Plenary,

Meeting date: Thursday, May 14, 2009

Official Report 692KB pdf

---

United States of America and Canada (Engagement)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-4131, in the name of Michael Russell, on Scotland's engagement with the United States of America and Canada. I remind members that, because the stage 3 debate on the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Bill was concluded yesterday, this afternoon's debate is scheduled to finish at 5 o'clock.

I call Michael Russell to speak to and move the motion. Minister, you have a reasonably flexible 11 minutes.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I shall be reasonably flexible.

I am pleased to speak to the motion in my name, which is on what I regard as a very important topic indeed—Scotland's past, present and future engagement with the United States and Canada. I notice that there is a paucity of amendments, which I hope is a good sign. I am happy to say that I will accept Labour's amendment, so I am sure that we can have a positive afternoon.

It is worth reminding ourselves that Scotland's historical links with the USA and Canada date back to the very founding of those great nations. There will not be sufficient time this afternoon—even with flexibility—to do full justice to the extent of Scotland's influence on the political, cultural, social and economic development of the USA and Canada. However, a few examples will illustrate the point.

According to the best sources, around half of the Presidents of the United States, including the current incumbent, have some sort of Scots or Scots-Irish ancestry. Scots accounted for a similar proportion of the signatories to the US declaration of independence, and nine of the 13 governors of the original United States were Scots. The signs of the connection are all around us. Just a few weeks ago, I was in Dumfriesshire visiting the cottage of John Paul Jones, the founder of the United States Navy. Scotland is dotted with places that have that sort of live connection with the United States.

Many of America's foremost businesspeople have been proud to claim Scottish roots—people such as Andrew Carnegie, John Rockefeller, John Paul Getty and, more recently, Bill Gates. Estimates of the total number of Americans with Scots or Scots-Irish ancestry range widely, from 9 million to 29 million, which represents possibly as many as one in 10 Americans.

Scotland's mark on Canada has been even greater: some 15 per cent of the population can trace their roots back to Scotland. In Nova Scotia, the proportion is even higher, at around 30 per cent. Remarkably, some 40 per cent of the citizens of Prince Edward Island, which has a population of only 135,000, claim Scots ancestry. Indeed, I am very proud of the fact that my wife's ancestry includes the Cape Breton giant—the tallest non-pathological human being from Scotland and Canada. Sarah Boyack is shaking her head in wonderment. However, as well as being a privilege, it is an indication that in almost every family—and I suspect in the family of almost every member in the chamber—there will be some link with Canada or the United States.

There are strong connections in bloodlines, but there are connections elsewhere. Many people from North America who are not Scottish come to Scotland to enjoy the connection. For those who are Scottish or have Scottish roots, the connection is all the greater. We will see that this year, at the gathering in July, which will be the largest ever bringing together of people with Scots and Scots-Irish roots who want to come to Scotland for a single event. The event builds on the enthusiasm that has been generated by the year of homecoming, which is focused in America and Canada on strengthening and nurturing our connections with the Scots diaspora. We have commissioned research that should inform us how we can best develop those existing links.

We should not just look backwards; we should look forwards. Our aim will be to work with partners across the private and public sectors in Scotland and North America to develop a cohesive, effective and supportive framework for our future relationship.

At the heart of that are the celebrations that take place across North America on 6 April to commemorate the signing of the declaration of Arbroath in 1320. It might seem slightly arcane that that event is celebrated, until one realises that there is a strong link between the declaration of Arbroath and the American declaration of independence. The celebrations started in Nova Scotia in 1986 and spread to other provinces of Canada. They were adopted by a resolution of the United States Senate in 1998, and in 2008 the then US President, George W Bush, issued a proclamation marking the 10th anniversary of tartan day, as it was called.

The Government on this side of the Atlantic has been capitalising on the good will that that has created, but we need to accelerate that activity. Individual activity by parts of Government has been significant, but it was not until 2001 that Henry McLeish signalled an intention to harness the potential opportunities. I pay tribute to him and the work that he did. Since then, he and his successors, Jack McConnell and Alex Salmond, have built the relationship and ensured the engagement of Government. The Parliament's relationship has been an important part of that. The decision in 2001 to establish a Scottish affairs office in Washington DC was a useful foundation on which all of that could be built.

