Tartan
The next item of business is a debate on the promotion of tartan and Scotland's tartan industry.
I welcome the opportunity that today's debate gives us to look at one of Scotland's most iconic and readily recognisable images—tartan. The subject evokes a wide variety of differing and complex views. It can be argued either that tartan is an essential and integral part of Scottish identity and our history or that it is a product and image popularised by a sentimental and largely outdated vision of Scotland. Some see the association with tartan as a valuable link with diaspora Scots across the world or as a romantic distraction from a modern Scotland—a reminder of our bloody past and military traditions.
It can be argued either that the image of tartan belongs to Scotland's past or that tartan continues to play an important role in Scotland's economy and cultural identity. For what it is worth, my view tends towards the latter.
We can be certain of two things. One is that everyone has a view on tartan, and the other is that tartan is one of a select handful of images, products and events that are immediately and consistently recognised across the globe as quintessentially Scottish. That gives us and our tartan industry, if I can call it that, an important opportunity to secure niche markets and maximise the potential of the brand.
The traditional and cultural values that are associated with tartan give it great potential in world markets. It appeals to particular overseas tourism markets in, for example, the United States, Canada and Australia. Capitalising on and developing interest in tartan can support the marketing of Scotland more generally, particularly in the strong niche market of ancestral tourism, but also through more recent promotional developments, such as tartan week in the United States, in which a number of members have participated.
Tartan as a trademark of Scotland is recognised everywhere. I am keen that we work to strengthen that brand and exercise some control here in Scotland as the guardians of the authentic article. That can only be of benefit to Scottish businesses. By promoting tartan and Scotland's tartan industry, we are standing up for Scottish businesses and working to promote and grow our textiles sector. For example, we aim to grow our textiles industry by using tartan in innovative ways, such as in the design industry as a key component of a modern, successful textiles sector.
If we accept the obvious potential benefits of tartan, we can start to think of ways to maximise the economic, marketing and promotional opportunities of tartan and the tartan industry in a modern, dynamic, competitive and outward-looking Scotland. The two are not mutually—
How does the minister intend to build consensus around the objective that he just outlined—which I support fully—to ensure that some practical action comes out of his helpful remarks?
I will explain the initial steps by which we will seek to secure the consensus that John Swinney and I, and probably the whole chamber, wish to see. I tend to the view that if we in this Parliament do not stand up for and associate ourselves with the tartan brand, no one else is likely to do it as effectively. The most effective way of promoting tartan is to build the consensus that the member seeks. I will speak about that later.
In that context, I make particular mention of Jamie McGrigor's work and his member's bill, which proposes a national register of tartan. I know that Mr McGrigor has for several years engaged with key figures in the tartan industry to discuss a possible definitive, publicly run and maintained register of tartans. I know that those discussions have been lengthy and challenging. I am grateful to Jamie McGrigor for brokering a consensus on the need for a definitive register. If there is not a unanimous industry view on how best to achieve that—which was John Swinney's point—it is our objective to secure it.
Like Jamie McGrigor, I support fully the concept of working to promote and support the tartan industry in Scotland. In our response to his bill, the Scottish ministers recognised that the principle underlying the bill—of having a definitive, independent, authoritative and accessible register of tartans in Scotland—could have a beneficial economic effect, become a focus for and raise the profile of Scottish-based businesses with an interest in tartan, and help to promote Scotland more generally.
The existing registers are incomplete and are, in fact, dominated by sectoral interests, such as the weavers and the genealogy tourism sector. Members can correct me if I am wrong, but the proposal for a national register has pretty well united those previously disparate interests on the need for a register, if not on the detail of the form it should take.
At the moment, the design and production of tartan are wholly unregulated. While that situation would continue, introducing a national register in Scotland could boost interest in the Scottish tartan industry and bolster perceptions of authenticity and quality assurance with regard to Scottish-registered, designed and produced tartans. Indeed, the register could become a marketing tool to give Scottish businesses a distinct competitive edge over their competitors.
As a result, I propose to ask Scottish Enterprise's textiles team to assess the relative importance of the tartan industry in Scotland and to consider whether introducing a register will immediately benefit Scotland's tartan industry and help to promote the image of Scotland more generally.
I might have misheard the minister, but I believe that he said that the situation with tartan is wholly unregulated. However, the Scottish Tartans Authority has put a considerable amount of resources into establishing authenticity, and its work should be recognised. Indeed, does that not assure customers that there is a degree of industry regulation?
The member is correct. It has been suggested that there is little time for this debate, but it seems to have stimulated the kind of discussion that I hoped it would. By national register, I mean that, as John Swinney said, we should use the various existing registers to compile one authentic national register of the textile in Scotland.
The outcomes of the work that we propose to undertake will inform a more balanced and informed consideration of whether the main principles of Mr McGrigor's bill would be best taken forward by working with existing public and private sector bodies, by exploring non-legislative options that may be open to us or by taking a legislative approach. I am grateful to Mr McGrigor for bringing his proposals this far. It is clear that the Scottish ministers are willing to listen to and take on good ideas from whatever source and irrespective of whether we share the member's political perspective.
