of that demonstration that you can see on the internet today. The motion that we have before us from the Government talks about the need to harness public and private sector. It is worth visiting the history of how we got here today. The public sector played a very important part in the digital developments that we benefit from today. Tommy Flowers, who is an engineer at the Dulles Hill lab of the post office during the last war, actually, using his own money, developed the first electronic computer. He scrounged a huge number of electronic valves and produced a computer for use at Bletchley Park against the recommendation that the person who was running the place contributed enormously to the war effort. The commercial company that was Lion's T-Shops produced the first commercial computer that ran its first transactions in 1951. The history that we have encompassed in today's motion is a long-standing one, requiring both the public and private sectors to work together. The digital way of expressing data is very long-held. It was Leibniz in 1679, who came up with a binary system. It was George Bull, who introduced Boolean algebra, which underlies much of it in 1847. The first digital electronic circuit into Edinburgh was installed in 1868. That was a telegraph circuit that connected the Bank of Scotland's head office in London to Edinburgh. The bank installed its first telephone in 1881. The board said that it could only be done on the strict understanding that it is not the use to conduct business. Mr Rumbull, when I get to the substance of the debate this afternoon— I was just mulling that over myself. I am looking for the historic reference in the Government's motion. I hope for colleagues that line 5 of the Government's motion, which says that wider public sector and private sector is the most effective way of improving digital capabilities, is perhaps relevant to some of the remarks that I have made so far. However, let us move on to today. The important things that we have to deliver the modern world in which everyone can benefit from the adoption of digital technologies. We know that about 2 per cent of our workforce is employed in the digital economy. We heard from James Kelly in particular about the gender discrepancy that there is in the industry, and he is right to say that. Although interestingly, when I started in 1969, it was more or less 50-50. What seems to have happened is that, when the BBC computer was launched in 1981, parents gave the computer to the sons and the family. You can see in the graph a couple of years after that the gender bias moves dramatically towards men. Sometimes there are cultural issues as well as Government policies, but women will be very welcome in the industry. I hope that they will join the over 60,000 people who are working in computers today. The important thing is getting infrastructure in place. Mike Rumbles wants us to cut the implementation period of the R100 programme from the 549 days that it will have for implementation if we follow the Government's programme to 334 days if it is to be delivered on the schedule that Mike Rumbles wants. That is quite a substantial downlift. You cannot simply squeeze projects into smaller spaces without taking risks. The non-commutativity of time and effort applies to the project. You illustrate that by thinking that it takes... I will finish this wee bit and then I will. If you think of a digger or grave and it takes them six hours, it simply does not mean that six gravediggers can do it in one hour. I will now, if I may. Edward Mountain. I am somewhat confused. It was quite clear in the Government's programme that broadband R100 would be delivered by the next election. That is what they stood on the last election for. That is what the First Minister said up until January this year. Then she started to change. It was not until Fergus Ewing changed his position, which happened in about March, that the First Minister then changed her position, which, if I remember rightly, was in about July. I think that people in Scotland are only expecting R100 to be rolled out by May 2021, which is what we were originally promised. I do not understand what the observation is. Perhaps the member could explain it to me. Mr Stevenson, I will give you a time bank. I think that the member should consider that it is better to set a realistic timescale in the light... Do forgive me, colleagues. I am not rebutting a single word that the colleague is saying about previous intentions. I am making the very substantial point that, when you are rolling out to the last 5 per cent, it is a huge programme to undertake and you need to have the right amount of time to get it right. Any Government who fails to deliver on a project that they have then set out, I think, will quite properly find themselves in a difficult position. Presiding Officer, you generously gave me a little time back, but let me not over-egg the pudding. We have 120,000 or so homes in Scotland that we have to deliver the R100 programme to, but I think that it has correctly been said that the infrastructure of communication is merely the scaffolding upon which you can then build the propositions that deliver value. Getting people who are not digitally capable up to a different place in society through libraries and public spaces and their education system. Converting private and government business to digital delivery, that is all part of what we have to do as well. I certainly look forward personally to getting my superfast broadband delivered by Fibre, and if the last 5 per cent is by Fibre, as I guess it will be, we will actually be ahead of the cities for the first time. Thank you, Gordon Lindhurst, followed by Willie Coffey. Deputy Presiding Officer, following that speech, I will try to remain in the modern world in which we are all forced to live. We heard evidence during the economy committee inquiry into Scotland's economic performance. We will hear more about that, of course, on Thursday, but we heard then that no sectors are exempt from digital disruption and that many face an innovator die scenario. Again, no reference or attempt to echo one of Stuart Stevenson's comments there in his speech. Indeed, we heard that manufacturing companies who were embracing new technology were thriving and those who were not were finding it more challenging to grow. It is clear that Scotland needs to harness the opportunities brought about by technological developments and not to be left behind by our competitors. However, in too many areas, we are not equipped in this country to take full advantage of new technologies. It is, for example, particularly disappointing to note the results of the 2017 digital economic business survey, which showed that only one in four businesses think that their employees have the necessary digital skills to meet business needs. That was down on the figure from the same survey from 37 per cent in 2014. To make the most of the digital revolution, it is not good enough to simply have the infrastructure without the skills, and some have touched on that already. Making greater use of those skills and using online data has been linked with an 8 per cent rise in productivity, and we badly need productivity in this country. Witnesses to the inquiry of the committee were left frustrated by what they saw as continued skill shortages for technological firms in Scotland. BT said that they hoped that the national shortage in computer science teachers in Scottish schools could be addressed so that we can produce a workforce for the digital future. Deputy Presiding Officer, the Scottish Conservative amendment today highlights the need for the Scottish Government to work together with the UK Government to make the most of opportunities provided by the UK industrial strategy and other initiatives. That industrial strategy is ambitious for the teaching of computing in schools in other parts of the UK and commits £84 million over a five-year period for a comprehensive programme to improve the teaching of computing and drive up participation in computer science. The Scottish Government must take action in this regard and halt the 25 per cent decline in computing teaching numbers that has been seen over the past decade and a bit. Likewise, as the need for those skills increases, it is important not to leave others behind. We often look ahead to the future with trepidation, as new technology that we enjoy replaces the need for lower-skilled work. As downturns happen in certain sectors such as oil and gas, people find that the lack of a dynamic approach towards skills provision renders them stuck in a particular field, competing for a shrinking number of jobs. There is also an acknowledgement that most skills interventions focus on younger generations and less on reskilling people so that they can contribute to the modern digital economy as they may have to a past type of economy. The industrial strategy acknowledges that new economy and the changes that will be required to support it. It commits to a national retraining scheme, which the chancellor