The challenge remains to connect in a modern way the people of North America with the people of Scotland, and to build out of the traditional and historical relationship a new relationship. Of course, the prize to be had is great. Let us look just at the financial prize. With a value in 2007 of £2.8 billion, the US remains Scotland's biggest export market and our single largest overseas market for tourists. There were 417,000 visits to Scotland from the US in 2007, with an estimated spend of £257 million. In the same year, Scotland's exports to Canada were worth £275 million and there were 124,000 inward visits. Those are big connections that can be made bigger. When those figures are reinforced with a whole range of other trading and business links, one can see a sharp edge to the issue—an edge of earning money in Scotland and ensuring that Scotland prospers as a result of the relationship.

Tartan day—indeed, the whole of Scotland week—is now the visible symbol of that relationship. It is an opportunity for us to renew the relationship and to profit by it. We have heard of business and cultural examples. On the cultural side, I refer to the phenomenal success of "Black Watch", the National Theatre of Scotland's touring production. At one time, we were informed that it would be too rich fare for America, but the Americans took to it with huge enthusiasm and gusto, and the National Theatre of Scotland is talked about very warmly in New York, in particular.

There has been investment in building the relationship. The previous Administration made a considerable investment, which has continued to grow. When we were elected two years ago, we were respectful of what had taken place and keen to extend it. That we have done. We expanded the remit of the Scottish affairs office to include responsibility for the totality of Scottish ministers' objectives in the USA and Canada, which includes the contribution that is made by Scottish Development International and other Scottish public sector organisations, such as VisitScotland. In the leadership role, the Scottish Government counsellor in North America, Robin Naysmith, is charged with ensuring that the work of the Scottish Government and its partners is integrated, cohesive and co-ordinated, and supports the Government's primary purpose of increasing sustainable economic growth for Scotland.

The distinctive touch that we have brought to the process has been to harness all the resources and interests and to focus them on the Government's purpose and what we believe Scotland will profit by. In 2008, we published an international framework that set out the basis on which we would seek to engage with our partners overseas. Since then, we have refreshed the plan and we held a stakeholder event some weeks ago to focus on how the plan can be built up. We need to build on the strength of our historical and cultural links, sharpen the focus of our activities, simplify the way in which we promote Scotland in Canada and the United States of America, and share our vision with partners and friends in a way that ensures that we can all work to the same objectives.

We have made a good start. I will reflect on my personal experience in that regard. Since this Government was elected in 2007, ministers have made 15 official visits to the United States and five official visits to Canada. All of those visits were focused on a string of political, cultural and educational objectives.

Earlier this year, the First Minister made a short and highly successful visit to Washington DC, where he met the recently appointed US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, just four weeks into the new US Administration. During that visit, the First Minister was joined by members of the 50-strong friends of Scotland caucus in the House of Representatives, when Senators Jim Webb and Lamar Alexander launched a new friends of Scotland caucus, with bipartisan membership comprising a third of the US Senate. Those events represent a level of political engagement between Scotland and the US that has not been reached since the days of the founding fathers.

Last month, the Deputy First Minister led a Scottish Government delegation to North America for Scotland week, building on the success of the first delegation of its type in 2008. Nicola Sturgeon, Jim Mather and I visited 10 cities in Canada and the US where, in the course of the week, we undertook a total of 60 official engagements and met individually 32 current or potential investors in Scotland. Through receptions, dinners and other events, we spoke to a further 1,000 business, cultural and diaspora figures to promote homecoming Scotland 2009. Our objectives were to build confidence in Scotland as a place in which to do business, live, learn and work, and to promote homecoming Scotland. As we predicted, the total budget for the trip did not exceed £400,000.

Our collective efforts during Scotland week were greatly enhanced by the welcome involvement of the Presiding Officer and a cross-party delegation of four members of this Parliament who travelled extensively in Canada and the US. You and I had the memorable experience of walking down 6th Avenue, Presiding Officer, either side of the actor Alan Cumming, without traffic coming in the opposite direction. It was an important, enjoyable and significant set of events.

Among the highlights of Scotland week 2009 were business meetings with some of America's biggest businesses, such as Johnson & Johnson, Microsoft, Sun Microsystems, Chevron, Boeing, J P Morgan, Morgan Stanley, the Trump Organization, Citi, IBM, Research in Motion and the Bank of New York Mellon, all of which are investors in Scotland. We also had meetings with potential investors and representatives of more than 100 other companies during business receptions and dinners in New York, Toronto, Seattle, North Carolina and Vancouver, which was taking part in Scotland week for the first time.