Further consideration of the proposal for a Scottish register of tartan is merited, and I propose to take that work forward by carrying out an economic impact assessment of the importance of the tartan industry in Scotland and by considering the potential economic and promotional advantages of introducing a national register. Moreover, I suggest that the Scottish textiles team and my officials engage with key players in the tartan industry on possible legislative and non-legislative options and on the way forward for a national register of tartan in Scotland.
I give the warmest possible welcome to the minister's words and, indeed, welcome this opportunity to reinforce tartan's iconic importance.
Scotland, of course, wants to be seen as a modern advanced country with a modern image. However, when Professor Michael Porter, the world expert on competitiveness, came here in 2000, he implored us not to throw the baby out with the bath water. To visitors to our country, the likes of tartan are synonymous with Scotland and they expect to see it when they come here in profusion. As a result, I welcome the minister's view that we should take ownership of the tartan brand and its inheritance. I look forward to hearing what his textiles team has to say on the subject, and feel that his promise to bring the various elements together holds out great hope.
After all, tartan is even now earning its keep and rewarding our nation. According to Professor Porter, we are one of the 15 or 16 countries on the planet that truly has a vivid national brand. Furthermore, Scotland means something to 98 per cent of the world's population. As Professor Porter has made clear, that appreciation of who we are and the values that we hold is a function not so much of our stem cell research and financial services sector as of golf, whisky and tartan. That is simply a fact of life, and we should play to those strengths.
With reference to the learned professor's claim that 98 per cent of the world's population has some idea of what Scotland means, do we have any notion of how the survey was carried out? I ask him to name two people in China who can tell us.
Professor Michael Porter's reputation suggests that a somewhat more systematic approach would have been taken. Certainly, his work has passed muster—I believe that Scotland the Brand paid a substantial fee for it—and goes well beyond two people from China.
What is interesting about tartan is the way in which it helps us to gain traction in terms of others' awareness of Scotland. Over the past 10 years, 50 per cent more Americans have designated themselves as Scots-Americans. Although that is doubtless a function of the Scottish Parliament and Braveheart, it is also a function of the tartan day phenomenon. Our cousins in America are developing rituals such as the kirkin' o' the tartan, through which tartan and plaid are being placed at the heart of their personae as Scots-Americans.
Last week, we gained further insight into that at Tom Hunter's excellent event entitled "The Second Enlightenment" at Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum. He brought along Simon Anholt, a young man who is the world's leading authority on national brands and whose advice contained some important messages about our stewardship of tartan in the long term. Simon Anholt talked about national image being psychologically and economically important to any country. He said that, as with tartan, a country's national image has to be managed and maintained, and that Scotland could not simply freewheel on its reputation, products and tartans that were delivered by previous generations. He went on to say that the way to maintain and develop our international reputations and brands is to gain a clear idea of our values and identity and of the values that we want to project, for example through modern tartan. It is clear that the iconic appeal of tartan lends itself to that.
Simon Anholt also made the important point that the only way in which to build that future identity and reputation is to have a pipeline of new and exciting projects and innovations that are totally consistent with what has gone on in the past. We know that our textile industries and designers are up for that. He was adamant in saying that neither new and boring nor old and interesting would do. He was equally adamant in saying that what was required was new and interesting, although that did not mean throwing out the baby with the bath water—we have to continue what we have got.
The minister's proposition will get support, along with any other sensible efforts to bolster tartan and promote the image, values and attributes of Scotland. It is clear that tartan is an identifiable icon that embodies the values of the nation. My wish is that it continues to be so over the long term.
Recently, I have been reading a book with the somewhat off-putting title "Great Boss Dead Boss"—
Alex Salmond. [Laughter.]
If we are going to talk about the living dead, it might be Prime Minister's question time that features, Mr Stone.
The book is all about the efficacy of tribes and the necessity for them, as successful and cohesive entities, to have iconic images, perhaps even down to apparel. Mr Gibson and I apologise for not wearing the kilt today. We will remedy that after 3 May.
I congratulate Allan Wilson, the Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning, on securing the debate.
I listened carefully to what the minister said. Despite my delight that ministers have taken such an interest in my Scottish Register of Tartans Bill of late, I want some assurances that they will take forward the general principles of the bill, with which they say they agree, before I withdraw it. My bill is important: a national register of tartan would establish a publicly owned and managed register that would enable current and historical records to be recorded and preserved.
Three years ago, I was approached by a steering group that had been meeting for two years with the request to facilitate the introduction of a bill. The steering group consisted of representatives of each of the existing registers, the Lord Lyon and others from the world of tartan. By the time I joined their discussions, they had sought, but not found, a non-legislative solution. I introduced the bill because of the underlying and overarching desire to secure the status of an independent and authoritative register for Scotland. At the time, there were also considerable rumours that, if Scotland did not produce such a register, another country—for example, Canada—might steal the lead.
Tartan's roots are in Scotland, but its branches spread worldwide. Scotland is the Mecca for tartan, and it would be stupid for our country to lose that valuable status. Other countries would give their eye teeth for such a recognisable symbol of identity. Anyone who sees tartan anywhere in the world thinks about Scotland—and bagpipers, pipe bands, the historic Scottish regiments, the rugby supporters, the tartan army of football supporters, the Edinburgh tattoo, the kilt shops, tartan day in New York and numerous Highland games worldwide. Tartan inspires pride in Scotland's past and present.