recently announced that he would fund with £100 million, including digital skills courses using artificial intelligence. The Scottish Government is playing catch-up in this area but has announced a national retraining partnership in its latest programme for government, and that is to be welcomed. However, it needs to be pursued without any further delay, given the pace of technological change. It is about embracing the future here in Scotland, giving people the skills that they need to thrive in a new environment and supporting employers to adapt. As we move into that future, Edinburgh and the wider Lothian region will be playing a key role. As a Lothian MSP, I welcome the Edinburgh and South East Scotland city region deal, which is an example of what can be achieved in the digital age if the two Governments and others work together. £1.3 billion is being invested, which aims, among other things, to turn the region into the data capital of Europe, a commodity that is so fundamental to the digital economy. The Edinburgh University hub at Easter Bush will be just one of the beneficiaries from the deal and will work towards meeting a challenge that is global in nature, but affects us directly here in Scotland. Using digital agriculture or agrotech, as it is called, it will seek to boost efficiency in the sector by collating a wide range of data that will be able to determine the right food species, the right products in the right field at the right time to maximise agricultural productivity. Helping to increase global food supply at a time when it is estimated that agricultural production needs to increase by 50 per cent by 2050. Easter Bush and other projects that make up the Edinburgh region deal build on the tech expertise that we already have present in this region. There were 363 tech startups that incorporated in Edinburgh in 2017 alone. There is reason to be excited in this region and for Scotland to be a productive and innovative digital economy for the future, but more needs to be done to ensure that there are the skills required to do so. Thank you very much, Mr Lindhurst. I call Willie Coffey to be followed by Daniel Johnson. Mr Coffey, please. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. The two main issues for me that face Scotland in pressing forward with our digital ambitions are one, getting the computing-sized software development skills that we need, and two, continuing to find a way to participate in the digital single market in Europe post Brexit. We know that the digital economy is the fastest-growing sector worldwide, and that will not stop any time soon. We think that it is worth about £5 billion to the economy, mentioned earlier by the minister, and there are around 100,000 technical professionals working in the industry just now. The cabinet secretary's vision to take this to 150,000 over the next four or five years is to be welcomed and his aim to reach out to schools and to encourage more females to choose science and computing is absolutely essential if we are to even keep pace with the demand for software skills. If we look at some of the figures coming from industry in Scotland, we see that more than half of the demand is for technology skills, and about 70 per cent of that demand is for software development skills. It is good to see a number of initiatives to support this. The digital skills programme, the digital development fund, things like code clan and digital extra are all examples of different types of interventions that are making a difference. The other key area that I mentioned is the digital single market in Europe and what our participation or association with that will look like post Brexit. The European digital single market is one of the biggest trade markets for online digital services. Estimated that spending online in Europe is worth about €500 billion, and that is expected to double incredibly by 2020. It is also crucial to think about how the UK and Scotland can continue to share in or work alongside that digital market sector that is worth about £400 billion a year to the European economy, supporting hundreds of thousands of jobs. However, worryingly, there is not even a mention of it in the UK Government proposal document that was issued last week, nor is there even a mention of it in the industrial strategy that was mentioned in the debate earlier. The digital single market has three main pillars or aims—access to online products and services, setting the right conditions for digital services and networks to thrive and growing the digital economy. It will allow consumers to access all of their digital content right across Europe at no extra cost if they are still in the single market. There will be no geographic blocking of your data and applications anymore if they are still in the market. It will continue to allow consumers to use their mobile phones across Europe with no roaming charges applying if they are still in the market. The question is, what is Scotland's role in all of this to be? The consumer experience is crucial. If that is not resolved and people from Scotland and the UK will get none of those benefits, they will get all the costs and restrictions as soon as they set foot in Europe. For business, it will be much worse. It will mean that Scottish and UK businesses cannot compete for and offer digital services in that market, and that will be a huge disadvantage to them because of that exclusion. It is time that we heard from industry about this so that some kind of sensible arrangement can be put in place before it is too late. For any politician claiming that it is a good thing to leave such a market or not to have any relationship with it at all, it really needs to think again about the damage that it is about to do. I do not really want to take members back in time to the late 1970s when I studied and graduated in computer science, but some of the key issues are still with us now. How do we get more young women to take up careers in this amazing industry? That was touched on by James Kelly earlier. I mentioned earlier that the cabinet secretary's welcome intention to reach out and encourage youngsters at school, particularly girls, to take up software careers. It is a well-paid profession, Presiding Officer, higher than most other sectors, usually full-time, and it allows those with the right skills to work anywhere in the world in some of the most exciting areas of development, from film, animation and games technology, to systems to help our NHS or to manage data and services across a huge range of public and private sectors. No area of business and industry can succeed without good software development, and we need good software developers to build all those systems of the future. The journey has to start early at primary school, and there has to be an almost continual focus on it to give us a realistic chance of success. When I meet youngsters from the many schools in my constituency who come to Parliament, I usually ask them who wants to work in software development when they graduate, and the numbers are still worryingly low, Presiding Officer, and there lies the challenge. To excite those young minds about the potential they have and what they can achieve is what we have to do if we want them to join this wonderful industry. The challenges in front of us are formidable. On the one hand, the commitments that the Scottish Government is making are clear and we can see the road ahead. Keeping pace with technological change and demands will be challenging enough, but pushing ahead and making Scotland a leader in the digital economy is our aim but is not entirely in our gift. On the other, the sooner that level heads and individuals in the UK Government with some technical knowledge about digital technology have their say and can affect a change of approach in relation to the digital single market in Europe, the better for us all. Daniel Johnson, followed by Stuart McMillan. I think that the timing of this debate is very apt, because at a point in time when the whole of UK politics seems to be focused and obsessed with whether or not the Prime Minister's deal will get passed through Parliament, we are having a debate on another topic that I think we need to be talking about, which is technology change. That is the problem with Brexit. At a very time when we have to be facing up to the realities of technology and how that is going to change the world of work, we are focused on issues that are only going to be a distraction and prevent us from doing so. In December 2016, Mark Carney gave a very important speech about just how important those changes are and the need to face up to them from a policy perspective. In that speech, he said that the fundamental challenge is that alongside its great benefits, every technological revolution mercilessly destroys jobs and livelihoods. He went on to point out that that includes, and especially in the latest wave of technology change, service jobs. I think that so many professional people have, until now, thought that were preserved and not subject to the sorts of