The Scottish Government sponsored the sixth annual Scotland run in New York, which was branded the homecoming Scotland run and attracted a record 8,000 participants—alas, I was not one of them, and nor, I think, were you, Presiding Officer.

A showcase for Scotland's textile industry and innovative fashion designers was hosted by the flagship department store Saks Fifth Avenue.

The Deputy First Minister made a major speech at the prestigious Stanford University, in which she highlighted Scotland's scientific excellence. I went to the Economic Club of Canada, where I outlined the Scottish Government's response to the current economic situation, and to the Munk centre for international studies in the University of Toronto, where I lectured on Scotland's constitutional future. In North Carolina, Jim Mather met the state governor and co-hosted, with you, Presiding Officer, a successful reception for Senate and House of Representative members of the North Carolina state legislature. I understand that Mr Mather has since been back to America—no doubt he will talk about that when he sums up.

Ministers have spent a lot of time engaging in and building up the relationship between Scotland and North America, but I believe that more can be done to encourage activities not only in the United States but in Canada. One focus that I will bring to my job will be to ensure that we increase the amount of work that we do in Canada and the profile of that work, because the relationship with Canada is strong and on-going.

In Toronto, I had the pleasure of meeting the former Canadian foreign minister Flora MacDonald—a name that almost says it all—for the first time since I met her in New Delhi in 2000. At the age of 80, she is going all over the world to talk about peace and justice, and she leads and supports a charity that works in Afghanistan. She traces her whole personality and success to the strong background that she inherited from the many generations of her Scottish family in Canada. She embodies Canada's strong relationship with Scotland. She is proud of her background. She is very Canadian, but very Scottish, too.

When we look at what we can achieve in Canada, we should see a huge opportunity. We should celebrate the work that we have done throughout North America, we should be grateful to all those who have taken part from all parties, and we should intensify our work, based on clear objectives.

I move,

That the Parliament recognises the importance of Scotland's relationship with the United States of America and Canada; notes the contribution of the Scottish Government, the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body and all those who were involved in the development of Scotland Week over the last eight years in North America; expresses its gratitude for the significant contribution of the Scottish diaspora in helping to promote Scotland's rich cultural heritage, and encourages the Scottish Government to continue to develop a more joined-up approach to the promotion of Scotland in Canada and the United States of America by working in partnership with all relevant organisations in the public and private sector in order to ensure that Scotland derives real social and economic benefits from such activities.

I hope that the minister will forgive me for pointing out that I did take part in the homecoming Scotland run, when I managed to summon up enough energy to hold one end of the finishing tape; the Deputy First Minister held the other end.

When I first heard that the debate had been scheduled, I thought, "Oh, that'll be a fun afternoon, hearing about Mike Russell and Nicola Sturgeon's vacation in New York, Washington, Toronto and Vancouver." Nicola Sturgeon definitely got the better deal—although Mike Russell might not agree—in that she got to host an event involving Scotland's budding fashion designers at Saks Fifth Avenue.

In all seriousness, Labour has always recognised the huge significance of Scotland's relationship with the United States and Canada, which the debate gives a chance to examine in some detail. That is why we will support the Government's motion, and I am pleased that the minister has said that he will accept the Labour amendment.

As the minister said, our engagement with the US and Canada is fundamental to our success as a nation. As well as being the largest inward investor in Scotland, the US is the top export destination for Scottish goods. As we know, Canada has an extremely strong connection with Scotland. The country's first Prime Minister was a Glasgow-born Scot, and 4 million Canadians claim to have some Scottish heritage. In my research, I discovered that the Canadians even have their own Loch Ness monster called ogopogo—I did not know that—although, as we know, our Loch Ness monster is real.

As I think Mike Russell mentioned, if one speaks to people from the US, many of them say that they have a connection with Scotland, even if it is often an extremely distant one. Considering that less than a quarter of US citizens have passports and travel outwith the country's borders, it is clear that Scotland has made quite an impact on the most powerful country in the world. Americans like the Scottish people and they like the Celtic connection, and rightly so. We nurture that.