Tartan has been around for a long time and does not belong to a private section of the population. It does not belong to the weavers or to another section of the industry; it belongs to Scotland. That is why it is important to have a Scottish register of tartans. It is vital that such a register should be independent and publicly managed. That was the conclusion of the steering group with which I was involved, which is why the legislative route was required. A public register would not just secure important information for our nation but make that information accessible to the Scottish diaspora. The 30 million or so members of the diaspora will be pleased that the new Scottish Parliament is elevating such a beloved national icon.
The proposal for a national register received strong support from many sources. Dr Andrew Cubie wrote in his submission on the Scottish Register of Tartans Bill to the Enterprise and Culture Committee:
"I believe that an official register of tartan would greatly benefit not only the limited number of commercial weavers who call themselves the ‘tartan industry', but also the entire Scottish tourist industry and tourist related activities, including genealogy."
VisitScotland said that tartan is Scotland's trademark and went on to say:
"tartan conjures immediate associations with the scenery, our culture and heritage".
Tartan adds value to the tourism industry.
Shortly after I introduced the bill, I went to the excellent, revamped Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum. Attached to the interesting tartan display in the museum are the words:
"When you see tartan, you immediately think of Scotland. It's a powerful symbol for the Scots—so powerful that Government"—
a Whig Government—
"once banned people from wearing tartan. Tartan is now a huge success story. It graces the catwalks of London and Paris, finding its way into the hearts (and the carrier bags) of most visitors to Scotland."
That nicely states in a nutshell the importance of tartan.
I am grateful to Allan Wilson for his kind remarks and I will search his opening and winding-up speeches for an assurance that both parties in the Executive will take action to create a national tartan register if they are returned to Government. His remarks so far have been encouraging. I will help in any way that I can, as I am sure will the people whom he intends to consult, who submitted evidence on the proposal at an early stage. I am grateful for their work and encouragement. I also thank David Cullum, Rodger Evans and Alison Wilson from the non-Executive bills unit for their invaluable guidance and assistance, and I thank my assistant, Joanna Mowat.
If the Executive were to take forward the general principles of my bill, it would be churlish of me to demand more parliamentary time from an already overburdened schedule. Therefore, I will consider withdrawing my bill, but I reserve the right to bring it back if I am re-elected and the Executive does not fulfil its promise.
I congratulate Jamie McGrigor on introducing the Scottish Register of Tartans Bill. I also congratulate members on their speeches, including Jim Mather. I agree entirely with what has been said.
I will consider three important historical events, with which many members will be familiar. The first is the crucial decision in 1745 by Charles Edward Stuart—Bonnie Prince Charlie—to give the order that his soldiers be dressed in tartan, particularly for the battle of Culloden. Whether the tartan followed any clan identity is very much open to debate; soldiers recognised friend and foe from what they wore in their bonnets. However, the order was a big event, because it put tartan on the map in the context of the national consciousness. It could be argued that until that event tartan was solely the property of the Highlands and was worn just by warring tribesmen and sheep and cattle stealers.
As we know, in 1746 and 1747 tartan was proscribed. Jamie McGrigor referred to that and, in all fairness to him, I should say that I cannot remember whether a Tory or a Whig Administration was responsible.
I wonder whether the member would like to take this opportunity to apologise on behalf of the Whig Government of the time for the act of proscription 1747.
That is tempting.
Tartan was proscribed north of the Highland line. If a person wore a greatcoat or jacket of tartan, they were subject either to six months' imprisonment or to exile or banishment to foreign shores for seven years. That was a draconian rule, to say the least.
The legislation was repealed about 30 years later, by which time tartan had become slightly more fashionable. It had never quite lost its identity, because the Highland regiments wore it, particularly the Government tartan, which was worn by the independent companies of the Black Watch. That tartan was developed into other military tartans by the addition of a coloured line into the set. It is worth remembering that the acts of 1746 and 1747 did not ban the gentry from wearing tartan. In the latter part of the 18th century, the Highland Society of London and the Northern Meeting Society were formed, and sought to encourage the innocent recreation and amusement of the gentry and nobility, who still wore tartan.
As we all know, the second crucial event in the history of tartan was Sir Walter Scott's friendship with King William IV. He had known him as Prince Regent and dined with him after he wrote the Waverley novels.
It was George IV.
That is absolutely correct. I stand corrected—I meant George IV.
Sir Walter Scott persuaded George IV to come north to Edinburgh in 1822. It is well known that the monarch wore pink tights under his kilt and was a generally splendid sight. However, when Wilkie painted his portrait, the tights were not put in.
For the visit, there was a lot of jockeying for position among the Highland lads, particularly MacDonell of Glengarry. Like peacocks, they were determined to show their ascendancy and they argued about what the etiquette would be when the monarch came to Edinburgh. That is why Walter Scott wrote instructions, in an anonymous pamphlet, on how they were to conduct themselves. He wrote that there was to be a grand highland ball, for which the rule was that people had to wear either military dress or highland dress. There was mad scrabbling among lowland lads to trace any whiff whatever of highland ancestry and the Edinburgh tailors did a fast business in kilts. That was another event that brought tartan and kilts into the national consciousness.