changes that we have seen in other industries. Sometimes this debate gets caught between those who say that we all need to fear the rise of the robots and learn to love our new robot masters and those who say that nothing has changed and that this is just another technological wave and we have always cooked with it in the past. The reality, I think, is somewhere in between, but there are some things that I think are different this time round, and I think that fundamentally, from a policy perspective, we have to face up with. One is pace. I think that we have seen it in recent technology changes where industries simply, within a matter of years, find themselves irrelevant. I think that the record industry is a very good one where, in a matter of years, they find their whole business model completely irrelevant. However, there is also the manner of the technology change. We are now dealing with technologies that have cognitive functions, technologies that are able to make assessments and decisions, and with that, coupled with robotics, we have technology change, which has the very real prospect of displacing entire supply chains, entire supply chains that will no longer need human input. From the very point at which an item is produced through to its delivery to the consumer, it will be able to be taken place by robotics, by artificial intelligence and without any human input. That is the reality of the challenge that is in front of us. However, the good news is—I think that other members have made references—that we have some of the ingredients that we need to take advantage of this. This city in particular, without anyone really noticing in the last few years, has become a major technology hub. I do not need to repeat the numbers that others have said. The key figure is the one that the minister quoted. The number of jobs in Edinburgh in technology has increased at three times the rates of the UK average. I think that recognition needs to be given to the university. Other members have again pointed out that the informatics department in Edinburgh University is the largest department in Europe. It is a major international hub. What more? It has been at the very heart of technology start-up. This city now has thousands of people working in technology start-ups. That is a real success story, but one that we need to learn from so that the whole of this country can benefit from the same things. The very heart of that is about people, people with the right skills and knowledge, talented people, skilled at the right level. It is also about investment, and there is not enough discussion in this debate so far about investment. If you look at countries and systems that have dealt with those things successfully, government-backed investment has been at the heart of it. Whether you look at DARPA in the United States, TECHES in Finland, the Taiwan Technology Institute, behind them all is the very fact that government sometimes needs to step in and take the risks that the private sector cannot, even in a country like America. However, the other is scale and form. When you look at those start-ups, they are very often not of the form that we might be used to. People are very often working from coffee shops with laptops. That is all that you need in the technology-based industries of the future. You do not necessarily need big factories or big offices. 20,000-dollar robots mean that you can produce things in a garage at the same cost efficiencies as a big multinational corporation in a factory. Those are the realities and the changes that technology means. Those are the things that we must make sure that our infrastructure and our public policy allow us to take advantage of those things rather than being left behind. I think that we can. However, there is a real challenge here. I come from an industry that has already seen many of the consequences of automation. Prior to coming into Parliament, I worked in retail. We all know the issues that are faced on the high street and why we might not call that automation. There are very much the same factors that lie behind that. The lessons are there and we need to learn them now. The reality is that every business needs to become a tech business. Every worker, every person working in every company needs to understand their job and the application of technology to it. I worry when people talk about 2 per cent of people working in technology. The reality is that 100 per cent of the workforce needs to be able to understand and apply technologies. The reality is that, according to McKinsey, 36 per cent of jobs in the workplace could be replaced. In some industries such as the transport and distribution, that is up to 77 per cent. That is an industry that employs 5 per cent of the workforce. Indeed, in Scotland, we should learn the lessons from our own recent past. We have cities and areas in this country that have simply yet to recover from previous technology changes, such as the steel industry, shipbuilding industry and jute. If we look at the areas that are reliant on those industries in the past, we still have much higher levels of under-utilisation of the working-age population. We need to learn those lessons unless we suffer them again in the future. Briefly, in conclusion, we need to address the skills agenda. Our skills regime needs to be as much, if not more, about reskilling people than it is about giving people skills at the start of their working lives. I think that the emphasis is too much in terms of college, universities and apprenticeships on young people leaving school. It needs to be just as much about older people. It is about education, teachers, investment, support for innovation and, above all, making sure that our city economies are at the very heart of our economy. We need to go much more far beyond city deals. That is about making our cities work together. I think that the big, missed opportunity to do city deals is that we have separate ones for our Scottish cities, rather than one cohesive strategy for our cities. I will end there. Stuart McMillan, followed by Jamie Halcro Johnston. Thank you very much. I just want to touch upon a couple of points that Daniel Johnson spoke about. It is his final comment just regarding the city deals. Just to remind Mr Johnson that the city deals are not solely about the cities. In my area in the west of Scotland, it is about the Glasgow regional deal, so it includes Inverclyde, Weston-Bartonshire, Easton-Bartonshire and other areas, so it is not solely about the cities. I do appreciate Mr Johnson's representance but I do not. The second point is his point about the issue of Government investment. Mr Johnson will be very much aware of the £280 million investment from the total contribution from across the public sector in Scotland regarding the digital Scotland superfast broadband scheme, but the £600 million investment by the Scottish Government in the R100 programme, which provides access to superfast broadband to all homes and businesses. I want to point out that the Scottish Government has been putting in investment, but I agree with it that business does need to do more. I agree with the member's point, but I sometimes worry that the debate focuses on connection to the internet rather than looking beyond it. It is about growing businesses in the technology space and that is where there is a bigger role for Government, I believe. Stuart McMillan? That is a valid point, but at the same time, if people are not connected in the first place, there is clearly some type of deficit there for them and those particular businesses, particularly smaller ones, which I am going to touch upon in a moment, to progress their business interests. Prior to the Scottish Government's intervention, the superfast broadband coverage in my Greenwich and Inverclyde constituency was below 80 per cent, and come the end of 2017, it was up to 96.2 per cent. By 2021, every home and business in Scotland will have access to superfast broadband, thanks to that £600 million investment. It is the biggest public investment that has been made in a UK broadband project. Finlay Carson? The member might remind the chamber whether the investment in broadband with the Scottish Government and its current budget went up or went down, because if he can't remember, I can actually help him with that. Stuart McMillan? Mr Carson, I am going to come on to some of that point in a wee moment tonight, because I think that you will need to listen when I do a come on to it. Presiding Officer, those figures indicate that things are looking good and have improved for Inverclyde. There are still pockets in my constituency that are not included in the roll-out. Consequently, I have been contacted by a local business who is considering closing due to the poor broadband speeds that they are receiving. Outdoor spares are limited, based in Llyndog and Drushall estate in Greenock. Not a rural part of my constituency but a town has tried numerous ways to improve their broadband speeds over the past few years. That is because of the two BT open reach cabinets