Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Affairs evidence session

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:09. > :00:17.The draft Article 50 letter must have existed by then. It was done in

:00:18. > :00:21.-- there was none in March or April, and are clearly won't be any inmate.

:00:22. > :00:26.I suppose it is possible one could be squeezed in by the end of June,

:00:27. > :00:28.but given everything that is happening, the Queen's speech will

:00:29. > :00:33.be on the 19th of June. I have made it clear I am available to attend

:00:34. > :00:38.the GMC by negotiation of any reasonable occasion. I suspect we

:00:39. > :00:44.may stretch into July at the earliest. In that period, there will

:00:45. > :00:49.have been only four of those meetings, which is a breach of

:00:50. > :00:55.commitments we have entered into. There is a suggestion that once

:00:56. > :00:59.negotiations begin, they will operate enough for weekly cycle. You

:01:00. > :01:02.will know the detail of what they have set. What proposals will you

:01:03. > :01:08.put to the incoming UK Government in terms of the relationship between

:01:09. > :01:14.that cycle and meetings of the GMC? It's a good question. The terms of

:01:15. > :01:30.reference refer to the oversight of the Gershon 's -- of negotiations.

:01:31. > :01:36.The president, I suppose, is in the JMCE, so that issues could be

:01:37. > :01:39.discussed between the devolved administrations and the UK

:01:40. > :01:43.Government. A developer top-heavy structure because it was a means by

:01:44. > :01:48.which ministers in Whitehall could find out about the European Council,

:01:49. > :01:54.so I once went to a JMCE in which there were 21 UK ministers myself

:01:55. > :01:58.and Rhodri Morgan, so it didn't work as it should have done. That would

:01:59. > :02:06.indicate, I suspect, that the agenda for negotiations each month should

:02:07. > :02:09.be discussed by the JMCE, and then the committee at its next meeting

:02:10. > :02:16.would have to review that progress and look forward. That would seem to

:02:17. > :02:21.be ideal. Thank you very much. That is helpful. Finally, just to relate

:02:22. > :02:24.will be critical in the months will be critical in the months

:02:25. > :02:27.ahead, to relate that to the relationship between yourself as the

:02:28. > :02:31.Minister and this committee and between the Government and

:02:32. > :02:38.Parliament. In your reply on the 4th of May on determining Scotland's

:02:39. > :02:42.future relationship with the EU, you said much that I would welcome, but

:02:43. > :02:48.perhaps the one thing I was most disappointed at what is your view

:02:49. > :02:51.that there was no need to expand on the written agreement between the

:02:52. > :02:58.Government and Parliament on informing Parliament of the

:02:59. > :03:03.progress. The example we have just considered shows the room there is

:03:04. > :03:08.for things of great importance to be withheld from Parliament under the

:03:09. > :03:13.current circumstances. I wonder whether you would reconsider that

:03:14. > :03:19.bold statement that there is no need for any difference in approach. Only

:03:20. > :03:24.cope perfectly well in terms of what cope perfectly well in terms of what

:03:25. > :03:30.I've talked about. The committee would expect to be informed of what

:03:31. > :03:36.takes place in each cycle, and it would be supplemented by the publish

:03:37. > :03:43.creation -- the publication of information. As is the EU side. We

:03:44. > :03:47.will publish information as we move forward. We will make it available.

:03:48. > :03:51.I don't think it's a question of withholding anything, I just think

:03:52. > :03:57.the structures we have, supplemented by the transparency we are committed

:03:58. > :04:00.to, would create a substantial and proper flow of information from

:04:01. > :04:07.ourselves to the committee. I am absolutely committed to transparency

:04:08. > :04:13.in this process. There will clearly be things that we will want to

:04:14. > :04:17.negotiate privately for a while, but on the vast majority of things, we

:04:18. > :04:23.will want people to know what our position is. We think the EU

:04:24. > :04:27.position is right. I have spoken TEU parliamentarians who are keen on

:04:28. > :04:35.that view. The role of the EU Parliament at the end of this is

:04:36. > :04:38.absolutely crucial, so this is about keeping the democratic forces

:04:39. > :04:51.informed, and this is one of the democratic forces. I accept much of

:04:52. > :04:54.that. I guess, my sense is that we find out in recent months after the

:04:55. > :05:01.event, when it is too late to bring any influence to bear. I feel the

:05:02. > :05:08.same way. But I wonder what the Scottish Government has taken to the

:05:09. > :05:17.table at the JMCEN. I wonder what you're putting in those negotiations

:05:18. > :05:24.as the vital interests of Scotland. Much has been made previously of the

:05:25. > :05:35.JMC in which we did not know which room would be hosting the meeting,

:05:36. > :05:40.let alone what would be discussed. I have only been accompanied by one

:05:41. > :05:43.other Minister to the floor, Michael Matheson, who came with me to the

:05:44. > :05:48.second one, and that was only because we did not know -- we did

:05:49. > :05:53.know that Justice and home affairs was to be discussed, and we knew

:05:54. > :05:58.that ten days in advance. Most of the time, we don't know what is

:05:59. > :06:05.happening. Even David Davis has only been to two of those. I think in the

:06:06. > :06:09.other two, he has popped in because he has been in House of Commons

:06:10. > :06:15.debates will stop it has not been a stable process. My Welsh counterpart

:06:16. > :06:18.compared the arrangements unfavourably to a community council

:06:19. > :06:23.within his constituency. I think he was being quite generous. As a

:06:24. > :06:29.supplementary on that, you had mentioned that one of the JMCEN

:06:30. > :06:34.meetings was cancelled, in your view, because the Government, the UK

:06:35. > :06:41.Government, did not want to discuss the Article 50 notification letter.

:06:42. > :06:44.Was there any consultation on that? It was a considerable matter of

:06:45. > :06:49.discussion from an early stage. Minutes have only appeared recently.

:06:50. > :06:53.I think they only appeared at the end of March for the previous two

:06:54. > :06:57.meetings. We had difficulty in getting minutes. I would have to

:06:58. > :07:01.check, but I think on every meeting there has been reference to the

:07:02. > :07:05.Article 50 letter. It certainly occurred in all my discussions with

:07:06. > :07:15.David Davis. It was a major subject of discussion at the JMC plenary in

:07:16. > :07:19.January in cover. The request was simple: That we should be consulted

:07:20. > :07:25.on the terms of a letter in whole or in part. The argument was that there

:07:26. > :07:29.was no letter, then that no decision had been made on whether it was two

:07:30. > :07:37.sentences or 20 pages. The length became an issue. And then there was

:07:38. > :07:43.no response to what was pretty much a formal request I make face-to-face

:07:44. > :07:51.in February for involvement in the process, and then nothing happens

:07:52. > :07:56.during March. The letter came the day before the white paper. There

:07:57. > :08:01.was a commitment, I think the week before, that we would see the White

:08:02. > :08:06.Paper two days in advance. We did not, just one day in advance, which

:08:07. > :08:11.was better than we had had with the previous White Paper, the Great

:08:12. > :08:17.Repeal Bill White Paper. We never got it until 40 minutes before it

:08:18. > :08:22.was published. I saw the Article 50 letter about half an hour after the

