 The next item of business, and the final item of business, is a member's business debate on motion 136 for 6, in the name of Bill Kidd, on UN international day of peace 2018. This debate will be concluded without any questions being put, and I can ask those members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request to speak buttons now. I call on Bill Kidd to open the debate. I would first of all like to thank all the colleagues here in the chamber who have stayed back, but particularly those who signed and supported the motion that I am now bringing forward for debate. That recognises international day of peace 2018. Every year, that is celebrated on 21 September, and this year it falls on Friday of this week. I also want to welcome to the chamber members of the international voluntary service who are working to raise the profile of this day in Scotland, and such promotions contributed to this debate taking place. I would like, on top of that, to thank and welcome to the chamber members of organisation that comprise the cross-party group on nuclear disarmament. As we recognise this suspicious day, I would like to use this debate to explain what international peace looks like in practice and why, as politicians, we have the capacity, mechanisms and responsibility to promote the UN international day of peace. What does international peace look like? Does it mean no wars and no conflict? Ideal, yes, it does, but peace is a more useful concept when you use it as a goal for something complex and difficult, not impossible to achieve. In international relations, the most prominent understanding of peace, semnally put forward by Johann Gaeltung in 1969, explained that peace relies on our capacity to create peace, or alternatively our capacity to stop violence. Terming peace in this way stops it being an unattainable thing. It makes peace both real and tangible. It is something that we can make a solid contribution towards. Peace is the absence of violence. We are lucky enough these days to live in times of peace here in Scotland. The normal experience of Scottish people nowadays is very different to what people had to live through and die for during large parts of the 20th century. Most notable is the sacrifice, of course, made in World War 1 and World War 2. Global peace day is an opportunity to recognise the contribution of all those who fought to provide peace for their children and grandchildren, the heavy and moving sacrifice of which we live in today. The creation of a peaceful society for us to live in also allows for us to consider a second layer to peace. That is a type of peace that involves the reduction of structural violence or social inequality, as it is better known these days. One of the biggest movements towards reducing social inequality on an international scale is the United Nations global goals. Those goals provide action points for countries to tackle worldwide issues such as hunger and poverty. They also provide direction on how to promote quality education, renewable energy, innovation, infrastructure, climate change, justice and human rights. That, again, roots back to the key point about our ability to reduce inequality. Structural violence or inequality, which the global goals work against, happens when a person's wellbeing—either mental or physical—is reduced below where it could and should reasonably be. Before institutions like the United Nations, it would have been difficult to make an international effort to reduce hunger, but now we have a greater ability to do so. A good example for explaining capacity to reduce violence or social inequality would be if someone had anonies like cholera in the Victorian era and died from dehydration. At that time, the medical profession did not know what cholera was or how to remedy it. They did not have the knowledge or ability to help that person. However, if someone loses their life today to an easily preventable and remedied illness such as cholera, we could say that violence has been committed on that person. If we have the capacity to reduce inequality, we must strive to find ways to do this. Today, this could involve a fair distribution of medical supplies and access to doctors, which the NHS is a fantastic example of. If we have the ability to actively promote peace and the capacity to make a change, we have the responsibility to do so. As parliamentarians, we here are privileged to be in a position to affect legislation working towards peace, whether it be on climate justice by voting in the climate change bill or in the child poverty act. We have the ability to be ambitious in promoting peace. As mentioned, the United Nations increases our ability to promote peace as it provides the opportunity for collaboration. In 2001, the General Assembly of the United Nations voted to mark the international day of peace as a day of non-violence and ceasefire. Since that has come into being, it has been allowing the delivery of aid to vulnerable groups within conflict zones. An incredible example of that is how the organisation of peace one day has worked with UNICEF and the World Health Organization for the Immunisation of 1.4 million children against polio in insecure southern and eastern regions of Afghanistan. The global peace day, ceasefire, has seen the Taliban put down arms recurrently since 2007 to allow safe passage for aid workers. It is clear that, in many cases, we do have the ability to make a difference. For me personally, that means working towards nuclear disarmament. I want to see weapons that are indiscriminate to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people abolished. If you are undecided about nuclear weapons, please use that peace day to look at the work of ICANN, PNND or Scottish CND for further explanation of the humanitarian impact of those weapons. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had survivors, but they were not physically recognisable to their loved ones after the bombings. That cannot be allowed to happen again. As many of you know, ICANN won the Nobel Peace Prize last year for their work in bringing about the United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. The next major step for nuclear disarmament will be the UN high-level conference, which I will attend and where we will count out $1 trillion, which is the amount of money wasted on nuclear weapons every year around the world. Where it is this or another matter of importance, I compel you. Where you have the ability to promote peace, do so. It can be complex, it can be difficult, but it cannot and is not impossible. Linda Fabiani, follow-up by Alexander Stewart. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Thank you, Bill, for the persistence that Bill Kidd has in bringing such issues to our Parliament on a regular basis. I very much want to contribute today mainly to celebrate the volunteers who do so much fantastic work worldwide in the name of peace, and Bill Kidd outlines some of the work that is done there. So many people look at the declarations of the UN, the different days that we have, and somehow think that it is not that important, but it is truly important because it brings so many people together and it brings the issues together and puts them at the forefront. Can you look closely at the different declarations that are made by the UN by nations coming together? Whether it be the global goals, whether it be the declarations that Bill has talked about today, they tie in together in a way of trying to create a big picture of citizens coming together and saying that this is not right and that we have to work to make our world a better place. There was another declaration that was made by the UN some 50 years after the human rights one, which was the declaration on human rights defenders. I think that that is also a very, very important one because human rights defenders are other volunteers who go out there to make sure that that structural peace can be maintained by human rights workers being defended. Peace Brigades International should probably declare an interest in that. I have been a member of the organisation for many years, not to the degree that others are in the work that they do, although I hope that perhaps someday I might be able to help more than I do at the moment. However, Peace Brigades International does fantastic work, and that is why I put down a motion about that and thank you to those who signed it. Peace Brigades International is currently working in seven countries. It is working in Colombia, Guatemala, Honduras, Kenya, Indonesia and Mexico. It is working in countries where communities experience violent conflict. As was outlined by Bill Kidd in his motion and in the work that he does, it can be conflict within a nation as well as conflict amongst nations. It is about repression, internal oppression as well as external aggression. The philosophy of Peace Brigades International is that lasting transformation of conflicts cannot come from the outside but it must be based on the capacities and desires of local people. You have volunteers promoting peace, whether it be the international voluntary service, so many different strands of that, whether it be organisations that are very specific, such as Peace Brigades International, showing on the ground that a different way is useful. The work with trained volunteers involves physical accompaniment, capacity development workshops, advocacy tours and raising concerns for human rights defenders. That is another way that people who work in that field come together. All those different organisations come together and truly believe in peace and in promoting peace. The responsibility of those of us who are fortunate enough to live in a peaceful society, to try and spread some of that peace to others. I could go on a long time about this, but I am looking at the time. I thank the international voluntary service in promoting peace day 2018 in Scotland. I thank all those who do more than just pay money to Peace Brigades International but who go out and do the hard work on the ground. I urge those who do not know an awful lot about those organisations to look into them deeper. I thank Alexander Stewart, Mr Bimish, for being with me. I am delighted to be able to take part today. I congratulate and commend Bill Kidd for securing the debate this afternoon. Each year, the international day of peace is observed around the world on 21 September, as you have already heard, and the UN General Assembly has declared that the day is devoted to strengthening the ideas of peace both within and among the nations and its peoples. Giving peace a chance is what we need to ensure that we do. Back in 2015, the United Nations member states adopted the ideas of 17 sustainable development goals as they understood it. It would not be possible to build a peaceful world without steps to achieve economic and social development from everyone and to ensure that their rights were protected. It is vitally important that their rights are protected. Those sustainable goals cover a broad range of ideas, including poverty, hunger, health education, climate change, gender equality, water, energy, environment and social justice, and each and every one of them plays a part to ensure that we can achieve the goals that they set. They are the blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for us all—a peaceful future for us all. The goals address the global challenges that we face, including those related to inequality, climate