that service businesses and homes in the area. Only one is fibre-enabled and can provide ultra-fast broadband. The other, Cabinet 64, which outdoor spares are limited or serviced by, was not enabled during the last roll-out. Ian Homer, who owns outdoor spares limited, waited to see whether Cabinet 64 would be one of the first to be upgraded in the current and final phase of the R100. It is now almost 2019, and Ian's business is still struggling to operate due to the abysmal broadband speeds. In September of this year, Ian said that he started to work from home more as the broadband speeds in the industrial estate are not suitable for running his business, which is an online shop supplying a range of spare parts, plus accessories for Mountfield, Steele, Partner, Akita Honda and Flymo retailers. His business has been growing in the past, but not knowing whether the roll-out will reach him next month or in two years' time, Ian is finding it difficult to plan for his business for the future, unless those plans involve locating elsewhere. That would result in local jobs being lost all over poor broadband speeds. A quick survey of other tenants in the London industrial estate shows that some are getting speeds of around 50 megabyte download to one to three upload, which is what Ian would get on a good day. That means that he does not qualify for the UK Government's better broadband subsidy scheme, so he has straddled the broadband speeds that are not conducive to growing and never mind a web-related business. The last thing that Inverclyde needs is for people who think that we are not able to support technology-based businesses, but we can, and we will do more so in the future. Digital technology does not just benefit tech companies. It enables all kinds of businesses to engage with customers directly, to develop new processes and products, and to sell those products to a global market 24 hours a day at a relatively low cost. It is crucial that the industrial estates that house dozens of businesses are not left until last in the show-out, otherwise constituencies like my own will actually suffer. The second example that I want to touch upon is the Ergyn Trout Fishery. It is another local business who approached me about their poor broadband speeds. Why are they important in a wider discussion? They are very important for the local tourism market. They bring people into Inverclyde to invest and spend money. I recognise that some of Scotland's most challenging locations in parts of the country are more challenging than my constituency. However, at the same time, we still have some rural parts, as well as some issues that we have in this particular part of Greenock. What that means for constituencies such as mine and Greenock and Inverclyde is that they have rural and agricultural-based businesses who cannot enjoy the efficient broadband speeds, and they simply cannot relocate. I know that the Scottish Government is committed to making Scotland the world-class digital nation. We are already well ahead of other European peers, such as Superfast Broadband Coverage, take-up and average speeds. I am concerned for local businesses and my constituency who are part of that 3.8 per cent without the Superfast Broadband. If you could do so quickly, please. Okay. The SNP Government is picking up the slack after a lack of investment from previous Scottish Governments—sorry, executives—and the UK Conservative Government is no better as their contribution to the R100 programme stands that are miserly 3 per cent of the total investment. Please, Mr Carson, talk to your colleagues in Westminster, get them to up their game, get them to put more money in, so not only your constituency but mine can have a better result in terms of the economy. Thank you very much. Jamie Halcro Johnston, followed by Alex Neil. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I welcome today's debate, which allows us to focus on an area of crucial importance to Scotland's economic future. We have already heard from others of just some of the prospects for the growth of the digital economy here in Scotland. That potential is significant and it is right that we give this sector our attention today. In its existing position, the growth value added by head for Scotland's tech sector is some 60 per cent higher than the economy as a whole. It is already making a disproportionate and effective contribution. Digital industries also employ highly skilled professionals with the added benefit of a market that has a global reach. We only need to look at some of the Scottish success stories to see what can be achieved. However, there are undoubtedly still opportunities to build on our existing strength and create a digital economy for the future. The enterprise and skill agencies have highlighted a number of areas of potential expansion, but a common thread is that each of those will require investment, and not simply financial investment, to lay the groundwork for future success. I am not speaking just of small-scale interventions, how welcome they may be individually, but instead about all levels of government taking a serious look at how we create the foundations for growth and expansion in the years and decades to come. I would implore the Scottish Government and its agencies to work closely with industry, to work closely with other Governments at local and UK level and to support the change that we need to see. Later this week, the chamber will also be discussing the Economy, Energy and Fair Work Committee's report into Scotland's economic performance committee that I sit on. I raised that as a number of the conclusions are relevant to how we look at support to support particular sectors and businesses. Stuart McMillan I thank Mr Halcro Johnston for taking intervention. Will he agree with me that the UK Government should increase its investment into the R100 broadband scheme to help Scotland's economy? Jamie Halcro Johnston I think that investment is key into that, but I think that the idea that the member suggests that the Scottish Government is either about to deliver on the commitments that it has made and repeated again and again and again. As somebody who represents the Highlands and Islands, the picture created by the benches over there is very different to the picture that is delivered in that area. One element that I would highlight is the committee's work around regional growth. The jobs that technology can support are often not geographically tied as the industries of the past were. Where the conditions are right, the tech sector can be an engine of growth, providing and supporting local economic hubs in regions like mine. The next silicon glen could be based in the Highlands or in one of our island communities, or connectivity coast in Marri perhaps. I have not traded that, so the minister is very welcome to suggest that to the Highlands and Islands Enterprise or not, as the case may be. That is achievable if there is a willingness for government to work collaboratively with existing local organisations like colleges and universities. However, there are other key elements that need to be in place. I have spoken at some length about the connectivity problems that my region faces. Those are unfortunately stark. The Highlands and Islands region contains within it the majority of the worst performing areas for broadband download speeds in the entire UK. In our previous debate about digital inclusion, I pointed to a number of those cases and the problems that have presented themselves in my region for some time. It is unfortunately a blunt fact that, for much of the rural Highlands and Islands digital exclusion, rather than inclusion, is the norm. If the technology sector is to be the driver of regional growth rather than a deepening regional inequality, then those barriers will have to be broken down and those many years of exclusion reversed. As a skilled workforce is also essential, I will be generous to ministers in saying that a number of positive examples and projects have been demonstrated in recent years. Much of it has been private sector-led or supported. However, a problem is learning the lessons from those projects and scaling them up and expanding their reach. We are also disappointingly in a position where more than half of our population is at a distance from the sector. We have spoken previously about the gender pay gap in the tech sector and it remains stubborn. Others have highlighted women who comprise or are just under half of the general workforce only account for under a fifth of employment in tech roles. Not only are opportunities being lost, but so too are the skills and abilities of many of Scotland's people. I welcome the additional routes that are created into STEM learning that has been offered by foundation and graduate level apprenticeships. With foundation apprenticeships particularly, there is a real chance to provide proper job-based introduction into the sector of this type, which can serve a young person well throughout their career. Again, there is work to be done. I have raised several