:08:23. > :08:27.Prime Minister had got up in the House of Commons. I could not see it

:08:28. > :08:38.in draft or any other text before that. Thank you very much. Jackson

:08:39. > :08:41.Carlaw. Is the stuff of politics flies freely in discussion and

:08:42. > :08:47.comment. I would like to go back to a remark you make, which is, we are

:08:48. > :08:52.where we are, that popular expression about what the Government

:08:53. > :08:55.now does. A lot of your energy, rightly, was in preparing the

:08:56. > :09:00.Scottish Government's contribution to the discussion that was to take

:09:01. > :09:03.place, and whatever one thinks of the response, we now have the

:09:04. > :09:08.response and we move forward from there. , structural point of view, I

:09:09. > :09:13.would be interested to know how you are approaching the next phase in

:09:14. > :09:16.terms of the Scottish Government, the civil service, the work streams

:09:17. > :09:20.that you are now preparing, the resource you feel you have and are

:09:21. > :09:25.bringing to those preparations in advance of whatever the next phase

:09:26. > :09:29.proves to be. I think it will be interesting, given the scrutiny we

:09:30. > :09:32.will have to apply as time goes on, just to have a better understanding.

:09:33. > :09:36.I understand from what you have said that you are not quite clear what

:09:37. > :09:39.the JMC process will be. What you are preparing now to do and the

:09:40. > :09:44.resource and structure you are putting in place to do that. It is a

:09:45. > :09:48.good question, and I am happy to answer it. There are three separate

:09:49. > :09:51.issues. There is the issue of what our position is. Your right to say

:09:52. > :09:57.that this was a substantial piece of work. We intend to continue with

:09:58. > :10:04.substantive work on the issues that will arise during the negotiation

:10:05. > :10:08.and the desired outcome. We have to think of what we need to get out of

:10:09. > :10:12.this situation. And you know, in some cases, it may be the same as

:10:13. > :10:15.what the UK wishes to get out of it, though perhaps we would go about it

:10:16. > :10:20.in a different way. So we are working on those things, and my job

:10:21. > :10:26.in that regard will be to coordinate the work across the Government of

:10:27. > :10:30.all the directorates and all the Cabinet secretaries, and to build

:10:31. > :10:36.that into a coherent whole so that we can both answer the question of

:10:37. > :10:40.what is the Scottish Government's position and what is good for hours,

:10:41. > :10:44.the right position I hold, and how we can ensure that is part of the UK

:10:45. > :10:49.negotiating procedure. The first part is easier than the second, so

:10:50. > :10:53.there is a process issue of how you influence the Government. We will be

:10:54. > :10:58.clear about what we want. And we will also be, in the process, when

:10:59. > :11:02.we know that, of building and developing the structures to deliver

:11:03. > :11:05.that where we are able to do so. An example would be in agriculture,

:11:06. > :11:10.where we would have to have our preferred position. We would have to

:11:11. > :11:14.have the ability to deliver that position, and we need to know that

:11:15. > :11:18.that position would work for the stakeholders. It is a complex

:11:19. > :11:22.process involving lots of people. I've been debating the future

:11:23. > :11:25.structure of agriculture with a constituent of mine in IE owner,

:11:26. > :11:34.Andrew Prentice, by Twitter this morning, and he has our view on what

:11:35. > :11:37.would work for remote islands. -- on Iona. We are preparing a position on

:11:38. > :11:42.negotiations in the round, knowing the detail of when issues will come

:11:43. > :11:48.up, knowing the process that will be followed. For example, the first

:11:49. > :11:55.issues we need to be clear about, the debt is one, the cost of

:11:56. > :11:58.leaving, our position on the Irish border, are position on EU

:11:59. > :12:02.nationals. Another issue, the role of the ECJ and what role it has in

:12:03. > :12:13.the whole process will The position on the frameworks on

:12:14. > :12:19.agriculture and fisheries and the de-Sir, the -- desire the Prime

:12:20. > :12:23.Minister's message have been different and talking about EU

:12:24. > :12:29.frameworks returning to the UK and then decisions about where they are

:12:30. > :12:32.and David Davis referring to consensus about new frameworks.

:12:33. > :12:44.There is an issue about what that means. We oppose the issue of EU

:12:45. > :12:49.frameworks coming back in that way. All compentencies should be looked

:12:50. > :12:55.at and we would want to work hard to make sure that happens. Then issue

:12:56. > :12:59.two the great repeal bill, the biggest legislative task any of us

:13:00. > :13:03.will take on. We have not seen the draft. The draft exists, it is meant

:13:04. > :13:14.to be published, the Queen's Speech around now it is off for a month it

:13:15. > :13:17.would be enormous helpful if civil servants shared that with our

:13:18. > :13:22.counter parts here and would give us an opportunity to prepare. Whatever

:13:23. > :13:27.happens, unless another government decides not the leave the EU we are

:13:28. > :13:32.going to have to go through that process. We need a good start and we

:13:33. > :13:35.have only seen the White Paper. There are issues we don't

:13:36. > :13:49.understand. We need to see that. Then we need to work out and it

:13:50. > :13:55.can't be a pronounment from London. It is conceivable there shouldn't be

:13:56. > :14:01.legislative consent. It covers areas that we legislate in. That is not

:14:02. > :14:10.clear. The UK Government's not said if that is the case A big burden of

:14:11. > :14:16.secondary and other legislation, the Great repeal bill is the first of

:14:17. > :14:21.several. Whether that allocation for resources is there and getting that

:14:22. > :14:26.through and this committee I suspect will... When it confronts the issue

:14:27. > :14:33.of the Great Repeal Bill will be concerned about the workload on the

:14:34. > :14:44.committee. And then this the third and widerish knew of influence and

:14:45. > :14:49.-- wider issue of influence. Fiona Hislop is involved as am I and that

:14:50. > :14:56.is something we will continue to do. There is no shortage of work being

:14:57. > :14:59.done. On the first of the points, minister, I mean, once the

:15:00. > :15:04.negotiations are under way, all of us have a vested interest in the

:15:05. > :15:10.best possible outcome for Scotland from those. We may at times disagree

:15:11. > :15:13.as to what that might be, but there may be times when the Scottish

:15:14. > :15:19.Parliament and the parties within it do agree on what the approach should

:15:20. > :15:24.be and I wonder how you intend to seek to identify and potentially

:15:25. > :15:29.ensure that the positions that are represented enjoy the widest

:15:30. > :15:36.possible support as and when that proves to be possible for you to do.