As a slight aside, although this is nothing to do with tartan, it is worth noting that the man who won the catering contract for George IV's visit was one Ebenezer Lennox Scroggie, whose grave in the Canongate kirkyard states that he was a "meal man", because he was a corn dealer and vintner. When Charles Dickens came to Edinburgh later in the 19th century, he went to the kirkyard and misread the gravestone as saying "mean man", so Ebenezer Lennox Scroggie was the origin of Ebenezer Scrooge, which is not commonly known, although I am sure that Jamie McGrigor knew that.
The third and final crucial event on which I want to touch was the involvement of Prince Albert and Queen Victoria in all things tartan.
I know that I have digressed, Presiding Officer, but through those three interesting historical events, the idea of tartan as part of Scotland's identity was brought to the fore and it has remained with us ever since. There is a lot of sense in what Jamie McGrigor says, so I welcome the minister's statement. Tartan is synonymous with the Highlands and Scotland—it is wrapped up in our country, which we love so well. We should take a long, hard and encouraging look at Jamie McGrigor's bill.
We come to the open debate. If we do not have too many digressions, every member who wants to speak will be able to do so.
I am pleased to speak in the debate. I inform members of my interest in Scotland's tartan industry: my wife's family has been involved in kilt making for six generations. Kinloch Anderson, the family business, has been supportive of Jamie McGrigor's Scottish Register of Tartan Bill and of efforts generally to establish a national register of tartans. Although neither I nor my wife, Claire, has a direct connection with the business and certainly no commercial or financial links with it whatever, I have a strong personal link with family members who have spent their lifetimes in the industry, as did those in several preceding generations.
Undoubtedly, that perspective and insight have informed my thinking on tartan in Scotland. I am well aware that the reaction of many in Scotland to tartan is to cringe rather than celebrate, but the Harry Lauder, Nessie-in-a-kilt tartan souvenir industry is only one part of the business. Tartan does not have to be stuck in the past, and it certainly does not have to be downmarket, cheap or nasty. Whether through Jamie McGrigor's bill or through action from the Executive, we can secure the status and the future of tartan.
The decline of Scotland's textiles industry over the past two or three decades has been alarming. I suspect that that sobering economic reality has brought opposing sides of the tartan industry together, to a point at which they can now agree a position. The industry has reached an agreement on the promotion of a national register. Existing registers are in private hands, but the new register will not be commercially or privately controlled. Any private register is vulnerable to being used to further the interests of one group or another. The new register will be simple, public and non-compulsory.
Viewing the register from the perspective of the Scottish Parliament, I feel that it will offer at least limited protection to one of our country's cultural assets. We protect our natural heritage, we protect our built heritage and we are proud of our Highland history, so why do we not protect tartan?
Does the member agree that, unless protection is built into the Scottish Register of Tartans Bill such that the only tartan that matters is that produced in Scotland, tartan will go into cyberspace and then out to China and the sweatshops of the far east, where it will be produced in great quantities to the register's specifications? Tartan must be Scottish.
I admire John Swinburne's hopes, but unfortunately I do not think that what he suggests will be possible. We have to take an inclusive approach to tartan. I do not think that tartan is actually owned by anyone, but a Scottish register will ensure that everyone knows that Scotland has a claim to it. The register will provide gradations, or ranks, of tartan through which we can promote Scottish business. We can achieve some of John Swinburne's aims, but we cannot operate judgmentally.
My father is the last in a long line of native Gaelic speakers and I am proud that the Parliament has done so much to secure Gaelic—in fact, to save it. Like my father-in-law, who is the fifth in the line of the generations of kilt makers in my family, I wonder why we cannot do the same for tartan. Why can we not protect this iconic cultural asset?
A tartan register will do more than preserve tartan's place in our history and culture. Tartan appeals to our romantic side, but we can do more for it by consolidating and building on traditional tartan businesses.
I do not want to portray the tartan industry or Kinloch Anderson in particular as just kilt makers. Many in the industry have diversified and are looking to the future. They are designing tartans for modern tastes and are moving into new markets. They are building businesses and an industry that we can be proud of.
Taking tartan into public control—which is what I believe we are doing—could have indirect benefits for businesses and the economy. At the moment, any Tom, Dick or Harry can design a tartan, but making the brand more Scottish will benefit Scottish businesses. If the Scottish Parliament does not do that, there is little likelihood of a United Kingdom Parliament standing up for Scottish businesses that may be up against other UK companies.
I appreciate the member's arguments, but can he appreciate that part of the success of the modern tartan industry has been the lack of bureaucracy? We have a vibrant private sector in which people are designing new tartans and using them in new ways. A nationalised approach may not be the best way of securing the future of tartan.
I appreciate Mr Purvis's concerns, just as I appreciated Mr Swinburne's concerns. However, I do not think that the register will take a judgmental approach and discriminate against one tartan or another. The register will be inclusive. It will help all tartans. Nobody will be turned away from it, so no sector will dominate and nobody will be excluded. The tartan register and the accompanying archive will generate further interest in tartan.
Tartan is a trademark of Scotland and it is recognised everywhere. In the far east, it already carries with it traditional and cultural values that make it a big seller, with associated benefits for all Scottish businesses. Do we really want others to cheapen the brand, or do we want to be in a position from which we can exercise some, albeit limited, protection?
Whether through Jamie McGrigor's bill or Executive action, we can be in a position to give tartan a real boost in Scotland. Tartan can remind us of who we are, who we were and where we came from. More important, it can be a symbol of where we are going.