times with the minister's colleague the priority that must be given to ensuring that the range of foundation apprenticeship frameworks are accessible across Scotland's council areas and regions. I sincerely hope that those steps are being taken and taken quickly. Another element is, of course, the continuing gender gap in STEM subject choices and STEM training. It does not need repeating in detail, but it is clear to me that at least it necessitates a better approach to career guidance and greater connections between schools, employers, colleges and universities at an early stage. Even today, the skills gap diminishes our ability to grow this sector. Figures acquired by Skills Development Scotland demonstrate that 82 per cent of employers in digital industry struggle to recruit people with the technical skills and expertise that are needed by their businesses. Around two thirds have also reported finding skills staff as a barrier to their expansion. That strikes me as one of our most significant obstacles to success here. The glint of light is that we are having this debate here today, in Government time, and that this research and analysis is available through the work of particularly the enterprise and skills agencies. Appreciating problems may be the first step towards addressing them, but as with connectivity, often the response can be slow. As we look with a keen focus towards innovation and productivity in our economy, we must surely recognise that this sector can be a key component in delivering in these areas. However, we have to see real and sustained ambition if we are to create the conditions for our digital industries to thrive. That is particularly the case outside of the central belt. Alex Neil is followed by Richard Lyle. Thank you very much indeed, Deputy Presiding Officer. There have been a lot of very good points made in this debate. I think that particularly the points made by Daniel Johnson were well made, but one of the things that we should be very careful of is that although there are major challenges in terms of the number of jobs that will be lost, as the McKinsey report, which Daniel referred to, indicated that the net impact, if we seize the opportunities, is that we could end up both with more jobs and better jobs and better paid jobs. The real challenge for all of us right across the benches, the Scottish Government, the private sector and the training agencies and the enterprise agencies is how we make sure that we not only participate in the digital revolution but that we exploit the opportunities to the maximum. One of the mistakes that we could make is by looking at the digital industry sector as one industry. It is not actually one industry, it is made up of a whole number of industries. I want to pinpoint three in particular where I think that there are huge opportunities for us in Scotland. One that has already been mentioned is the games industry, headquartered effectively in Dundee, and when I say headquartered in Dundee, I do not just mean the Scottish headquarters of the industry, actually in many respects the global headquarters of the game industry is in Dundee. The leading entrepreneur in the games industry in Scotland and internationally is Chris Van der Kyl. He made an interesting observation earlier this year. He said that if we exploit the opportunities in the games industry, if we invest enough in the games industry in Scotland, we could end up employing as many people as worked in the North Sea oil and gas industry at its peak. That would be over 100,000 jobs in the games industry alone. I think that the Government should sit down with Chris Van der Kyl and put together a plan to make that ambition happen because those jobs are exciting jobs. The number is growing, the sector is growing globally, huge career opportunities, huge payments in terms of the spin-out to the rest of the economy and well-paid jobs at that. The second sector in the digital framework is health and social care. We had the first class announcement last week jointly from the health service and the health directorate of the Scottish Government, along with Glasgow University, about using artificial intelligence in the health service. Scotland is ahead of the game again, but we have to stay ahead of the game. What that industry showed was the amount of money that we could save in the health service by investing heavily in artificial intelligence. If we develop the artificial intelligence tools that are already available in principle, in a few years' time with personalised, digitalised medicine, the health service will be able to predict what illnesses and diseases individuals are likely to develop even before the symptoms show up in those particular patients and the potential saving to the health service but, more importantly, the potential impact on patients will literally be revolutionary. I would say to the minister, along with Jeane Freeman, to get together and let's have a hugely ambitious strategy focused on health and social care as well, not just health but social care. A third area where we have a presence and could do a lot more is in the cyber crime industry. Cyber crime is now a major challenge for business across the world. It is a major challenge for government across the world. Fighting cyber crime is now commanding huge budgets in the States, in Canada, in the UK, in Australia and all around the world. The opportunity there is to develop the talents that are required to effectively fight cyber crime worldwide, and the people sitting in Glasgow and the companies that are already established fighting cyber crime are working in a global industry. The services that they are providing remotely from Glasgow are counted in their export figures. Those are huge opportunities. One of the lessons that we can learn is from the high-tech hotspots in America and from the triple helix in Norway, where they bring together in each of those gross sectors the public sector in terms of government and councils, the private sector in terms of those already operating and academia. By bringing those three sectors together, we already do it in the life sciences sector in Scotland. We effectively do it in parts of the renewable energy sector. We now need to do it in games technology. We need to do it in health and social care. We need to do it in cyber crime. We need to do it in each of the other digital sectors in which there are massive global opportunities. Sorry. No, I am not allowed to take it, no. No, right. That is an opportunity that we will need to miss. However, I think that this of all the industries that are growing up in Scotland is the one with the greatest global opportunity. Let us join together—forget the petty party politics—about what month of the year next year are 100 will be finished. Let us think big and act big and do it together. I am sure that I missed something very profound there but perhaps some other time. The last of the open debate contributions is Richard Lyle. I think that it is called Let's Do It. It is always a pleasure to follow my esteemed colleague, Mr Neil. I begin my remarks this afternoon by welcoming the opportunity to contribute to this debate in developing Scotland's digital industries for our economic future. I thank my colleague the minister for bringing forward the debate, which provides us the opportunity to talk about the investment that is delivered by this Government in digital infrastructure and the role that it will surely play in terms of our economic policy. It is on that investment that I want to begin my remarks this afternoon, Presiding Officer, because some of the numbers and actions that are involved are truly impressive. From the launch of the Scottish Government's first Scotland-wide project, Internet of Things, IOT network last month, as part of a £6 million project, a new network that will provide a wireless sensor network for applications and services to collect data from devices and send that data without the need for 3G, 4G or Wi-Fi. Supporting businesses, developing new and innovative applications and changing the way that they work, the network will enable all businesses to have the ability to monitor the efficiency and productivity of their assets, equipment, scheduling, maintenance and improving production. That is an example of an innovative practice that could see, for example, IOT Scotland supporting the wider use of smart bins that will honestly inform local authorities when they require emptying. Wouldn't that be a good thing? Ensuring best use to bin lorries but also helping to reduce carbon emissions. Similarly, the network could monitor office environments to lower costs by saving energy while reducing carbon footprints of buildings. Technological investment delivers more than just intelligent working. It can and does have the potential to change the way we work, especially as I have outlined in the terms of local authority functions and making a way of working smarter. Of course, that extends far beyond local authorities. That SNP group in this Parliament want as many people and businesses to