:15:37. > :15:42.How do you imagine in a sense that negotiation that can be tricky, that

:15:43. > :15:47.that influence is maximised? This committee would have a role and if

:15:48. > :15:50.that is an invitation to bring more debates to the Parliament, something

:15:51. > :15:54.you and your colleagues were complaining about. If it is an

:15:55. > :15:59.invitation to do, I'm happy to make sure the matters are debated in the

:16:00. > :16:08.Parliamentary chamber. I think there will be issues we will wish to

:16:09. > :16:11.develop support for. I think the question of agricultural structures

:16:12. > :16:18.is key and we have to make sure people are interested and bringing

:16:19. > :16:21.their points of view. Fergus Ewing will be key to that and will make

:16:22. > :16:27.sure there is support and discussion. The Parliament has a big

:16:28. > :16:31.role in influencing those things. There is no monopoly on wisdom and

:16:32. > :16:36.there will be views from people who have strong views on issue that

:16:37. > :16:39.bewill want to hear. It is a Parliamentary process, I'm keen to

:16:40. > :16:45.see it as a Parliamentary process and providing members do not become

:16:46. > :16:55.bored, debating Brexit, I'm always up for it. There is a distinction

:16:56. > :16:58.between debating speculatively and debating substantive issues as they

:16:59. > :17:05.are progressing through. You mentioned the Great Repeal Bill and

:17:06. > :17:10.you will have had conversations with other governments in the UK and we

:17:11. > :17:15.all appreciate the potential workload that could arise for the

:17:16. > :17:18.devolved administrations as a consequence. That is something for

:17:19. > :17:26.the Parliament to give consideration to. From the Government's point of

:17:27. > :17:29.view, how do you anticipate reconciling that with what the

:17:30. > :17:36.Government's work programme might have otherwise have been and how you

:17:37. > :17:42.manage, you imagine these two things will operate in tandem. That will be

:17:43. > :17:47.an issue for the UK Government as well as ourselves, the workload at

:17:48. > :17:52.Westminster will be enormous. They have greater resources. Our workload

:17:53. > :17:58.will be very large too. We will have to manage it. So we will have to

:17:59. > :18:04.find a way to do it. Because we can't afford on 29th March 2019 to

:18:05. > :18:09.find there are areas of law that are inoperable. The question of how it

:18:10. > :18:16.is done and how rapidly it can be done is taxing all of us. There is

:18:17. > :18:22.the issue of what is called south of the border Henry VIII process that

:18:23. > :18:25.is fast track secondary legislation that will be something they will

:18:26. > :18:28.need to do at Westminster, we don't know whether we will be able to do

:18:29. > :18:34.that or whether we would want too do that. Some things may be necessary.

:18:35. > :18:38.Our position is, our position will be perhaps in terms of requirement

:18:39. > :18:44.and resource more difficult than they have imagined south of the

:18:45. > :18:49.border, because it is not just 8.8% of all legislation, we deal with

:18:50. > :18:52.substantive areas of European legislation that the changes to

:18:53. > :18:58.which will be as complex as they are south of the border and we have our

:18:59. > :19:06.own legal system. I have had discussions with the Law Society and

:19:07. > :19:10.the Faculty of Advocates and been involved in meetings with Michael

:19:11. > :19:17.Matheson and we are aware of the problems and the problems that will

:19:18. > :19:20.be presented by not having certain types of European legislation

:19:21. > :19:27.available to us. There are issues you will know from your justice work

:19:28. > :19:34.for example in the... In the European arrest warrantses in, in

:19:35. > :19:38.some of the family law issues. There are complex systems in place. And if

:19:39. > :19:51.we are no longer part of those and revert to systems before they came n

:19:52. > :19:59.in we will be dealing with archaic systems and those are big questions.

:20:00. > :20:05.Thank you. Thank you minister, you covered some of what I was going to

:20:06. > :20:09.ask in regard too the Henry VIII powers, recognising what you have

:20:10. > :20:14.said about as yet being unsure if they're wanted or required in

:20:15. > :20:18.Scotland, what process would you envisage for the Scottish Government

:20:19. > :20:28.may have beeninging that decision? -- make nag decision. Ing -- making

:20:29. > :20:30.that decision? I haven't seen the UK proposals for those, because we

:20:31. > :20:36.haven't seen the detail of how they intend them to operate. Until I see

:20:37. > :20:41.that and this is an issue of seeing the actual repeal bill. It is there

:20:42. > :20:47.in draft form, I wish I was able to say having seen it, this is how it

:20:48. > :20:54.will operate, can we then, should we then dupe Kate those o' O'--

:20:55. > :21:00.duplicate those powers? My instinct is always against using powers that

:21:01. > :21:03.do not have adequate scrutiny. That is the wrong thing to do. The

:21:04. > :21:09.imperative is to have the work done so there is no collapse in the

:21:10. > :21:13.systems. If you look at some organisations, I had a meeting

:21:14. > :21:19.yesterday with the Scottish food standards body, I I think they had

:21:20. > :21:24.identified less than 3% of their work that isn't covered by European

:21:25. > :21:30.legislation. Unless we get that done in less than two years there will be

:21:31. > :21:36.a huge issue in term of food safety and food production and export. So

:21:37. > :21:45.we will have to do it. So the question is, once we see the powers,

:21:46. > :21:49.we have to ask ourselves if its possible to to operate without them.

:21:50. > :21:55.And I think that will require discussions right across the

:21:56. > :22:04.Parliament. On the potential outcomes of negotiations, there have

:22:05. > :22:07.been speculation about outcomes, considerable of evidence from

:22:08. > :22:13.figures such as Sir David Edwards that it is away with the fairies the

:22:14. > :22:18.idea you could sort it out in two years. The former ambassador there

:22:19. > :22:22.was there was a chance negotiations would fail. What planning is the

:22:23. > :22:29.Scottish Government doing for the worst case scenarios of failed

:22:30. > :22:34.negotiations or negotiations being resolved for exit but no

:22:35. > :22:38.transitional arrangements. The First Minister appointed a counsel of

:22:39. > :22:46.experts that includes John Kerr. There is a distinguished group being

:22:47. > :22:53.very thoughtful about this. I think that chances of the UK not sticking

:22:54. > :22:57.with a negotiations are high. I don't think they're necessarily 58%

:22:58. > :23:02.or 60%, but they're high. Therefore, it is in our mind that we would have

:23:03. > :23:07.to be prepared in those circumstances. All I can say is we

:23:08. > :23:11.have a range of scenarios that we look at regularly. You start

:23:12. > :23:19.probably with that issue and you work your way through hard Brexit,

:23:20. > :23:24.with detriment to devolution and hard brefbgt without detriment to

:23:25. > :23:27.devolution and moderate Brexit, through to independence, which we

:23:28. > :23:31.believe is the offering that should be made. We have thought through

:23:32. > :23:35.some of the issues. But if there is going to be a collapse in

:23:36. > :23:40.negotiations it will probably happen sooner rather than later. I think

:23:41. > :23:46.the real pressure points will be the debt. That would be the biggest of

:23:47. > :23:51.the pressure points. If they can get through then to the autumn, I think

:23:52. > :23:56.the prospects of negotiations going full term become better. Then you go

:23:57. > :23:59.into the European Parliament ratify xags and a process -- ratification

:24:00. > :24:04.that will involve most of the that will involve most of the

:24:05. > :24:08.Parliaments of Europe. So it is a complex process. Things could fail.

:24:09. > :24:14.And the year piano Parliament has -- European Parliament has been known

:24:15. > :24:19.to take an individual is tick views and set red lines early on and it

:24:20. > :24:24.would be foolish for them to be ignored. We think about it. I spend

:24:25. > :24:30.a loft time thinking about thing I would not like to think about. In

:24:31. > :24:35.the events of these scenarios playing out, at what point would bit

:24:36. > :24:42.appropriate for the Government to present proposals to Parliament?