As my colleague Jim Mather has stated, the Scottish National Party welcomes the Executive's proposals. We look forward to seeing what the Executive will outline and develop, but we are happy to support the principle.
I also pay tribute to Jamie McGrigor for having brought the issue to the Parliament and for having focused the debate. All parties have acknowledged that tartan is part of Scottish identity. It is iconic and immediately recognisable as being Scottish—whether to 98 per cent of the world's population or less. We should welcome that and think of tartan as an opportunity and an asset; we should not hide from it or view it as an embarrassment.
The minister was correct to say that tartan has provoked many mixed feelings in Scotland: ambivalence from some and scorn or pride from others. That has caused a great deal of angst and debate over recent generations, as a battle developed over whether we should promote ourselves as a kailyard country with a Harry Lauder image or as a contemporary and vibrant nation and a socially and scientifically modern country that is built on learning. However, there is no reason why we should not be able to marry the two, and that is what we must do. They are not mutually exclusive: it is possible to have an element of the kailyard and, at the same time, be a vibrant, contemporary nation. Scotland must come to terms with that.
The problem is not with expatriate Scots or the 98 per cent—or whatever percentage—of people throughout the world who have the impression that tartan is related to the kilt. The issue is a mental image of Scotland. We must recognise that there is no problem with promoting tartan at the same time as promoting a modern, vibrant country that is based on learning, a modern economy or whatever else. The fact that that is possible is demonstrated by the booming tartan sector, which the minister touched on, and by the Scottish diaspora that many speakers have commented on.
I mentioned the booming tartan sector. Earlier this week, I met one of the key players in the dressed to kilt event, which has become a fashion fixture not only in New York, but in Los Angeles and California. It is not necessarily my cup of tea, but it has put the First Minister on the catwalk and it provides an opportunity for Scottish manufacturers to sell their wares. We should not denigrate such an event, whether we like it or not. It does a lot of good for Scotland, the Scottish economy and Scotland's image and brand. The organisers of the event have no problem with parading themselves in tartan and promoting a modern, vibrant, Scottish manufacturing sector.
The same applies to our diaspora Scots. Whether they are recent emigrants or are descended from people who left centuries ago, they view tartan as a link to their Scottish identity. We should not seek to take that away from them but should welcome it. We should obviously lament the fact that some of our people have gone, but we should be grateful that they wish to link and bond with us. There would be more for us to worry about if they wished to have nothing to do with us, but the fact that, as Jamie McGrigor said, 30 million people or more wish to have some link with Scotland is a huge asset on which we must build.
As the minister commented, tartan day is highly successful. It is now spilling out of New York and Washington. Whether it is a week in Sydney or events in Chicago, tartan day is going global. That is why Scotland must come to terms with itself. We must realise that being dressed in tartan is not something to mock or mimic, although there may be instances in which it is highly amusing or impractical. For many, it is an iconic image of Scots. There is nothing wrong with parading oneself in tartan on the Saturday of tartan week in New York and working in Wall Street the following Monday. Young emigrant Scots do that, and we must do it as a country. Let us sell ourselves, whether in the kilt or as a contemporary nation.
I congratulate the minister on changing his mind. I certainly remember the time when he and people of his age group denigrated tartan—I will come back to that thought. I ask him to ensure that the tartan week organisers do not instruct the Scottish Enterprise team that is going to try to evaluate tartan's importance. I also congratulate Jamie McGrigor. There is no doubt about it: he has done the right thing at the right time. It is big of the Executive to have taken his proposals on board.
I wonder why the minister started by referring to the debate about tartan. Ken Macintosh's speech, and even Kenny MacAskill's speech, gave us the answer: they dismissed the thought of Harry Lauder. We can all get embarrassed about Harry Lauder if we like but, abroad, in all those places where people know about Scotland, they might just know about Scotland through Harry Lauder. The late Jimmy Logan explained to me how, in theatre terms, Harry Lauder was quite an icon. We must look less to the confusing images of the past and more to what we agree is the way to use such icons, even if we are a bit embarrassed about them, to promote Scotland. There is a difficulty with promoting tartan while we are diluting Scots identity and its promotion.
I will draw a parallel: I ask the gentlemen in the chamber to think of lederhosen for just a minute. Where do we associate with lederhosen? I see the minister slapping his thigh—good on him. Is it Austria, or is it Bavaria? I associate them with Bavaria, because I know the subtleties, but most folk are confused about where lederhosen come from. I put it to members that the same confusion might exist regarding where tartan fits into the panoply of the world's patterns. Where does Paisley pattern come from? That uncertainty exists because we have not promoted the Scottish identity and used tartan unashamedly to do so. That is one of those wee things that we will just have to sort out—I am sure that we are on the way to doing that.
The minister said that he would listen to good ideas. I have about six. First, there is the recognition factor. We are kidding ourselves if we think that, everywhere in the globe, people know what Scotland is and can distinguish Scotland from other parts of the United Kingdom. We should not kid ourselves like that.