benefit from the transformative potential that the internet of things offers. That is a complemented alongside our most recent programme for government. In the year ahead, we will deliver and develop a range of activities across Scotland to inspire and enthuse enterprises of all sizes, along with public bodies and our communities, with what that technology can achieve. A welcome priority is that we move forward with our digital industries and developing for our economic future. It is absolutely about our economic future, as the digital economy is set by 2024 to be the fastest-growing sector in Scotland. That means that we all must recognise that the impact of this digital revolution is no longer consigned to technological companies, but across all sectors, as increasing types of business are harnessing the benefits of technological to drive innovation and increase competitiveness. I want to repeat the last sentence again. Harnessing the benefits of technological to drive innovation. Finlay Carson I thank the member for taking the intervention. Given the Scottish Government's less-than-brilliant reputation for delivering IT projects, such as the agricultural payments or the police system, does the member have any confidence that the Government can deliver an innovative social security system? Richard Lyle I do not call it a UK Government, I call it an English Government. Basically, your Government has wasted so much money over the years, caused so much misery to people over the years and you have the cheek to stand up and say about this Government. This Government is doing far excess better than your Government has ever done in its puff. I want to repeat the last sentence again. Harnessing the benefits of technological to drive innovation. Because, as members will note from a previous contribution of the digital economy, I have been assisting a local company who wishes to see the wi-fi installed on lampposts and to have the lampposts powered by renewable energy. That type of innovative thinking and technology is essential as our industries develop for the future and contribute to the economy. I am delighted to note that various agencies within the SNP Government are now supporting this company to pursue their ideas and make it a reality for communities in Scotland. I hope particularly for those remote and rural areas that I so often hear about at the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee, for example. There can be no doubt that our digital and technological technologies sector is on the up and its contribution cannot be understated. To put it in perspective, in terms of the scale of digital and technological sectors, in 2015, the sector contributed billions to the Scottish economy and over thousands of people were employed as tech professionals across all sectors. That is a significant and welcome investment. As Mr Neil said earlier on, there are 1,000 more jobs that could be created. However, our people and this news is only set to grow even higher. It is a testament to the support that this sector enjoys from business, the public and this Government. Of course, with the growing sector, this is what we call a digital revolution. It continues to pick up pace and create an unprecedented demand for skills for employers across all sectors. Indeed, the Government's economic action plan sets out a number of new and existing actions that will work together to build a strong, vibrant and diverse economy. As I see my time has run out, I thank you very much. Thank you, Mr Lyle. We have now moved to closing speeches and we are back on time on target. No more than six minutes, please. Colin Smyth. Today's debate has highlighted automation and the digitisation of the workplace. It is not some distant faraway prospect. Technology is transforming almost every aspect of our lives and it is doing so now. As Daniel Johnson stressed, the impact of this digital revolution is not simply consigned to technology companies. Every field, every sector is increasingly seeking to harness the benefits of technology. Businesses are making use of digital innovation to expand improved efficiency and competitiveness and drive innovation. Our schools and other educational institutions are utilising technology to improve learning and access to education. As Alex Neil said, the NHS is using new technology more and more to improve services with predictive healthcare analytics facilitating a more preventative approach. It is impossible to overstate the impact that digitisation has had and will have on our jobs, our economy, our services and our lives. However, with the opportunities of what has been described as a fourth industrial revolution, also comes risks and threats if we do not ensure that the benefits of digitisation are realised for all. A few weeks ago, we discussed digital inclusion in this chamber and highlighted the importance of ensuring that groups across society are able to participate equally when it comes to access to digital. At present, rural communities, those on the lowest incomes, people with physical or mental health conditions, older people, women, all suffer because of digital exclusion, exclusion that mirrors the wider social and economic inequalities that James Kelly spoke about. If we do not make digital inclusion a priority, digitisation will not only continue those inequalities, it will entrench them. Investing in our digital capabilities is not only essential to our long-term economic prosperity. If it is done properly, it is an opportunity to address injustice and inequalities, to create good, well-paid jobs in rural and deprived areas with targeted investment, to help to close the gender gap by encouraging more women into STEM jobs, to give young people who do not want to go to university better career options developing, for example, foundation and modern apprenticeship schemes. If we simply take a business as usual approach, those who are left behind will increasingly be unable to access essential services. They will also not be able to access the job opportunities that changing technology can bring, but they will also be impacted negatively by that change. For example, job losses caused by automation disproportionately affect those in lower paid jobs. As James Kelly highlighted, those affected or likely to be affected must have alternative opportunities by properly investing in adult learning and by ensuring that employers and those in the labour market are supported to embrace retraining and upskilling. Tackling that growing digital skills gap in Scotland will also mean truly embedding digital skills development in our schools right through to further and higher education. Of course, if we are serious about inclusive growth, we need to address the fundamental regional and social inequalities that exist in terms of digital infrastructure. How can we expect businesses in Orkney to take full advantage of the opportunities that are created by digitisation when superfast broadband coverage is as low as 65 per cent in those areas? Lessons have to be learned from the roll-out of the previous Scottish Government fibre broadband programme as we go forward. Instead of rural Scotland having to play catch-up all the time, how about we give those communities a competitive advantage for once? Let me give the minister one example of how we could achieve this in my own South Scotland region. Sitting on the desk of the UK and Scottish Governments at the moment is a proposed borderlands growth deal from Dumfries and Galloway and Scottish Borders Council, along with the three furthest north English local authorities. At present, less than a third of the people who live and do business in the borderlands area have access to superfast broadband connectivity, and they can access average download speeds of just 8 to 10 megabits per second. A key component of the borderlands growth deal is to break down that digital divide through the digital borderlands plan. That plan seeks investment to complete the roll-out of superfast broadband to the properties that do not yet have it, to extend 4G coverage further into remote areas and, crucially, develop transformationable hyperfast digital infrastructure in key settlements and employment sites, enabling speeds of one gigabit. In addition, the plan proposes using the borderlands as a pilot for emerging 5G technology and developing digital skills in an area that suffers a chronic shortage. Government funding for this type of outside-in approach, which prioritises rural areas for future investment, would give communities currently disadvantage, such as the borderlands, a technological and economic advantage that has previously been denied. Supporting the borderlands growth deal would be a digital inclusion in action. It would help to deliver the inclusive growth that the Government talks about, but it is so far out of the reach for far too many of our rural communities. Delivering the benefits of the digital economy for all will require a comprehensive approach from schools to the workplace. It will take strategic leadership. The report is automatic