:24:43. > :24:45.Specifically, proposals on? ? If we are looking likely that the

:24:46. > :24:49.negotiations would fail, my point would be it would be preferable for

:24:50. > :24:53.Parliament to be presented with the Scottish Government's plan before it

:24:54. > :24:58.happened. We would wants to make sure that the Parliament was not

:24:59. > :25:03.only fully consulted but we had a proposal for the Parliament to

:25:04. > :25:07.consider at the earliest possible stage. One thing the First Minister

:25:08. > :25:11.has brought is to have always thought through what the next steps

:25:12. > :25:18.are. The day after referendum, she said we knead to do this and this.

:25:19. > :25:21.She is determined that we should be clear in our thinking about all

:25:22. > :25:32.these matter and we will have a plan I'm sure of that. Thank you. Do you

:25:33. > :25:38.have a supplementary? Yes, the increasing number of references from

:25:39. > :25:45.the UK Prime Minister to the idea of no deal is better than a bad deal.

:25:46. > :25:48.Is it the case the Prime Minister is saying that more and what signals is

:25:49. > :25:54.that sending to the Scottish Governments? I think she is and some

:25:55. > :26:01.people would speculate she is saying that in order to strengthen our hand

:26:02. > :26:06.in negotiations. To make the rest of the, to make the 27 fearful of that

:26:07. > :26:10.and determined to give ground. Others say there is not much system

:26:11. > :26:15.in what she says and she is operate occasion a political basis and not

:26:16. > :26:25.thinking through the process. there shouldn't be any dubiety that

:26:26. > :26:32.no deal is considerably worse than any other option. That is a really

:26:33. > :26:39.bad option. There should also be new dubiety about the naivete with which

:26:40. > :26:42.many people think the UK Government has gone into this without a clear

:26:43. > :26:47.perspective of the point of view of the European Parliament. It is

:26:48. > :26:54.important to read European views more widely on this. It is a

:26:55. > :26:59.different view that is taken. Your own clerks produce for you a

:27:00. > :27:03.publication, the latest one of which has two articles specifically on

:27:04. > :27:08.this issue - the way in which this looks from elsewhere. I spent time

:27:09. > :27:13.in Brussels, as do colleagues, and what you hear there is obviously a

:27:14. > :27:19.very different view. The UK Government say, that is just the

:27:20. > :27:25.EU's view. But actually, the 27 Rabbit mystified why where this has

:27:26. > :27:31.gone -- the 27 are a bit mystified by where this has gone. They don't

:27:32. > :27:36.feel themselves to be hectored and pressured in the way that perhaps

:27:37. > :27:41.Theresa May thinks they would feel. There are bigger issues for the 27

:27:42. > :27:44.sometimes, and they are addressing them in that way. I hope there is a

:27:45. > :27:51.process that produces an outcome which is successful. Not unlike one

:27:52. > :28:00.of the pieces in your own paper, your own summary, I actually think

:28:01. > :28:03.in 20 years, if the UK does come out, the UK will be in the process

:28:04. > :28:08.of trying to be back in and it will have lost 20 years of influence,

:28:09. > :28:14.progress and prosperity. I think it is that foolish. Can I just say that

:28:15. > :28:26.I understand the minister has to be away 11am. 10am, sorry. I am at his

:28:27. > :28:33.disposal, not all day, and you wouldn't want me here to be all day!

:28:34. > :28:37.But I'm happy to be flexible. Good morning, Minister. Has the Scottish

:28:38. > :28:43.Government requested an official role in the negotiations in order to

:28:44. > :28:49.represent Scottish interests? Yes. The discussions we've had have been

:28:50. > :28:53.discussions where we've said we want a role, but that is already

:28:54. > :29:01.guaranteed, in a sense. The terms of reference for the JMCEN, which James

:29:02. > :29:06.has passed, and it is important to quote them, item three says: Provide

:29:07. > :29:11.oversight of negotiations with the EU to ensure as far as possible that

:29:12. > :29:15.outcome is agreed by all four governments are secured from these

:29:16. > :29:22.negotiations. Item for: Discuss issues stemming from the

:29:23. > :29:26.negotiation. There is already a definition of the role that the JMC

:29:27. > :29:29.would give to the devolved administrations. The exercising of

:29:30. > :29:42.that, in my view and in the view of colleagues, is that there should be

:29:43. > :29:44.an active involvement. It wouldn't be unusual for officials to be

:29:45. > :29:49.involved in complex discussions with Europe as part of UK teams. It does

:29:50. > :29:54.happen in a variety of areas, so it would not be that like there would

:29:55. > :29:58.be a precedent to make sure there was representation. Ministers do

:29:59. > :30:11.attend the European Council. I've been to the European Council in

:30:12. > :30:14.three different roles. I represented Richard Lochhead when he was on

:30:15. > :30:20.paternity leave, for instance. I have attended culture Council when I

:30:21. > :30:25.was culture minister. And I spoke Gaelic for the first time in the

:30:26. > :30:35.European Council. I was the first person to speak Gaelic in a speech,

:30:36. > :30:40.and that was in the culture Council. There is precedent for involvement

:30:41. > :30:47.and for speaking. That is also an issue that needs disgust. It should

:30:48. > :30:54.be obvious where we should be. The issue -- that is an issue that needs

:30:55. > :31:01.to be discussed. RB discussing devolved competencies or should it

:31:02. > :31:05.be wider? Example I might uses freedom of movement. -- use is

:31:06. > :31:11.freedom of movement. Increasingly, people are recognising... We should

:31:12. > :31:14.be in there when the issues of freedom of movement and migration

:31:15. > :31:19.are discussed, because they are of crucial importance to us. Your

:31:20. > :31:26.clarification is helpful, but certainly, the reason I posed the

:31:27. > :31:31.question follows on from Jackson's questions earlier, when he was

:31:32. > :31:35.asking what you would do to represent and highlight the various

:31:36. > :31:41.interests from Scotland. Sometimes the parties in the parliament can

:31:42. > :31:45.agree on particular issues. If the Scottish Government didn't have an

:31:46. > :31:50.official role in the negotiations, then it would be difficult for the

:31:51. > :31:54.Scottish Government to then put forward any interests from Scotland.

:31:55. > :31:57.With respect, it wouldn't be difficult to put it forward. We

:31:58. > :32:05.intend to be heard. We won't be silent in this process the fault --

:32:06. > :32:09.in this process. It would be better if there were any facts to us being

:32:10. > :32:16.heard, which would be we could take this in to discussion and in

:32:17. > :32:19.discussion with in the JMC to be able to seek positions which are

:32:20. > :32:23.advantageous to Scotland, so that is what we would seek to do. There is

:32:24. > :32:28.no question of us not doing or saying things. We will be doing

:32:29. > :32:33.that. A second area I want to question your news regarding the

:32:34. > :32:40.European Commission's proposed framework, and the four-week cycle.

:32:41. > :32:43.Just to get it on the record about the four-week cycle. Week one is

:32:44. > :32:49.dedicated to internal preparations and consultations. The second is for

:32:50. > :32:56.exchange of views between the two size. Three is for negotiation. And

:32:57. > :33:00.the fourth is for reporting back to the European Parliament Brexit

:33:01. > :33:04.group. As well as publishing information emerging from the tasks.