Once, when I tried to check my bags through from Atlanta airport to Edinburgh, I had quite a discussion—it eventually became quite a heated discussion—with the helpful young woman behind the desk. She asked, "Edinburgh's in London, isn't it?" I replied, "No, it's not in London—it's in Scotland." "Yes," she said, "but that's in London, isn't it?" "No," I said. "Edinburgh is the capital of Scotland, which is a different country." Her nametag said that she was called Marie Stuart, but she did not have the faintest idea that she was part of the diaspora. We must not imagine that the opportunity is already there for us. I want lots of television advertisements and film placements. Let us start with Bollywood—a growing market, I point out to the minister—and there is Chinese television, too.
Although Kenny MacAskill waxed lyrical about tartan week, I do not think that it is big enough or focused enough yet. We should be getting in touch with Craig Ferguson, for example, and ensuring that really nice tartan ties and other tartan accoutrements are sent to him, so that he can refer to them when he presents his show, which is one of the biggest coast-to-coast shows in America.
Why does the Parliament not use tartan? The colours that we have are very fetching, but we could use tartan much more. I am sorry to see that the Presiding Officer is looking at me like that, because I wanted to go on to mention tartan tat. As a representative of this country, I am sometimes concerned when I see the tat on sale up and down the High Street. However, I remember what I said at the start of my speech. Ken Macintosh should not get embarrassed about Harry Lauder, and I will not get embarrassed about the fact that some folk have different tastes from mine. That is what tartan tat amounts to, and no more.
The Scottish Register of Tartans Bill came before the Enterprise and Culture Committee, and I rise as a member of that committee to discuss how we reacted to it and how our thinking evolved.
Like many other members, I started by thinking that tartan is a recent addition that grew with the Victorians and which has nothing to do with history. The bill is being promoted by a Tory. He proposes that we have a separate register and keeper, yet I thought that the Tories were all about reducing bureaucracy. I argued that the bill was not necessary, because it should be possible to get agreement among the existing privately-owned registers.
I then thought about the history of tartan. There is an argument that poor people rarely had access to dyes or fancy patterns, that tartan was used mainly to signify rank and wealth and that only the rich could afford the patterns and coloured cloths. I wonder about that when I think about the pink lining in Jamie Stone's jacket—it is a pity that he is not here to show us it.
As incomes rose among the Victorian business classes on the back of commercial activities, which we heard the moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland describe earlier, people started to become interested in all things supposedly Scottish and the tartan market boomed. Tartan has become a symbol and an emblem of Scottish culture and, yes, there is evidence that it has been used for hundreds of years.
Jim Mather talked about having new and interesting things. Tartans have been created for the G8, the Highland year of culture, Scottish Power and other big organisations and the Commonwealth games. As I looked into the matter, having spoken to the Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning, the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport and Jamie McGrigor, I thought that there was a good argument for doing something—I am thinking of genealogy, tourism and commercial activities—to take advantage of something that is uniquely Scottish, whether or not it is recognised as widely as it might be.
I welcome the minister's promise to commission work with the textiles group and hope that that work produces something.
I turn to the issue of a publicly owned and publicly managed register. We have many official registers in this country. I remind everybody of my registered interest as chair of the Scottish Library and Information Council. Many museums, galleries and other registers, including the National Library of Scotland and the National Museums of Scotland, are members of that group.
The Enterprise and Culture Committee was persuaded of the strength of Jamie McGrigor's argument, but we remained unconvinced of the need for legislation and for a separate keeper to be funded. I am glad that the Executive has picked that up and I hope that the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport will be involved in the discussions, given that she has responsibility for the Registers of Scotland and museums.
I would like to hear in the minister's closing remarks a little more about his commitment to the register and how he hopes that it will be developed. I hope that Jamie McGrigor will be reassured, both by what he has heard and by the evident cross-party support, that there is a commitment to take forward the register, not just in the rest of this session but after the election. I hope that he is reassured sufficiently to withdraw his bill. I look forward to continuing to work with him and with the ministerial team, and I will help in any way that I can, through the Enterprise and Culture Committee.
With Lochcarron of Scotland, Andrew Elliot Ltd and Robert Noble in my constituency, I am extremely lucky to be the constituency representative of the finest tartan manufacturers in the world—my colleague Ken Macintosh, who has other loyalties, is querying that, but I am afraid that we will have to have that debate outside. I am delighted that we are having this debate and that the Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning has asked that representatives of the Scottish textiles industry and Scottish Enterprise officials take forward the register through formal discussions.
The real issue is how we ensure that our financial interest in this cloth is protected. Margo MacDonald asked Jim Mather to name the two Chinese people who would recognise tartan as Scottish, and I have sympathy for Mr Mather's difficulty in naming them on the spot. However, Margo MacDonald answered her own point: Chinese, Indian and English companies are manufacturing cheaper and poorer-quality cloth—tartan tat, as she said. The issue is how we ensure that that does not harm our indigenous manufacturing industry.
Although I have considerable sympathy for Jamie McGrigor and Ken Macintosh's arguments for a national body and a nationalised approach, I think that every opportunity in the private sector should be explored first.
We have an exciting, dynamic and embracing tartan industry, which has caught the imagination of young people and old across the world, because of the personal commitment of Alistair Buchan and others. Those designers and manufacturers have been the real keepers of the brand since the war. Jim Mather addressed the brand in his speech, which all members agreed with.
We have been debating the ancient cloth of the land—it is grown from the land, literally. The original earth colours of tartan are the earth colours that are represented in the carpets in this building. People around the world see them as distinctive, and they are cherished at home.