for the people, including the recommendation that a Scottish Commission on the Fourth Industrial Revolution be established, bringing policy makers, industry workers, academic citizens and young people together to recommend that strategy and actions for governments. I would support that recommendation, because bringing key stakeholders together and, more importantly, developing a strategy that delivers for everyone and leaves no one behind is crucial. That is why Labour's amendment today unashamably highlights issues such as digital democracy, as well as a principle of fair work and the role of our trade unions in developing that strategy. Technology allows more efficient, effective methods of producing and delivering the existing and new products and services. It allows our society to become less dependent on time as work and more on output as work. That should release workers to enjoy and participate more in family and community life. The challenge for us all is to deliver not only growth in the digital economy, but to tackle digital exclusion and to break down barriers to access and opportunity, and to ensure that working people benefit from that growth. To coin a phrase, we need a Fourth Industrial Revolution for the many, not the few. We will be voting for the Scottish Government's motion at decision time, but we have lodged an amendment to highlight the significant opportunities available to Scotland's digital economy under the UK industrial strategy, which I will come back to later. The minister opened the debate by rightly emphasising the importance of the digital economy and by providing an update on different initiatives in the digital economy, including digital growth funds and digital boost. We welcome those initiatives, but Scotland still faces a number of challenges that must be addressed if we are to achieve the objectives of increasing productivity and building Scotland's reputation as an innovative nation. In looking at how we can best address those challenges, let me frame that in the context of the Scottish Government's own economic policy, the policy of inclusive growth, internationalisation, investment and innovation. In terms of inclusive growth, much more needs to be done by the Scottish Government to ensure that the benefits and opportunities offered by digital are available to all. Ofcom has reported that internet use in Scotland is significantly lower than the rest of the UK. 23 per cent of Scottish households do not have access to the internet, and 21 per cent of people do not have basic digital skills. Finlay Carson, Jamie Halcro Johnston and Colin Smyth highlighted that limited digital access is of particular concern in rural areas. According to Audit Scotland, 370,000 households across Scotland still lack superfast internet speeds, but less than half of them are expected to be resolved by the Scottish Government's original 2021 deadline—glacial progress indeed, as Mike Rumbles noted. It is clear from this data that much more needs to be done by the Scottish Government to meet its original targets and to avoid hundreds of thousands of people across Scotland facing digital exclusion in the future. Turning to investment, the recent report automatic for the people highlighted concerns about the increasing digital skills gap emerging in schools, colleges, apprenticeships and universities. That was mentioned by James Kelly, Patrick Harvie, Daniel Johnson and others during the debate. That reflects what we have seen after 11 years of SNP government since 2008. We have seen the number of maths teachers declining by 15 per cent, those teaching science declining by 12 per cent and the number of computer science teachers down by nearly a quarter. We have also seen a decline in college places and apprenticeships dedicated to science and digital subjects. If we really are to equip Scotland's workforce for a digital future, we need to address that under investment. Otherwise, the workforce of the future will not be prepared to capitalise on the digital opportunities. On the internationalisation agenda, we also face a critical shortage of digital support in the business environment. In giving evidence to the economy committee, Nora Senior, chair of the strategic board, highlighted that only 9 per cent of business in Scotland have embedded digital in their business operations. That compares to 43 per cent among competitor countries. That digital gap poses a massive challenge if we are to increase productivity and a massive challenge for those companies looking to increase global trade and exports. The global export market and international trade is increasingly dominated by online commerce and digital platforms. I saw that myself first-hand earlier this year during a trade mission to Hong Kong and China. I met with a number of trading companies whose business models for import and export are now predominantly online, meaning that they largely trade with other businesses who will only use e-commerce and digital platforms. That means that Scottish businesses will lose out on massive trading opportunities available in the global market if we do not address that digital gap. I will give way. Willie Coffey Taken the intervention, but could you say something about the European digital single market please and whether you think that we should be in that or out of that? Dean Lockhart That is obviously going to be subject to the negotiation, but the precursor to that is having business in Scotland digital ready, and that is my point. There is no specialist public agency in Scotland dedicated to the establishment of e-commerce and digital platforms for business and international trade. To address that digital gap, we are calling for the establishment of a dedicated institute of e-commerce for Scotland to help Scottish business to move online. I need to make some progress, sorry. I might in a second. A dedicated institute of e-commerce, a specialist support agency that will help to move businesses large and small online to take advantage of global opportunities in e-commerce. That policy has gained significant support in the business community, and I look forward to hearing the minister's response to that policy initiative. Finally, in the crucial area of innovation, the SCDI has called for Scotland to actively participate in the UK industrial strategy. That is reflected in our amendment to the motion calling for the Scottish Government to work closer with the UK Government to help to deliver the real benefits of the industrial strategy to Scotland. In recent years, Innovate UK has invested £2.5 billion in innovative businesses across the UK, and the British Business Bank has helped to unlock £10 billion of new finance for business across the country. By actively participating in the UK industrial strategy, Scottish business can tap into innovative digital markets across the UK, and it can also tap into UK-wide research and development and financing opportunities. In that area, as with many other areas, Scotland's business will be significantly better off if we fully capitalise on the benefits of being part of the fifth-largest economy in the world. I support the amendment in Finlay Carson's name. I call Kate Forbes to wind up the debate. You have eight minutes, please, minister. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I thank the members for their contributions to this interesting and valuable debate. It is fair to say that the importance of the digital economy to Scotland and its people is paramount, and that view is shared by the majority of people in the chamber. There were some highlights in the speeches, the common theme running through those highlights, where people engaged with the motion before us. I take on board the comments that were made by Opposition members and stress once again that I believe that the clear digital strategy that we have set out is the correct one. However, we are open to ideas, and particularly, as the First Minister for the Digital Economy explicitly, I am open to the ideas of Opposition members when it comes to dealing with the thorny issues that are before us. I would like to talk about those thorny issues and will continue here. The first issue that was raised by James Kelly and reiterated by Colin Smith was about the importance of digital inclusion and digital participation. It is a critically important point to recognise that the debates in this chamber often feel like an echo chamber when it comes to recognising the challenges that are faced, particularly by those that are perhaps disadvantaged by poverty or by other aspects when it comes to engaging with digital. We know that digital has the potential to be inclusive and we have to be intentional about doing that. We have invested £1.5 million in the digital participation charter fund, which has supported 169 local projects across Scotland to enable more than 20,000 people to gain or improve their essential digital skills. That digital participation charter has secured commitment from nearly 600 public, private and third sector organisations to build on those digital