:33:05. > :33:08.In terms of the issue of the Scottish Government reporting back

:33:09. > :33:14.to the Scottish parliament and to this committee, and also on the

:33:15. > :33:22.issue of transparency, how can you reconcile that four-week cycle with

:33:23. > :33:27.what you can do to make sure the Parliament in Scotland is informed?

:33:28. > :33:30.As indicated at the start of the process, we would need to be

:33:31. > :33:33.involved in the discussion. At the end of the process, we would want to

:33:34. > :33:38.represent what the outcomes are in exactly the same way as the EU will

:33:39. > :33:43.represent those outcomes. We don't know what the UK Government will do.

:33:44. > :33:47.I think it fits pretty well. It is not a matter we can influence,

:33:48. > :33:51.frankly, so we will fit in with it and make sure we're doing it as

:33:52. > :33:55.constructively undemocratically as possible. I don't see any

:33:56. > :34:00.difficulty. There is a pressure in that, and you have to therefore

:34:01. > :34:03.respond to that pressure. There will be a pressure in showing if this

:34:04. > :34:07.committee were a committee that would regard itself as wanting to

:34:08. > :34:13.comment on it, it would have the structure itself in order to allow

:34:14. > :34:17.itself to do so. Would you anticipate regular updates and

:34:18. > :34:27.briefings to the committee and the chamber? . Yes. I am happy to go

:34:28. > :34:31.along with the structures, and we will supplement them with the

:34:32. > :34:35.publication of information. I am always happy to come to the chamber.

:34:36. > :34:41.We can do ministerial updates and statements, which we have done. I am

:34:42. > :34:49.keen to have more debates, if possible, because I know Jackson

:34:50. > :34:55.Carlaw is keen on those. Members can submit written and oral questions

:34:56. > :34:58.and ministers will respond. I was hoping we wouldn't stick to the

:34:59. > :35:04.strict ten o'clock deadline. There were a few areas I hoped to touch

:35:05. > :35:08.on. You mentioned a bit about the potential divorce Bill, what that

:35:09. > :35:11.might cost, and we heard about the House of Lords EU financial affairs

:35:12. > :35:14.committee report on that and their opinion that if we left with no

:35:15. > :35:20.deal, then that would mean that there might not be an obligation on

:35:21. > :35:26.the UK to pay anything towards the EU. Just to get your sense of that

:35:27. > :35:30.and what discussions have been held around that, if any. No discussions

:35:31. > :35:34.around that, in the sense that the issue of the bill has been

:35:35. > :35:39.studiously avoided by the UK Government, particularly in terms of

:35:40. > :35:44.the JMC discussion. To be fair, it is not the major issue we have been

:35:45. > :35:47.pressing so far. So far, it has been the Article 50 letter and

:35:48. > :35:53.negotiating process. Leaving without paying a bill is a bit like going

:35:54. > :35:57.out for dinner and not paying the bill. In the end, someone will catch

:35:58. > :36:01.up with you, and in the circumstances, it is unlikely, to

:36:02. > :36:05.say the least, that you would be able to move towards a construct of

:36:06. > :36:09.trade deal if you hadn't actually come to an agreement on the terms

:36:10. > :36:13.under which you would exit. What would be the incentive for the other

:36:14. > :36:17.countries to do so? There might be some small detriment to them, but

:36:18. > :36:22.they would have to make a point about the refusal to pay the bill.

:36:23. > :36:27.The results of a requirement. The European budget is set until

:36:28. > :36:32.2020-21, and there will be a gap that needs to be filled. Any

:36:33. > :36:39.reasonable negotiation would have to come up with a sum that was due. The

:36:40. > :36:43.difficulty in this is that some sums were being bandied about Burnley on,

:36:44. > :36:47.whereas the right thing to talk about was the methodology and how

:36:48. > :36:56.you come to a calculation of this. That is where the meeting between

:36:57. > :36:59.the Irish Prime Minister and the Dutch Government was significant. I

:37:00. > :37:05.think they have been struggling as a smaller group to see if they could

:37:06. > :37:11.suggest a methodology which would drive this, and it may well be that

:37:12. > :37:21.that is where the effort will go in, and it is in terms of finding

:37:22. > :37:25.methodology. If there is a build-up of resentment at a payment, that may

:37:26. > :37:30.create a huge political difficulty for the UK Government, whoever they

:37:31. > :37:37.are, to negotiate this. Some of the remarks from Ukip figures, and Ukip

:37:38. > :37:41.thinking is mainstream in the Conservative Party at the moment,

:37:42. > :37:45.that it's a bit like a golf club, where you say you will not pay your

:37:46. > :37:49.subscription. Actually, many golf clubs require you to pay a

:37:50. > :37:53.subscription even if you resign for a period, and many forfeit the

:37:54. > :38:00.deposit you've made if you walk out without due process. Even golf clubs

:38:01. > :38:04.have rules. That is the thing with it, because the figures do vary so

:38:05. > :38:07.wildly as to what that could be, so I think how that can be done will be

:38:08. > :38:13.one of the most important things. On another point, in terms of free

:38:14. > :38:18.movement and how the immigration setup might work, we were presented

:38:19. > :38:26.with a report a few weeks ago from Doctor Eve Hepburn about options for

:38:27. > :38:28.differentiating the UK's system. I wondered whether there had been

:38:29. > :38:33.discussions on that and what were the feelings of the UK Government in

:38:34. > :38:40.terms of that, and will that be a possibility for Scotland, going

:38:41. > :38:44.forward? The issue of differentiated migration was dealt with, and in my

:38:45. > :38:51.view, it was a positive compromise that we were offering. Such systems

:38:52. > :38:57.exist in Canada and Australia. I remember quoting David Davis at the

:38:58. > :39:01.previous committee on the nature of migration problems. It is not about

:39:02. > :39:06.borders. No one is proposing at this stage that this island should be in

:39:07. > :39:10.the Schengen area. The borders issue is about stopping people getting in.

:39:11. > :39:15.The migration issue being addressed is whether people have the right to

:39:16. > :39:20.stay. You can deal with that differentially by marketing people's

:39:21. > :39:23.passport or marking their papers that you only have the right to stay

:39:24. > :39:26.in Scotland, so it is not a difficult thing to do. However, we

:39:27. > :39:30.should not underestimate the fact that we're dealing with a Prime

:39:31. > :39:35.Minister who used be Home Secretary and has, frankly, an obsession with

:39:36. > :39:40.migration and is not prepared to countenance any weakening of that

:39:41. > :39:43.position, so this is a dead duck at the moment. It is the right thing to

:39:44. > :39:49.do, and it would have solved a problem for us and the rest of the

:39:50. > :39:56.UK, but a rational solution does not appear to be possible. The issue of

:39:57. > :40:01.EU citizens is tied up in this too, and that is increasingly a big issue

:40:02. > :40:07.and it is a considerable worry to me. As you probably know, I was in

:40:08. > :40:13.Angus on Monday, and I visited one of the big fruit companies, who had

:40:14. > :40:18.given evidence before to Parliament on some of these issues, and I had

:40:19. > :40:23.conversations with people from Bulgaria, Romania, and I was really

:40:24. > :40:30.concerned for them, because they are very distressed, and people are

:40:31. > :40:34.saying now what we thought would happen. Whatever the solution is to

:40:35. > :40:39.this, I am really fed up with this and I am doubtful whether I want to

:40:40. > :40:42.stay. Some people have bought flats, some are here permanently, but they

:40:43. > :40:46.are looking and saying, there are other places. One of the people I

:40:47. > :40:50.spoke to, who had worked there for a long time, quite senior, said, I

:40:51. > :40:54.have skills which are needed in Germany and elsewhere, and although

:40:55. > :40:58.I would like to beat you, I don't want to put up with this any longer.