Tartan brings a significant financial benefit to modern Scotland. Perhaps more than other features, it has defined modern Scotland itself. Jamie Stone outlined precisely when modern Scotland dates back to—1822, when my erstwhile constituent, Sir Walter Scott, was the master of ceremonies during the visit to Edinburgh of George IV. It was Scott's contention that, only 76 years after the Jacobites were hanged at Carlisle, Highland tartan should clad the King. With the King resplendent in his royal Stewart kilt over—as Jamie Stone said—his salmon-coloured tights, one of the great public relations stunts in Scottish history had been carried off, and modern Scotland was born. Just as the question of branding Scotland is controversial today, it was controversial then. Scott's son-in-law said that the event was a travesty and a hallucination.
Will the member give way?
If I have time later on, I will give way.
You will not have time; you have one minute left.
The modern take on tartan, with young designers working in the school of textiles and design in the Borders or in the private sector, represents more than £65 million to the Scottish economy in manufacturing alone, and more than 1,500 jobs. However, we have to cherish the industry. The army threatened to have its kilts and trews made outside Scotland and Heriot-Watt University threatened to remove the school of textiles and design from Galashiels, which is at the heart of the manufacturing of textiles. Both those threats, which have been successfully resisted, highlight the fact that we need to cherish the industry.
The Galashiels Manufacturers Corporation dinner has been held every year since 1776. At one of the dinners in the early 19th century, James Hogg and Walter Scott sang a song about Borders cloth being "cladding for a queen". Tartan is cladding for a nation and it needs to be protected.
This has been an interesting and, at times, entertaining debate. We have had well-informed contributions from across the chamber.
It would be appropriate to start my speech by commending my colleague Jamie McGrigor for the effort that he put into producing his Scottish Register of Tartans Bill, which is what lies behind this debate and the process that we are engaged in.
A lot of time and effort goes into the production of a member's bill. Members have to devote a lot of their time and their staff's time to ensuring that the bill progresses, and there are a lot of steps to go through with regard to consultation and so on. It is no small thing for any member to lodge a member's bill and see it make some progress. We should acknowledge the work that Jamie McGrigor has done on his bill and thank him for it.
The intention behind the bill was the establishment of a publicly funded state register of tartans that, it was envisaged, would replace the existing private registers, which, in some ways, are in competition with each other and are, as the minister acknowledged earlier, incomplete.
Although, as a Conservative, I always resist the idea of the state taking over successful private enterprises, there is an argument for a gap in the marketplace to be filled in order to address concerns that exist about the incompleteness of the registers and to counter the concern, which Jamie McGrigor expressed, that another country, such as Canada, could set up a register and take away what should be our birthright in Scotland.
There has been general support for the principles of the bill from the industry. I welcome the support that has been expressed by the Scottish Executive for the general approach that the bill takes. I understand that the Executive will consider ways of progressing the issue, including non-legislative options and the commissioning of an economic impact assessment.
It has been acknowledged across the chamber the tartan is an internationally recognised symbol of Scotland. There will be some who dismiss tartan as a Victorian affectation and invention—Christine May acknowledged that in her contribution—but its roots go much further back. In his speech, Jamie Stone rather stole my thunder by giving a history lesson, so I will cut short my history lesson. However, it is important to remember that tartan was banned in 1747 by the act of proscription. The only exception was for uniforms of the Government army, and anyone transgressing the law would
"be liable to be transported to any of His Majesty's plantations beyond the seas, there to remain for the space of seven years."
It was some years later—in 1782—that the wearing of tartan was permitted. That move was accompanied by a proclamation declaring:
"This must bring great joy to every Highland Heart. You are no longer bound down to the unmanly dress of the Lowlander."
As we have heard, tartan very quickly became fashionable. It was that great Scottish Tory, Walter Scott, who made tartan and Highland culture fashionable once again to the extent that, as we have heard, George IV wore a kilt when he came to Scotland in 1822.
What had been the culture exclusively of the Highlands became identified as the culture of the whole of Scotland, which was quite a change. Previously, lowlanders would have disdained Highland culture or looked on highlanders as strange savages from north of the Highland line, but suddenly everything associated with the Highlands—tartan, kilts, bagpipes and claymores—became what we now recognise as part of Scottish culture.
I will close following my abbreviated history lesson. I thank Jamie McGrigor again for introducing the Scottish Register of Tartans Bill and giving us the opportunity to debate the issue.
The debate is useful because Jamie McGrigor has got to the heart of one of the iconic symbols of Scotland and has forced the Government to respond. It was interesting to hear that Scottish Enterprise will conduct an economic impact assessment of the tartan and textiles industry.
The debate also flows around the idea of cultural impact. How do we assess the cultural impact of tartan? It is one of the most positive items that we have in Scotland, and many speakers have reflected on the fact that the overall view of tartan is that it is instantly recognisable and something that we ought to cherish.
The vexed questions are how we deal with copyright, authenticity and other issues. There are various ways of doing that, but I am not sure that to create another quango would be good. We must be careful about how we consider registers and their cost. The minister must think carefully about how to apply the economic impact assessment so that it leads to a means of liberating rather than constraining the trade. I agree with Jeremy Purvis on that.