and environment, and justice, peace and itself. The goals are in order to ensure that we all have a responsibility, and those should be achieved by 2030. The theme for international day of peace 2018 is the right to peace—the universal declaration of human rights at 70. We thank all those who have played a part. We have heard already about World War 1, and we will commemorate some reversals as we go forward. What happened in World War 2? Those individuals gave of their time, their talent and their lives to secure peace for all of us, and that is vitally important that we remember them. The theme of the celebrations talks about human rights. That whole idea is a milestone to discover and we should ensure those human rights. It is drafted from responsibilities with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world. It is vitally important. Going back as far as 10 December 1940, when the common standard was achieved for peoples of all nations, the universal declaration is the most translated document in the world and has been available and has been translated into over 500 languages. It is as relevant today as it was the day it was adopted. The universal declaration states that, article 3, everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. Those elements build on the foundations of freedom, justice and peace around the world. All of us in society can play our part. It is important that we tackle those and take those steps in our day-to-day lives. Each and every one of us in this chamber has an opportunity to do that. We can promote human rights, we can work with human rights, we can ensure our work at our home environments, in our education, in our schools, in colleges and even around a dinner table that we talk about human rights. We talk about the opportunities that are there to ensure. Human rights are everyone's rights and we have the responsibility to maintain that, to help to keep peace. In conclusion, a peaceful society is one where there is justice and equality for everyone. That is an end to what we are trying to fulfil. The prophecy that came from the United Nations is very true. Peace will endure a sustainable environment to take shape, and a sustainable environment will in turn help to promote peace. I congratulate Bill Kidd on his motion and thank him for giving us the opportunity to debate on such an important issue as peace today in the lead-up to the international day on the 21st. I would also like to recognise the member for his tireless efforts travelling to a number of significant meetings across the globe to represent Scotland in the peace movement and much of the other work that he does, including in the cross-party group against nuclear weapons. This year, we celebrate, as we have heard, the 70th anniversary of the universal declaration of human rights, a milestone document in the history of human rights, which, as we have heard from Alexander Stewart earlier in his remarks, in its article 3 states that everyone has the right to life, liberty and security, building the foundation of justice, freedom and peace amongst peoples and nations. However, many times, the fundamental principles that recognise our dignity and inalienable basic rights as human beings are being breached across the globe, not only in war-torn countries, not only in dictatorship nations, not only in developing countries, but if I may say so here as well, we all have a right to peace, peace in our homes, peace in our communities and peace in our countries and between countries. Sometimes, we only see peace as the mere absence of conflict and believe that we have achieved it in all its forms and shapes and forget that peace is hardly ever a permanent status of the human race, but rather a very fragile condition that we must pursue and protect at all times. We must, I suggest, all consider recommitting to working to reduce what Bill Kidd has highlighted as structural inequalities, both globally and here in Scotland. We can and must continue to be leaders on climate change, for instance, which is in my brief and on other issues that are right across this Parliament, as well as on the global sustainable development goals. Nonetheless, even if we, in our free democratic and reasonably prosperous and reasonably equal country, are striving for peace, we still face major challenges when it comes to guaranteeing our citizen safety. That will always be the case as long as nuclear weapons are here on our soil. While we still have weapons of mass destruction, as well as the requirement to transport them, I am not quite sure that we can describe our nation as peaceful. I have been involved in the peace movement not as much as others, but over a long period of time. I strongly believe that today more than ever we need to bring more young people into this dialogue and ensure that they have the appropriate knowledge and adequate tools to influence change and achieve lasting results. In July, I had the honour to speak at the peace campaigning academy, organised by CND Education, a three-day-long event. It was very important that young people were able to learn more about nuclear weapons and, equally importantly, that they found out about lobbying activities, to lobby us as their parliamentarians, communication tactics and ways to engage in legislative processes more. It was incredible to be part of this peace academy, and it was very inspiring, along with Bill Kidd and Ross Greer, who were there to share their ideas and to hear so many young people's commitment. My thanks also goes to Quakers in Scotland for their briefing for this debate. They too note the value of peace education for young people. Active involvement of younger generations is fundamental to ensure that we create and sustain