:40:59. > :41:03.If I go back to Romania and I get on the plane, I don't know what will

:41:04. > :41:08.happen when I arrived in Scotland. I am nervous and fearful. The Romanian

:41:09. > :41:12.consul general was telling me there was a big increase in application

:41:13. > :41:17.for Romanian passports because people want something to prove who

:41:18. > :41:21.they are if they live here. So I am very worried about that. I was in

:41:22. > :41:27.Angus College, meeting staff and students, who are very concerned and

:41:28. > :41:32.are not getting answers. They had 11 months of this. We will see people

:41:33. > :41:35.who are enormously positive contributors to Scotland and who are

:41:36. > :41:39.passionate about Scotland deciding, in the end, that it's not the place

:41:40. > :41:43.they want to be, and that will be damaging to our reputation across

:41:44. > :41:48.Europe and the world. So, this is a really concerning area.

:41:49. > :41:59.I met with a rural business who had closed part of business, because it

:42:00. > :42:04.was relying on EU migrant labour. There are some businesses that

:42:05. > :42:08.cannot do without. If you look at Angus Soft Fruits, there is a

:42:09. > :42:13.thousand workers from other parts of EU and it is not possible for that

:42:14. > :42:18.to happen. The solution might be to move the business and the complexity

:42:19. > :42:26.of it is something I think we are only just getting to grips with.

:42:27. > :42:33.Many people who work in the soft fruits may work in the fish plants

:42:34. > :42:37.in the autumn and winter and some industries are dependent upon this

:42:38. > :42:41.labour and there is an affect in the businesses and those running the

:42:42. > :42:48.businesses. Somebody said to me, I'm worried for the people who work for

:42:49. > :42:54.me, but I'm worried for myself too, I may not have a job. Because I

:42:55. > :42:58.can't keep the business going. I guess the supplementary question was

:42:59. > :43:04.when we were presented with that report from Dr Hepburn, a lot of the

:43:05. > :43:08.other countries agreements they have which he already highlighted, we had

:43:09. > :43:17.them in detail in that report and a lot of the arrangements were

:43:18. > :43:24.dependent on political will. I was going to ask if you believed the

:43:25. > :43:29.will was there. It is also dependent on information. A lot of could have

:43:30. > :43:38.been dealt with a flow of information and policy commitments.

:43:39. > :43:42.Nobody knows what the policy of any prospective UK Government is about

:43:43. > :43:46.this. So it is the lack of information. Where do people get the

:43:47. > :43:52.information they need. They don't have it. Sorry. Thank you. Another

:43:53. > :43:58.point I would like to touch on as well, is in terms of funding, we

:43:59. > :44:02.hear about horizon 2020 and cutting payments and it is in terms of

:44:03. > :44:08.relation to some of the other funds that I would say local Government in

:44:09. > :44:16.particular depend on and communities as well. There is the interregular

:44:17. > :44:24.funding, the transnational fund and the leader that is vital for rural

:44:25. > :44:29.areas for in Angus it is worth 2.7 million and they provide vital

:44:30. > :44:36.projects in communities. It was just, I I know a lot is still

:44:37. > :44:42.unknown. But in terms of those funds in particular, are there any

:44:43. > :44:50.discussions on what the transitional a arrangements maybe. No, not with

:44:51. > :44:54.us and that is concerning. You know how vital these are and these

:44:55. > :44:58.connections, these access to this money and the connections it

:44:59. > :45:04.produces are vital. In my area in the west of Scotland access to DP

:45:05. > :45:09.money and agricultural support, infrastructure funding, all those

:45:10. > :45:12.things are really important. Now, you know Richard lochead will

:45:13. > :45:17.remember when we moved from one programme to another, there was a

:45:18. > :45:21.hiatus with the best will in the world, even if you know what the

:45:22. > :45:27.programme is, there is bit in the mid that will doesn't fit perfectly.

:45:28. > :45:34.We are in a situation where we know where the programme will finish. But

:45:35. > :45:41.we have no idea what comes in. Nor do we know the quantum that is

:45:42. > :45:46.talked about. Will there be a sum of money available across the UK to be

:45:47. > :45:52.allocated for these purposes? Will the purposes be priority purposes or

:45:53. > :45:56.will that money be allocated to the Scottish government by Barnett or in

:45:57. > :46:01.some other way. No knowledge. Because of that, there will be a

:46:02. > :46:08.hiatus of some sort. I mean, how big it is, what it look like we don't

:46:09. > :46:12.know. One example is in my constituency the island of Ling has

:46:13. > :46:20.been talked about a bridge for many years. But they have moved on to the

:46:21. > :46:23.extent they're wonding how it can be funded. Until now a European

:46:24. > :46:28.contribution would be needed. I don't know whether there will be a

:46:29. > :46:33.contribution of equivalent monies. Until you know that, nobody can plan

:46:34. > :46:37.for it to happen. There is a hiatus. Now, that is a flow of information.

:46:38. > :46:42.But it is also we also require to know what the objectives would be

:46:43. > :46:51.from the UK Government. If the UK Government said to us, look, in the

:46:52. > :46:55.last five years, X amount has been allocated to Scotland and we will

:46:56. > :47:00.guarantee X amount plus inflation will be guaranteed for the same

:47:01. > :47:04.purposes, you go ahead and set up those funds. That would be good. We

:47:05. > :47:10.would say, let's go ahead and we don't want to leave Europe, but yes

:47:11. > :47:13.we will set the things up. But we have no idea when that is going to

:47:14. > :47:21.happen or if that is going to happen. We can't say. We are saying

:47:22. > :47:28.to people, I had a conversation and said we were talking about the

:47:29. > :47:33.allocation of funds, I said, work out the ideas and come back to me.

:47:34. > :47:37.And let's see if we can develop some plan in the anticipation that we

:47:38. > :47:41.will need new structures. But what those are, you know, we don't know

:47:42. > :47:50.and the clock is ticking on them and it is concerning. Thank you. Sorry

:47:51. > :47:57.just one final point in terms of of trade and security. You touched on

:47:58. > :48:03.that answer earlier. One of the briefings we had if no agreement is

:48:04. > :48:07.used and using World Trade Organisation rules as a fall back

:48:08. > :48:11.plan, before we could begin training on World Trade Organisation rules

:48:12. > :48:15.the UK would need to establish its new status in that organisation and

:48:16. > :48:22.that requires agreement from all members. Is that something that can

:48:23. > :48:28.happen parallel to the discussions over the next couple of years or

:48:29. > :48:34.wait until we are out of the EU. I'm not a trade expert. I understand it

:48:35. > :48:39.the difficulty would not becoming a member of the WTO. We are a member

:48:40. > :48:43.any way. The difficulty would be the application of the interim tariffs

:48:44. > :48:49.before you negotiated that would take the standard tariffs as set.