To illustrate my speech, I am wearing a tie of the Breton national tartan, which is registered in Crieff. It uses the black and white of the Breton flag, or gwenn ha du; the blue of the sea, armor; and the green of the land, argoat. It respects the Scottish tradition but represents people in a different country. Already, tartan is an international product.
Last week, I read about the creation of a Polish tartan, which is mainly red and white like the country's flag. The person who bought it, a baker of Polish origin who lives in Edinburgh, said:
"I'm Polish, but I am living in Scotland now… I want to be seen as a Scottish person. A Polish tartan seems like a good idea."
I hope that we could reflect here the respect that is given to tartan internationally.
I hold the unpaid position of honorary president of the Kilt Society de France. It is one of those odds things that crops up after attending a Celtic tartan day event, not in America but in Paris. This year's is in Normandy. The point is that many people around the world want to reflect the type of dress that has become known as Scottish. In doing so, they honour the tradition of tartan and spread the good word.
As I said at the beginning, many tartans—the Breton tartans, the Normandy tartan and so on—are registered at Crieff. That provides a fix in the world at present. However, it is essential that we ensure that the next generation knows that it can go to one source.
It is perhaps an overstatement to say that tartan is unregulated, because people have sought to establish authenticity. However, authenticity means something entirely different now when people can invent a Parliament tartan privately—to exploit the creation of Parliament—a Polish tartan, a Breton national tartan and so on. We must think very carefully about how we will achieve our aim.
Naturally, the Scottish National Party wants positive images of Scotland to be cared for and looked after in a fashion that takes them forward. Jamie McGrigor began to explore the issue well, but the question of a register will have to be part of the minister's thinking beyond any economic impact assessment of the tartan industry, because the issue is about much more than the economy—it is about our cultural impact. I hope that the minister is prepared to take on board that assessment. He might be in the wrong department to do that, but I hope that Scottish Enterprise will acknowledge that it needs to take much more cognisance of the communities and culture of our country and to recognise that the issue has a scope that goes wider than the pound in people's pockets.
The Scottish National Party welcomes the debate and acknowledges that good will exists throughout Parliament to ensure that tartan flourishes. The tartan that I am holding up is for the year of Highland culture 2007, and was designed by children in Mulbuie primary school in Ross-shire. It is called the golden broom tartan and was part of an enterprise in education project for primary 6 and 7 pupils. I welcome that. Those pupils' terrific efforts are being recognised through the tartan's use throughout the year of Highland culture. We want such innovation. We want more and more people to invent tartans and to use them.
I give Jamie McGrigor and other members the assurance that they seek that the propositions that I will make will meet their aspirations for the range of issues that have been raised.
When Margo MacDonald spoke, I was struck by the words of another national icon:
"wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as others see us!"
It is undoubted that some people outside Scotland see us clad in plaid, whereas others see us clad in white coats and leading technological advances in a range of sciences. That can be confusing—as confusing as the difference between patriotism and nationalism, or as the Tories proposing the nationalisation of tartan.
The issue is difficult; it is not easy. However, we have struck the right balance in the debate and have not taken a romantic and misty-eyed view of our history by looking through rose-tinted spectacles at where we came from and who we are. More important, the balance of the debate has centred on the economic and other advantages that can accrue from the principles of what Jamie McGrigor has proposed.
As well as the textile industry, which produces tartan fabric, several industries—including the tourism and genealogy industries—may benefit from tartan. The economic benefits are not easily assessed, which is why we propose to ask the textiles team in Scottish Enterprise to assess the possible economic, presentational and marketing advantages of a tartan register. Scottish Textiles has initiated the process of tendering for the economic impact assessment study and we expect that work to be completed in the spring, so there is a prospect that Parliament will consider the matter before dissolution. I cannot—for obvious reasons—make a commitment for after the May election, although I suspect that the most probable outcome of that election will be a Liberal Democrat and Labour-led Executive.
There will be three key events this month. On 9 February, the national textile forum will meet to discuss possible ways forward—a tartan register is among the matters that will be discussed. A meeting on an economic impact study involving consultants and the textiles team will take place on 16 February. On 24 February, my officials will meet the Lord Lyon and the registrar of the National Archives of Scotland. We will consider legislative and non-legislative options, including legislating for a national register and placing custody of a register with an existing body, such as the National Archives of Scotland or the Lord Lyon. However, it would be premature to consider the options for a register before a more detailed assessment of the options has been undertaken and the bodies concerned have been engaged with. That is my response to Rob Gibson.
The starting point is the creation of a central and comprehensive point of reference for the tartan industry. In that context, I look forward to the outcomes of the work that I have mentioned. It is difficult to envisage a situation in which we would seek to compel a commercially run register to cease to operate, but the work that the Executive proposes to undertake will get deeper under the surface of the possible issues relating to, and the potential advantages of, creating a register of tartans. We have strong links with the textiles industry in Scotland through the textiles team in Scottish Enterprise, which works hand in hand with the industry, and the national textile forum. That close and on-going work is typical of our proactive engagement with key sectors. We will use the strong and robust framework for industry engagement to consult and involve key industry stakeholders in discussions on the best way forward. As John Swinney and others have said, we should seek to build the consensus that members obviously want in order to take forward our tartan industry and to preserve and protect the icon of tartan for future generations to enjoy.