a society that is not only aware of the social issues and challenges of its communities but has the knowledge and power to shape its future. I would like to conclude by quoting a wonderful sentence from Mr Masashi, a survivor of the Hiroshima bombings in 1945, who said, humans cannot coexist with nuclear weapons. Let's work together for a world of peace. John Finnie, to be followed by Ruth Maguire, Mr Finnie, please. I congratulate Bill Kidd, not only in bringing this debate, but I thank him for all the other work that he does. UN International Day of Peace has got a nice ring to it. I only wish that some people would show their respect to the UN with regard to matters such as adherence to international law. It is reassuring to hear my colleague Claudia Beamish talk about the peace academy and the work that went on with Ross Greer and Bill Kidd. I think that that is the future and empowering young people in the way that is to be commended. Motion talks about the UN's understanding of peace as being structural rather than just an absence of violence. That is very clearly the case. I look at some of the terminologies that are used in relation to this. I know that the UN Security Council asked the then-General Secretary Boutras Boutras Gally in 1992 to examine ways to improve peacekeeping and peace enforcement. Those are key phrases. It was in the paper agenda for peace that he used to phrase peace building. Peace building is post-conflict social and political reconstruction activities. Peace is often associated with the aftermath of great terror that is visited invariably on the most vulnerable in our communities. Importantly, peace building is about preventing a repetition and it is dialogue that is going to do that. It is not a proliferation of weapons, whatever those weapons may be. It is distinguished from peacekeeping and peacemaking by its insistence on a society-wide reconciliation. The role of truth and reconciliation in conflict is to be commended. We have seen that in South Africa, we have seen it in the Balkans and hopefully it will continue to be the case in the north of Ireland. It is about state building thereafter and it is about valuing the citizen and the role that the citizen can play in prevention. Talking has never harmed anyone and I think that we cannot commend that enough. There have been a number of mentions made of trident and wasted money. I think that all arms money is wasted money, it is wasted energy and I think that there are opportunities for citizens to display their position on that by encouraging divestment. On the particulars of the motions, can I thank the international voluntary service for their outstanding work? I took the opportunity to have a look at their web page and some of their values, which I have shamelessly plagiarised now and said that one of the first ones that is mentioned there is service, locally led action for social change. I think that that is something that everyone in the chamber would commend. Talking about turning that support's behavioural change. Of course, if we are going to have sustainable peace, then we cannot have anything other than every effort made to reduce violence where it exists and resolve conflict. Respect is key to that. That is about respecting each other's differences and valuing each other's differences. We celebrate differences in nationality, ethnicity, gender and background. I think that the world is richer for all the differences that we have, not weaker because of it. Integrity is something else that is in their values and ambition. We all have ambitions and we have some very refined ambitions regarding nuances of policies here, but surely the one thing that can all throw our weight behind is an ambition to see a world where there is collaboration and innovation, two of their other values and, most importantly, peace. I think that it was a well-kid that talked about water, food and education, the UN global goals agenda and human rights. Human rights bring with their responsibilities and we all have responsibilities. I think that there is a tendency in the so-called civilised waste to think that a lot of those issues are issues for the third, the developing world, call it what you will. The Scottish Greens have a mantra of people, plant and peace and I think that is in common with a lot of the individual members in here. We see that as being the priorities. I would like to thank both for bringing this and commend the motion. Thank you very much. I gently remind members to use full names, please, in the chamber. I call Ruth Maguire to be followed by Maurice Corry, Ms Maguire, please. Thank you. On UN international day of peace 2018, we devote ourselves to strengthening ideals of peace both within and among all nations and peoples. A peaceful society is one where there is justice and equality for everyone. I am really grateful to my colleague Bill Kidd for securing this important debate, which means that we can come together in the chamber to observe as many others will around the world international day of peace. Bill Kidd, of course, has years and years of service to the peace movement and I am hugely grateful for all his hard work and commitment to the cause. The theme for 2018 is the right to peace, the universal declaration of human rights at 70, and celebrates the 70th anniversary of the universal declaration of human rights. This is a milestone document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the declaration was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 as a common standard of achievement for all peoples, for all nations. The universal declaration is the most translated document in the world and is available in more than 500 languages. It is as relevant today as it was on