The new president, Obama, gives many of us hope that a new political approach will be adopted in the US, and I am sure that we all look forward to that.

Recent data show that there has been a sizeable depreciation in sterling, which has resulted in a decline in key export markets. The Confederation of British Industry has called on the Scottish Government to support exporters and to come up with a plan that will assist their recovery, and it is incumbent on the Government to live up to those demands. It is interesting that although there has been a decline in whisky exports to the USA, there has been an increase in whisky exports to Canada, so it is clear that Canada is a growth market.

The year of homecoming gives us a chance to recover our position. Scotland week, which the minister mentioned, represents a key opportunity to promote what Scotland has to offer. It has always been a key objective of Scotland week—previously known as tartan week—to promote Scotland's trade and investment links. The Scottish National Party should never forget that Scotland week is about promoting Scotland; it is not about promoting the party that is in power. I have watched carefully the speeches that Government ministers have made abroad to ensure that they have presented an accurate view of what the Scottish people think about their future.

It is interesting that the budget for Scotland week has halved and that the First Minister was not part of this year's event—I make no connection between those two facts—but I am sure that that does not mean that the Government is any less committed to it. I hope that Jim Mather will address that point when he sums up. Scotland week is a golden opportunity to grow Scotland's economic potential by connecting the existing cultural and historical links and using them to our maximum advantage.

In her speech at Stanford University, the Deputy First Minister talked at length about Scotland's contribution to science and innovation. Scots have made numerous inventions around the world, from ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging to anaesthetics and penicillin, but I recently discovered that there is no exhibition or permanent display dedicated to the work of Scottish inventors, which I argue is an important part of our history and culture. Glasgow Science Centre or Our Dynamic Earth could hold such a display, and I am pursuing the idea with some vigour. I know that the Science Museum in London has offered Glasgow the chance to exhibit some Scottish inventions, and I hope that the Government will support any attempts to bring that about.

We punch above our weight in research and development, taking 12 per cent of United Kingdom research council grants and thereby benefiting from the UK funding framework. Also, our continued collaboration with US universities is a two-way street. Recently, for example, Philip Cohen from Dundee became only the fourth Scot in history to be invited to join the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

While Nicola Sturgeon was making her speech, Mike Russell was doing his bit in Canada, causing uproar among radio chiefs with his suggestion that Scotland should follow Canada in having quotas that stipulate that a third of the music played on radio should be home grown.

Will the member give way?

I have more to say, but I will give way.

I have to say that I cannot recall hearing from a single radio chief—however that might be defined—either in uproar or otherwise. I would welcome any evidence that the member can provide in that respect.

Perhaps the minister has not read any of the articles in which that very language was used. I am happy to send him the quotes. It simply goes to show that a bit of consultation with the industry might save ministers from creating that kind of response.

However, in fairness to the minister, I think that we can learn a lot from Canada's approach to the music industry, and I hope that he will consider some of its other initiatives, which could find support. It is not the K T Tunstalls but the other less successful artists who need support or other interventions.

Although I appreciate the member's long record of promoting Scottish music and musicians, I wonder whether she agrees that we should ditch the lot and support Susan Boyle. After all, it has taken us eight years to get to where we are, and she went coast to coast in eight minutes.

It is hard to disagree with the member. I was abroad when Susan Boyle became famous, but it certainly seems as if she has made an impact on the world.

I have said that we support the Government's motion, and I am pleased that it will support our amendment. However, the year of homecoming, in particular, is in danger of being dominated by our past rather than our future. For example, the advertisement for homecoming, with its all-white cast, promoted a rather dated version of Scotland, and the problem was compounded by the belated airbrushing-in of a solitary Asian man. I am sure that we all condemn that action. In any case, the Labour amendment seeks to put the matter beyond doubt and ensure that we are talking about a modern and diverse Scotland.

I do not believe that the Government is capitalising on the year of homecoming. It makes no sense for it to spend less money on promoting the event abroad and for its strategy to focus on the home market. There is a job to do here. After all, visitor numbers are declining. I wonder whether in his summing up the Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism will tell us whether FirstGroup, with its US connections, has been approached to promote homecoming over there as well as in Scotland. The Government has spent £112,000 on TV ads promoting homecoming in Scotland, but has spent only £56,000 on advertising it abroad.