skills. I am also working with social housing providers to try and ensure that there are affordable internet solutions for older people, for people with disabilities and for hard-to-reach single people. Moving on to businesses, Mike Rumbles wants to help. Mike Rumbles. I thank the minister for taking my intervention. I think that for the people that are not connected, in a practical point, for the last 5 per cent, it will be immensely helpful to them if the minister could lay out a date when she could actually tell them when they might be connected. Kate Forbes. I am sure that I will pass on that question to the Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure, who is responsible for the roll-out. The debate before us today is about the digital economy. Although connectivity is a critical aspect of that, there are some really complex issues that I think that it would serve us all well to engage with. Gordon Lindhurst made a good point that infrastructure without skills would not get us the progress that we need. I wanted to quote some of the stats that he started quoting from the DEBs survey, that 34 per cent of businesses are doing something now to address the skills issue, which is up from 26 per cent in 2014, and that 48 per cent of businesses stated that they were well equipped with the skills, but they recognised that there were some gaps. We recognise that the role here in terms of the pace of change that Daniel Johnson outlined to support businesses to meet that skills gap. Patrick Harvie and others talked about the need for rights and to ensure that we have the ethics in place and that we develop, on an on-going basis, with other Governments across the world, the legal framework that we need as technology continues to emerge. I quoted at the beginning and I want to return to it the five rights campaign that we are supporting in conjunction with Young Scot, to ensure that young people in particular know the rights that they have in relation to online, the right to remove, the right to know who, what, why and for what purposes they are sharing their data, the right to safety and support, the right to informed and conscious use of online, and the right to digital literacy. I am grateful. In relation to one of those, the right to know how your data is being used, does the minister acknowledge that the GDPR attempt to address that, while well meaning, has in fact resulted in the vast majority of us simply clicking yes, yes, yes, yes, accept, accept, accept, accept, accept, accept to a blizzard of those requests? It is not meaningful consent to anything that is being provided that way. Kate Forbes would agree with the member that we want all citizens to feel confident that their personal data is being shared responsibly to create better and more responsive services, but in order to do that they need to understand what their data is being used for and to feel empowered to engage and to agree or disagree. I want to finish with Daniel Johnson's speech, which I thought, if I might say so, was one of the most perceptive in terms of the challenges that we face but also the opportunities. Daniel Johnson talked about the perception that automation has the potential to destroy jobs, and I think that we need to be intentional that digital actually includes more of the population. I quoted at the beginning that we need about 12,800 new entrants to the tech sector just to stand still. So there is an opportunity there for our current workforce to train them, to re-skill them, to up-skill them and also to ensure that we've got the skills that will never be replaced by machinery, particularly the emotional skills, the soft skills that will continue to be needed. Daniel Johnson talked about an ecosystem with the universities, and I think that that's particularly obvious somewhere like Edinburgh, where whether it's been driven by the city deal or local authorities and government working in partnership to ensure that universities know what skills are needed and put in place the training that is needed for that. Lastly, and this is what I want to close on, he talked about the investment that's needed in SMEs, and Alex Neil touched on that as well in terms of training. The Scottish Government has funded code clan with just over £3 million of investment to date, which is the first industry-led digital skills academy that offers students an intensive four-month training programme with direct access to employers, so that businesses, wherever they are, whether they're in the Highlands or in the one of our cities, I've got less than 60 seconds left, have the skills that they need, that industry outlines the skills that they need and we ensure that they have them in an intensive way. However, there are other ways that we're supporting businesses, particularly around cyber resilience, and my colleague Derek Mackay launched the Cyber Resilience Economic Opportunity Action Plan. That provides voucher schemes to SMEs to ensure that they have the cyber resilience that they need. There is also the digital boost and also the digital voucher scheme to target our investment in SMEs to ensure that they have the skills that they need and that we in Scotland lead on the digital revolution and that countries around the world look to Scotland to see what is happening in terms of the partnership between public, private and third sector to take advantage of the new opportunities that come with the digital economy. That concludes our debate on developing Scotland's digital industries for our economic future. We're going to move on to the next item of business and that's consideration of business motion 14834 in the name of Graham Day on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau setting out a revision of tomorrow's business. Does any member wish to speak against that motion? No? The question is that motion 14834 be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. As members may recall, we have a procedure now to allow some time to be set aside at the end of the day for committees to raise business of importance to them, such as committee reports or urgent inquiries. In that context, I would like to call Bill Kidd, convener of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, to make an announcement on the report on confidentiality of reports from the commissioner for ethical standards for public life in Scotland. I call Bill Kidd. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. On behalf of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, I would like to draw the Parliament's attention to our report published last week on the committee's handling of reports about MSP's conduct from the commissioner for ethical standards in public life in Scotland. The committee considers those reports in private before reporting to the Parliament stating whether it agrees with the commissioner and what sanctions, if any, it recommends the Parliament should impose. If details about either a complaint or the contents of the subsequent commissioner's report appear in the public domain before the committee has considered and reported on the matter, the committee may have to carry out its responsibilities against a backdrop of external comment, speculation and judgment. Publicity and media coverage resulting from breaches of confidentiality may act as a disincentive to making a formal complaint, particularly if it is of a sensitive nature. I would like to take this opportunity on behalf of the committee to remind all members of the requirements under the code of conduct that they must not disclose, communicate or discuss any complaint or intention to make a complaint to or with members of the press or other media prior to the lodging of the complaint or during the committee's consideration of the complaint. Members are also reminded of their obligations under section 7 of the code to keep certain committee material confidential. The committee intends to take action against future breaches of the code of conduct provisions and will not view ignorance of the rules as a mitigating factor in deciding what sanction to recommend against a member. I thank you on behalf of the committee. Thank you very much. That concludes our business. We turn now to decision time, and the first question today is that amendment 14807.1 in the name of Finlay Carson, which seeks to amend motion 14807 in the name of Kate Forbes on developing Scotland's digital industries for our economic future, be agreed. Are we agreed? We are agreed. The next question is that amendment 14807.2 in the name of James Kelly, which seeks to amend the motion in the name of Kate Forbes, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. The final question is that motion 14807 in the name of Kate Forbes, as amended on developing Scotland's digital industries for our economic future, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. That concludes decision time. We will now move to members' business in the name of Lewis MacDonald on Offshore Windweek 2018. We will just take a few moments, if we can, for the members and ministers to change seats.