the day that it was adopted. The universal declaration states in article 3, everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. These elements build the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. Yet the universal declaration does not include a separate article on the right to peace. That is why this year we are being asked to think about what the right to peace means. Those wishing to get involved in that global discussion can share their thoughts and ideas on social media using the hashtag peace day and hashtag stand up for human rights. When I think about peace, I think about more than the absence of violence, I think about more than the absence of war, I think about a just and equal society. A society where everyone can achieve their full potential, where no one is left behind and where we help, nurture and protect those who need it. Of course, as well as thinking and talking, we can all act. As individuals, we can seek peaceful resolution of conflict in our everyday life when disagreements arise around us. Even in taking small steps, we can be part of the solution. Prevent an injustice in your friend group, in your school, in your college, in your workplace. It can adopt a non-violent approach to solving and reporting potential crimes, including online bullying. You can speak up when others are at risk and you can simply stand with others. Whether you choose to do that at your dinner table, in the street, at your school, in a workplace, on the media, in a Parliament or indeed at a nuclear submarine base, it all matters and it all helps. Human rights are everyone's rights and this international peace day, let's remember that we can all act and each and every one of us can stand up for rights every day. Thank you very much. I call Maurice Corry to be followed by Rhona Mackay. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I welcome the United Nations International Day of Peace and I thank Bill Kidd very much for bringing this member's debate today to the chamber. This Friday, nations around the world will mark their commitment to peace on a day which has been globally shared since 1981. Peace is something that should never be taken for granted and so having this time to recognise the significance in our everyday lives must be appreciated. It is inherently linked to our rights as citizens and as humans. Only by having these rights secured and protected can nations and individuals regain their dignity. Together they act as a core foundation for a peaceful society wherever we are. I am sure Parliament today will join me in supporting the good work done by the United Nations. This organisation has worked long and hard to prevent the onset of wars in some of the most dangerous environments. It serves to calm disputes, restore peace if armed conflict does arise and to promote lasting peace for those countries which have emerged from the troubles of war. I paid particular tribute to the United Nations for its tireless efforts, evident in that it is making many peacekeeping missions throughout the years. Indeed, we can look back on its contribution to the restoration of stability in Sierra Leone, Namibia and Cambodia. I am sorry that I can hear you, Mr Corry, but I suspect not other— I beg your pardon, sorry. Just before I check, if the official report did not hear you, I hope that you will be able to pass your material over rather than rehearse it all again. My apology. Thank you. I paid particular tribute to the United Nations for its tireless efforts, evident in its many peacekeeping missions throughout the years. Indeed, we can look back on its contribution. I am very grateful for the member taking intervention at that point. I fully agree with him on respect for the United Nations. Will that apply in the member's opinion to resolutions that are passed condemning countries or are asking countries to act in line with international law, like, for instance, Israel? Maurice Corry. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I note the member's intervention there and thank you for it. Yes, I think that it depends on the circumstances and everyone is different. There is no one common plan for each one and I think that one has to be very careful before you make a judgment in that case. As the UN believes, those successes help to foster a culture of peace, which opens the doors for vital development goals to be reached, such as the eradication of poverty and hunger, the promotion of universal re-education and the reduction in child mortality. The international day of peace officer's time not to just reflect on how we as nations cooperate with each other, but what more can be done to actively obtain freedom, opportunity and protection? From my own experience in the armed forces, I have witnessed what life is like for those who do not live in countries free from war and injustice. With those military experiences, I can wholly appreciate the security that we enjoy within our own borders by favouring deterrents by the presence of UN forces, which has been of enormous benefit in the prevention of long land conflict. I believe that this is a necessity and we should appreciate in our goal of lasting security and acceptance of every human right. This year, the theme of peace day is the right of peace, the universal declaration of human rights at 70. The universal declaration is a monumental document that charts the necessity of human rights and sets a shared high standard for their protection. Without our freedom of expression, our right to partake in public affairs and our right to live in a free and just world, individuals cannot enjoy a lasting genuine culture of peace within their nations. In the current international climate, human trafficking, international