:48:50. > :48:53.Some would be fine, some would be disastrous. There are huge

:48:54. > :48:56.agricultural tariffs. I don't think that is an option. Clearly the UK

:48:57. > :49:01.Government this it might be an option. But I think the difficulty

:49:02. > :49:06.would be great. The process of trade, I have had conversations with

:49:07. > :49:11.bodies like the chamber of shipping and people like that, one of their

:49:12. > :49:16.concerns is you know the continuation of tariff-free access

:49:17. > :49:20.to Europe with the minimum regulation means that you can flow

:49:21. > :49:27.as you are now. The moment that flow is interrupted, it has consequences.

:49:28. > :49:32.One is for Scottish shell fish, which are delivered promptly and if

:49:33. > :49:37.they're not delivered promptly they don't get delivered. Another is

:49:38. > :49:41.capacity. No port, no channel port has huge capacity to stack up

:49:42. > :49:48.lorries that can be inspected. That is why you get queues on motorways

:49:49. > :49:51.if you have a dispute. Now, that would become commonplace, you would

:49:52. > :49:58.haven't the capacity to deal with it. So those issues need resolved. I

:49:59. > :50:03.can't imagine on 30th March 2019 that barrier will come down. But we

:50:04. > :50:08.need to know what the policy intention is of the UK and have some

:50:09. > :50:13.confidence they can achieve it. That might bring us back to the approach

:50:14. > :50:19.of the Prime Minister, confident to achieve an intention is not enhanced

:50:20. > :50:22.if you're standing in Downing Street denouncing the people you're about

:50:23. > :50:30.to negotiate with. That makes it harder. You had a question? I have

:50:31. > :50:40.two questions. Firstly turning to the Secretary of State's letter, to

:50:41. > :50:44.you, on 29th March. He says, that Scotland's assertion to EFTA and the

:50:45. > :50:48.EE A would not be deliverable. To ask you are you aware of how he has

:50:49. > :50:54.come to that conclusion and who he has spoken to. And what is your

:50:55. > :51:01.response to it. No, I'm not aware of who he has spoken to. He does not

:51:02. > :51:10.speak on their behalf. Our paper makes it clear that would be a new

:51:11. > :51:15.departure for EFTA and the negotiation is worth attempting. We

:51:16. > :51:20.are clear on Scotland's place in Europe, the right way to proceed was

:51:21. > :51:24.to place a requirement for a solution into the Article 50 letter,

:51:25. > :51:31.which was, which would be the first step. Then to assist us in the

:51:32. > :51:34.discussions we would have using their good offices, one of the

:51:35. > :51:40.solutions would be to make use of their membership. In a way, not

:51:41. > :51:46.dissimilar to what the Greenland option that was described as, to

:51:47. > :51:51.piggyback on their membership. We had figures involved and knowledge

:51:52. > :51:57.which said the discussion should take place. But it has not taken

:51:58. > :52:05.place because this was submitted, we published this on 20th December.

:52:06. > :52:10.That letter is dated 29th March. I made a presentation based on this at

:52:11. > :52:17.the January JMC and officials went away and discussed various parts of

:52:18. > :52:28.it. We were unaware and then that process was "intensified" after the

:52:29. > :52:33.GMC meeting. I'm not aware of any barrier to this that arose. That ims

:52:34. > :52:37.not to say we came to agreement. But there was no deal-breaker was dealt

:52:38. > :52:41.with during the discussions. And then I get the letter which says,

:52:42. > :52:47.no, can't be done. I don't believe that. Well whoever deems the

:52:48. > :52:52.Scottish Parliament report enough to appear before perhaps we will ask

:52:53. > :52:59.him those questions ourselves. We are struggling to get him to appear

:53:00. > :53:05.before this committee. I want to ask about the UK's Government response

:53:06. > :53:10.to the idea of Scotland having a bespoke with Europe, which is no, we

:53:11. > :53:15.need a UK internal market that is something that appears to have come

:53:16. > :53:20.on to the agenda, the idea of a UK internal market. I wonder what you

:53:21. > :53:27.thought the agenda was for the UK Government and how that could be

:53:28. > :53:35.compatible, notwithstanding it may be necessary, how it is compatible

:53:36. > :53:40.with devolution and given how things decided here could be usurped or

:53:41. > :53:44.have to be compatible with a UK market. The phrase they have used is

:53:45. > :53:49.a UK single market. I have been sceptical of that phrase. Before I

:53:50. > :53:55.come to just say what I think the motivation is, I might draw the

:53:56. > :54:01.committee's attention to a paper in the judicial review, a paper by

:54:02. > :54:07.called Brexit as a constitutional shock. And there is, it is an

:54:08. > :54:12.interesting paper, because what it deals with is the question of how

:54:13. > :54:17.the devolution settlement is under threat and what that thet is and it

:54:18. > :54:21.is an interesting study of the problems and how they might be

:54:22. > :54:26.addressed. But I do think this concept of the UK single market has

:54:27. > :54:31.been overinflated by the Prime Minister for purposes of her own

:54:32. > :54:38.really. First, it runs contrary to what devolution is about. Devolution

:54:39. > :54:42.is about subsidiarity and the appropriate places for power to be

:54:43. > :54:46.exercised and sharing the arrangements as we are required to

:54:47. > :54:48.do. So that is how we operate now. There is a differentiated

:54:49. > :54:55.constitution and there has been since the act of union in 1707. So

:54:56. > :54:59.different yapted powers -- difference yapted powers that are

:55:00. > :55:04.exercised joint lip as required. It is a bit of a threat to two things.

:55:05. > :55:10.One is the sovereignty view of the UK Parliament that is held by Brexit

:55:11. > :55:15.ears that the UK Parliament is sovereign and must not be dictated

:55:16. > :55:25.by any other body, so you can't share power in Europe and can'ts

:55:26. > :55:30.accept the ECG and that is why devolution is not popular with them.