intentional murder and sexual violence are still major threats to our aim for peaceful societies. Unthinkable and widespread atrocities seen in nations such as Syria and Somalia, to name but a few, lead to a mass displacement and civil unrest. For this week's international day of peace, the theme asks us what the right of peace means to us. Surely it means that further international co-operation and support of the United Nations is needed to deal with the challenges that these nations face. There are wealth of ways that we can participate in peace day this Friday, whether it be through our schools, sports, the arts or the environment. I am pleased to see that this international day of peace will be highlighted in events across Scotland. Indeed, the University of Dundee is offering a talk on democracy and security of Gambia, which is now entering a new political era and seeks to strengthen its links with other international partners. Allenton peace sanctuary in Lanarkshire gives the opportunity to plant peace poles, which are universally recognised as a symbol for peace. It is estimated that over 200,000 peace poles have now been planted across the world since the project first began in Japan in 1976. In Glasgow, the public are invited to participate in one-minute silence, followed by meditation, to acknowledge and celebrate the peace day. In conclusion, Presiding Officer, I hope that this year's international day of peace we recognise what has been done and what can still be done to further co-operation both within and among nations in our world today. Before I call Rona Mackay, I can say that I have two members still wishing to speak in this debate, so I am therefore minded to accept a motion without notice under rule 8.14.3, to extend the debate by up to 30 minutes. I now invite Bill Kidd to move a motion without notice. The question is that the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes. Are we all agreed? That's agreed, so I now call Rona Mackay to be followed by Tom Arthur, who will be the last speaker in the open debate. Mr Mackay, please. Can I too thank Bill Kidd for bringing this debate to the chamber and for his long-standing commitment to peace and ridding the world of nuclear weapons? The theme of this year's international day of peace, as we have heard, is the right to peace, which celebrates the 17th anniversary of the declaration of human rights, and it is entirely fitting. Everyone has a right to peace. It is a fundamental human right. Sadly, however, we know that this right has been eroded throughout the world as we witness horrific scenes of needless violence and wars taking place in far too many places throughout the world. The heartbreaking scenes that we see daily on the news of children's suffering as collateral damage or, in some cases, being specifically targeted defy belief. How can humanity become so badly eroded in a person or collectively in a regime that this is thought to be acceptable? The world looks on helplessly as children suffer in Syria and Yemen and in places that have yet to make headlines. How many more must die or be maimed before the regimes that are responsible stop the killing? The Quaker society briefing, for which I thank them, states its belief that Scotland can be a country that leads others in peace, but that peace, far from being passive, is an active thing that has to be pursued, encouraged and performed on a continual basis to exist. There is a difference between merely keeping the peace and actively encouraging conflict resolution. It rightly says that when the world appears to be so divided, becoming less tolerant and compassionate, that Scotland should make a commitment to learning about and modelling peace as a first step to becoming world leaders in that area. There is nothing that I would want more, and I suspect everyone in this chamber. Until the Westminster Government stops sending arms to regimes that use them to maim children and cause horrific widespread suffering, the killing will go on. Our nation, the nation of Scotland, cannot become peacekeepers or actively encourage conflict resolution until we have control over our independent defence industry. I say to the Westminster Government, do not send arms to countries that kill children in my name, in my family's name or in Scotland's name. My 98-year-old father-in-law, who is now sadly in his last month, fled for his life in a coal ship from Dunkirk. Like all veterans, he lost best friends and saw things a 17-year-old should never have to see or do. Until recently, he said very little about his traumatic experience during the Second World War. However, the family now knows that he believes that wars do not solve anything and that peaceful resolution must be sought at all costs. I agree with him, despite the achievements and sacrifices that so many made in that war, which did have a legitimate aim. We can never stop countries breaking into civil war or committing violence in its people, but I say again that we must not be enablers and we must not use force and a quest for peace. We know from experience in Iraq and Afghanistan that that does not work. We should not forget either that war has not broken out between European countries while they have been a member of the European Union, but that is another debate entirely. Of course, peace is not just about stopping wars. It is about how we live our lives in common humanity, as Bill Kidd outlined and many others have said. Antonio Guterres, the Secretary General of the United Nations, has asked us all to speak up for gender equality and promote inclusive societies, do our part at school, at work at home, talk to friends and family and stand up for human rights and call out those who abuse them. Every step counts. Let's all act to promote, promote and defend human rights for all in the name of lasting peace for us and for future generations. Thank you very much, I call Tom Arthur. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I am very grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate. I would like to begin by thanking my colleague Bill Kidd for securing the debate. I must confess that I had not intended to speak, but Bill Kidd's speech was so powerful, compelling and moving. I felt moved to respond and share some of my thoughts. Before doing so, I would like to welcome Ben Macpherson to his new role. Ben is a campaigner for peace both at home and internationally. I have every confidence that he is going to excel in his new position. I am very much looking forward to his response to the debate. Two days ago, I had the great pleasure of attending a service in Paisley Abbey, which was to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Royal Air Force and also, in doing so, to remember the sacrifice of airmen over the past century, particularly airmen and airwomen, particularly in the Battle of Britain. As I was listening to the various remarks and contributions that have been made for this debate, I was reflecting back to that service and two of the key lessons that we learned from those two global catastrophes of the First and Second World War. In particular, their origins and what they tell us about peace and how fragile peace is. It is well known to any high-skill student of history that World War I could perhaps be characterised as having happened by accident, misunderstanding, misreading and people being compelled into taking action. Clearly, there were events that led up to it, but it was a conflict that no one wanted, no one needed, and until very shortly before it occurred, not many people saw coming. That speaks to the importance for communication, for understanding, for giving the benefit of the doubt, for our willingness to be able to empathise and understand other people's positions and situations, and to take opportunities to steer off catastrophe long before it happens. The lessons from World War II are somewhat different in how war came about. The gradual erosion of what is fundamental to peace is civic society. It is an independent judiciary. It is free, open and transparent elections and a strong democracy. It is a free press, the ability to criticise, but, fundamentally, what is required in such societies is a willingness to be able to engage and communicate with each other, a calming set out of understandings of what counts as truth and fact. The lessons of the decay of Weimar into what emerged in Germany in the 1930s and the consequent configuration in Gulf Europe are lessons that are as valuable as ever. We are in a society in a global society, particularly in the west, where we have the rise of fake news, a tribal and entrenched politics where two sides can't speak to each other, sides looking for the easy media hit rather than necessarily searching for the truth, seeking to simplify rather than admit complexity. That is a danger because it can result in the breakdown of civil society. A common thread throughout all of this debate has been that peace is not something that is natural or exists, it is something that is hard when one, it is something that must be built and rebuilt constantly. It is such a fragile entity. As we mark UN International Day of Peace 2018, as we look across the world and look at our democratic and civic institutions that are under threat from extremes on both sides of the political spectrum, it is absolutely imperative that we recommit ourselves to building peace, not just in the global sense but at home and in how we conduct ourselves in our daily lives and our attitudes towards each other. I hope that that is a message that will resonate from Ms Chamber today. Thank you very much. I call on Ben Macpherson to close with the Government minister, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. It is a real privilege to speak in conclusion of this really illuminative and important debate that we have had here this evening. As others have, first of all, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Bill Kidd for bringing this motion to debate today. It is such an important motion for all of us to think about not just the day of peace itself but the wider points around it, as has been described and commented upon by several members. This motion and subject and area is of interest to me not just in my capacity as minister but also one that is close to me on a personal level. At this point, I declare an interest that, as a idealistic but determined 20-year-old and disheartened by the Iraq war in 2003 but determined to do something in the cause of peace, walked from Edinburgh to London to raise awareness of peace day in that year and then worked for peace one day that Bill Kidd mentioned the year after in 2005. Because I believe now that a more peaceful world is possible and by spreading awareness through debates like we are having this evening and all of the activism that has been described across the chamber, we can promote a more peaceful world and peace day gives us the chance to reflect and act on that sense of common purpose. As the former Secretary General of the United Nations who sadly passed away this summer, Kofi Annan said in support of peace day, any moment, whether it's a day or a week when we can get the competence to pause to think and reflect on what they are doing to their own people and to the environment will be a great achievement and I would support it 100 per cent. As was referenced by Bill Kidd, that sense of reflection can also have really significant practical implications, whether it's the international