:55:31. > :55:37.There is another issue. If you look at the issue of agriculture it is

:55:38. > :55:43.strong. One of the ways the UK Government could be able to set up

:55:44. > :55:47.new trade deals elsewhere would be to trade away access to our food

:55:48. > :55:52.markets. They couldn't do that if those things were still controlled

:55:53. > :55:56.by devolved Parliaments, because te volcano ved Parliaments -- devolved

:55:57. > :56:01.Parliaments would say no. I have used the Welsh use the example of

:56:02. > :56:06.New Zealand land. They would not want to be in a position of not

:56:07. > :56:13.being able to secure those advantages in trade deals. So they

:56:14. > :56:21.have to control those things. Now, they're also, you know I've seen it,

:56:22. > :56:30.they're concern about what happened over the SITA treaty and for a short

:56:31. > :56:34.period it looked as if that might be scuppered by a devolved Assembly. If

:56:35. > :56:40.they have got trade deals to do and things to trade off, like fishing,

:56:41. > :56:48.which will be traded off, mark anybody's word that is what they

:56:49. > :56:54.intend, they can only do if feck if they can control the assets. So a

:56:55. > :56:57.major part is doing deal that are presently the responsibility of the

:56:58. > :56:59.Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly and the Northern Ireland

:57:00. > :57:10.Parliament. This is threatening for devolution,

:57:11. > :57:13.to the health of our agricultural industries, and to rule rule

:57:14. > :57:18.Scotland. This is not being inimical to devolution. It is about that, but

:57:19. > :57:22.it is also about having the power to trade away things that we would not

:57:23. > :57:32.trade away, and should not trade away, given that the interest of our

:57:33. > :57:39.farmers and fishermen are concerned. Going back to your answer to marry

:57:40. > :57:45.Evans on structural funding -- to marry Evans. One of the challenges

:57:46. > :57:52.after Brexit is, what is the relationship between schemes that

:57:53. > :57:55.have an application across the whole UK and particular interest here in

:57:56. > :58:01.Scotland? For example, structural funds at the moment are considered

:58:02. > :58:05.Europe-wide. The dynamics of the Highlands and Islands at one time

:58:06. > :58:11.had a different status from what the ad now, reflecting changes in social

:58:12. > :58:17.development. Is the Scottish element's preferred proposal to have

:58:18. > :58:21.a UK wide dynamic scheme where we might be net beneficiaries or

:58:22. > :58:26.contributors, depending on our stage of development relative to the rest

:58:27. > :58:33.of the UK? Or is it to freeze the situation as it is in 2020 and make

:58:34. > :58:37.that the permanent financial relationship between the UK and

:58:38. > :58:46.Scotland? Know, our ambition is to be an independent country that is

:58:47. > :58:49.taking part in the EU. So, your second preference... It is not the

:58:50. > :58:57.second preference, but in terms of how we would operate within the

:58:58. > :59:04.current situation and in Brexit, my principle is no detriment. Scotland,

:59:05. > :59:09.and particularly the Highlands and Islands, and my constituency has

:59:10. > :59:13.benefited disproportionately from European investment. That is right

:59:14. > :59:16.and proper that the Highlands should do so, because they have required

:59:17. > :59:21.special treatment, and in those circumstances, we want to make sure

:59:22. > :59:23.there is no detriment. The same principle of assisting areas to

:59:24. > :59:29.develop and assisting communities should apply, and also the priority.

:59:30. > :59:35.For example, in agricultural terms, one of the key issues of support is

:59:36. > :59:41.keeping people on the land. The crofting system has developed as a

:59:42. > :59:46.uniquely successful one of showing that -- ensuring that immunities are

:59:47. > :59:51.not decimated and the land is still in use, and that is a useful system

:59:52. > :59:54.to have. If you have a UK wide agricultural policy with virtually

:59:55. > :00:01.no variation, that would be the principal. Quite rightly, the

:00:02. > :00:05.principle will be about agricultural production in areas such as the East

:00:06. > :00:09.of England or Scotland, and other areas will lose out. So, no

:00:10. > :00:15.detriment, a policy that suits Scotland. I hear all the time from

:00:16. > :00:22.people in crofting and agriculture in my constituency that, above

:00:23. > :00:27.everything else, retention of a less favoured area system is crucial,

:00:28. > :00:31.because without it, they will not be able to operate, given that they

:00:32. > :00:35.live in less favoured areas, so we pay attention to the need, to what

:00:36. > :00:40.the stakeholders are saying, to the principle of no detriment, and I

:00:41. > :00:43.suppose I am saying it is a matrix of issues, based upon making sure

:00:44. > :00:50.the interests of the people who elected us are followed and that we

:00:51. > :00:53.are true to those. Does that mean that you take a snapshot at the

:00:54. > :00:59.point of Brexit and then keep it there? No, it doesn't have to be the

:01:00. > :01:04.existing system, clearly. If they work well, they should be retained.

:01:05. > :01:09.If they don't, they can be changed. I just want to say this, probably as

:01:10. > :01:14.my last answer, the preference is to continue, or to find a way to be a

:01:15. > :01:16.member of the EU, and taking part in the schemes which have been very

:01:17. > :01:24.positive for Scotland. I was at the positive for Scotland. I was at the

:01:25. > :01:29.Europe Day celebrations in Edinburgh on Tuesday, and they were vibrant

:01:30. > :01:35.and interesting and vital, but the people who were there, and were

:01:36. > :01:40.representatives of all 27 countries, were saying, what we want is to

:01:41. > :01:46.celebrate something which has produced peace and prosperity on our

:01:47. > :01:49.continent for all of our lives, and that's vitally important to us, and

:01:50. > :01:54.we shouldn't forget that. It's about peace and prosperity. Do you have

:01:55. > :02:04.time for one more supplementary from Ross Greer? In relation to the

:02:05. > :02:09.answer he gave to Ms Evans, you mentioned the time you spent in the

:02:10. > :02:14.rest of Europe meeting with other parliamentarians and goverments.

:02:15. > :02:21.There are two different perceptions about the relative strength of the

:02:22. > :02:26.UK's negotiating position. We recently met with a delegation from

:02:27. > :02:30.another European Parliament who were perplexed by what they had heard

:02:31. > :02:33.when they were at the House of Commons, the belief about the

:02:34. > :02:37.strength in the UK position on the basis of caste that we sell to

:02:38. > :02:41.Germany, for example. What have you picked up from the rest of Europe?

:02:42. > :02:47.What did they believe the strength of the UK position to be in

:02:48. > :02:51.comparison to the perception they have of the UK Government's self

:02:52. > :02:56.belief. But like everyone wants to resolve this in as positive as

:02:57. > :03:04.possible. I don't think there is any doubt about that. The language of

:03:05. > :03:06.the Article 50 letter from the Prime Minister implies that in some way

:03:07. > :03:12.there is another arrangement that is just as good, and that that will

:03:13. > :03:17.become too because they are owed this. That is not the view. The view

:03:18. > :03:20.is, this is a mistake, a profound mistake and it shouldn't be

:03:21. > :03:24.happening. But if it is happening, then let's get it done as well, as

:03:25. > :03:29.neatly and as carefully as possible, but it won't be the same. And the

:03:30. > :03:33.advantages of membership are not available to nonmembers. That is

:03:34. > :03:38.simply axiomatic. And the language being used is either that language

:03:39. > :03:41.of saying, we'll have a strong, constructive relationship and there

:03:42. > :03:50.will be some wonderful pot of gold that comes to us outside the EU,

:03:51. > :03:53.which is nonsense. And then there is the view that we know best and we

:03:54. > :04:00.know what we're doing. It is all a bit confusing, and sometimes I have

:04:01. > :04:05.heard it said, once by a very distinguished former European figure

:04:06. > :04:09.some weeks ago, in the end, they go. That's it. And it's a mistake and it

:04:10. > :04:14.shouldn't have happened, but it has happened, now let's move on. Thank

:04:15. > :04:18.you very much. You have been very generous with your time. Thank you

:04:19. > :04:22.for coming to give evidence to us today. We will now have a brief

:04:23. > :04:25.suspension and go into private session.