voluntary service raising awareness here in Scotland as I did on my walk to London and others have done in their activism, creating peace in our communities or whether it's what Bill Kidd described the real practical life-saving implications of peace day. For example, in 2007, when the World Health Organization UNICEF and the Afghan Ministry of Health immunised 1.4 million children in 2007 against polio and then 1.6 million in 2008 against polio, that shows that those concepts of peace can have a real impact in terms of lives saved and communities protected. It is clear from the debate that we have had this evening as well that Scotland has a role to play as a nation which does its bit to promote peace overseas. A nation that endeavours to be a good global citizen and a nation whose domestic policies reflect the fair and sustainable approach that we aim to achieve in our international engagement. Of course, one of the key contributions that Scotland can make towards promoting peace is our commitment to all of the UN goals, not just goal 16 but all of them, as part of the structural peace building that others have mentioned. The global goals provide an integrated framework to achieving a better and more sustainable future for all, addressing common challenges relating to poverty, inequality, climate, peace and justice. In the Scottish Government, we have made a dual commitment to the global goals domestically for Scotland and in contributing internationally through our international development work. Our international development strategy outlines the approach that we will be taking between now and 2030 to help to reduce global poverty and promote sustainable development and human rights. Partnership and collaboration will continue to be the foundation for our future development work as we build on our existing bilateral partnerships with Malawi, Zambia, Rwanda and Pakistan, working across borders to address the shared challenges that our world faces in pursuit of those goals. Of course, we also have our humanity and emergency fund as well for moments of crisis. We are conscious that, in order to act with credibility in other places, we must also work to protect and promote human rights and address poverty and inequalities here in Scotland. That is why our domestic policy has at its heart sustainable, inclusive economic growth and our commitment to a fairer Scotland. Just as we are committed to achieving greater social justice, we are also committed to protecting human rights. The UN's 2030 agenda for sustainable development is grounded in the universal declaration of human rights, which was adopted 70 years ago. In Scotland, we are committed to giving further and better effect to international human rights standards encapsulated in the declaration. This commitment of making rights real in people's everyday lives is reflected in the new national performance framework, which has an explicit human rights indicator, and our commitment to human rights is also demonstrated by the Scottish Government's work to fulfil our obligations across the seven core UN human treaties to which the UK is a party. That includes measures to tackle poverty and to promote fair work, to eliminate racial discrimination, to promote gender equality and to disable people's rights, and to use the UN convention on the rights of the child as a framework to ensure that children's rights are embedded in all decision making. Of course, that is particularly important in this year of young people. As the programme for government demonstrates, equality is firmly embedded throughout all of the Government's activities. That starts at the heart of Government, where we have one of the few gender-based cabinets in the world. That all matters when it comes to aspiring to the ideal of peace day, because creating the structural conditions that others have mentioned to support international peace at a domestic level provides support to global societies managing inequalities and conflict. We have embedded a refreshed international framework, a focus on tackling inequality, and that means that all of our international engagement is guided by our commitment to the universally recognised values enshrined in human rights treaties. That includes what we provide to refugees, asylum seekers and our local communities through the pioneering and collaborative approach of our new Scots refugee assistance strategy. In conclusion, so much could be said about peace day and Scotland's role in it. Scotland has a unique contribution to offer the world through our people's expertise on education, health improvement, climate change, renewable energy, human rights and research, along with our innovative partnership approach to international development. We will continue to evolve that through our international development work. We are already making a significant contribution, sharing particular knowledge, skills and technical expertise globally, and we will continue to do so. By taking a fair, sustainable and inclusive approach, we demonstrate that we are a country that promotes human rights, democratic values and supports the structures and global efforts involved in promoting international peace. In this time of flux and challenge, peace day on Friday and in the years ahead is a chance to promote ceasefire and non-violence, not just for 24 hours but in the wider context of social justice, the global goals and sustainable development. In that spirit and in the words of Kofi Annan that I referenced earlier, I support it 100 per cent and encourage all to mark peace day this Friday in what they do, whether that is in social media, their communities or their everyday lives. Thank you Minister. That concludes the debate and I close this meeting.