I said earlier that it is important for the Government to promote Scotland and its perceptions. In a speech that he gave last year at the University of Virginia, the First Minister focused on the fundamental rights of nations and peoples and quoted Thomas Jefferson's comment that

"Every nation has a right to govern itself …under what forms it pleases",

giving the overall impression that the national conversation truly reflected Scottish opinion. The Parliament will—and, indeed, should—support its ministers in their attempts to promote Scotland abroad, but what we expect them to do is promote Scotland's business, trade and good relations, not give the false impression that the country is in favour of independence when it clearly is not. We cannot allow Government ministers to present such a portrayal of Scotland. The Scottish National Party must resist the temptation to promote itself.

In such times, there is real work to be done in Scotland. Visitor numbers are declining, and we need to improve our trade links, particularly with the US and Canada. We should and we will portray a modern Scotland—the one Scotland of many cultures. I am sure that much of what happened during Scotland week can be taken forward in the weeks to come.

I move amendment S3M-4131.1, to insert after second "Scottish Government":

"to promote Scotland's cultural diversity in a modern Scotland and".

Unlike your good self, Presiding Officer, Mike Russell, Iain Smith and my colleague Bill Aitken, I have not had the good fortune to march down the Avenue of the Americas with Alan Cumming, far less with Sean Connery, nor to behold the First Minister in a Stetson and kilt heading up the tartan day celebrations. However, I am feeling consensual and I am prepared to believe that those are invaluable props in promoting Scotland in the Americas, not just stunts to drive the nationalist bandwagon.

I have teased the minister about whether all the press and radio stories that the Government claims to have generated during Scotland week have brought any business. However, it is imperative that Parliament builds on the strong links with America and Canada, which are our most important diaspora partners for exports and tourist spend, as the minister has said. We recognise the efforts of the Government and its predecessors in developing business links in particular with the Americas, therefore we will support the motion, with the caveat, of course, that the promotion of Scotland should not be to the detriment of promoting the wider United Kingdom.

It has been my great good fortune to study at first hand the ties that bind the United States and Canada to Scotland. With due respect to tartan day, dressed to kilt and the rest—which my researcher has told me, and the minister has confirmed, cost the best part of £400,000 in 2009; I am sure that that money has been excellently spent—members will be glad to hear that my odysseys to the Americas over the years have not cost the Parliament a penny.

Members will have noted that there is a stanza from John Galt's song of the Canadian fishermen on the Parliament's Canongate wall. Few lines more hauntingly express the pain of exile:

"From the lone shieling of the misty island
Mountains divide us, and the waste of seas
Yet still the blood is strong, the heart is Highland
And we in dreams behold the Hebrides."

Some years ago, I produced a television series for Channel 4, the video of which is still available relatively cheaply. Borrowing from John Galt, I called it "The Blood is Strong". The phrase seemed to me to articulate perfectly the Gaelic sense of cianalas—the deep yearning that Scots have for their homeland. Cianalas is still to be found in the Carolinas, where exiled Jacobites first landed at Cape Fear. It is to be found in the prairies of Manitoba, where a rash forebear of our former colleague Lord James Douglas-Hamilton bankrupted himself trying to establish a new Scotland. It will be found in gleaming downtown Toronto. I discovered that that city's telephone directory has more names with the prefix "Mac" than Edinburgh does. There is certainly cianalas in the fishing hamlets of Cape Breton, where Gaelic Scots first made landfall at Pictou—most perished in their first dreadful winter of 1773. In those and many other parts of the Americas, the blood is indeed still strong. No intervening waste of seas can dilute the history that we share and the debt that we owe in peace and war to our United States and Canadian cousins.

As we have heard, half of the signatories to the American declaration of independence were Scots. One came from Carskerdo, not far from Ceres in north-east Fife. The first two Prime Ministers of Canada were Scots. Gaelic, the ancient language of the Scots, still flourishes in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia. Historically, culturally and economically, Americans and Canadians will therefore be especially welcome in the year of homecoming.

Unlike Pauline McNeill, I do not think that the debate should be an occasion for breast beating about how many credit-crunched visitors will make their way back to the old country. I am sure that we will have such debates on many occasions, perhaps towards the end of this year and next year, but today we should simply rejoice that fishermen MacAskills from Cape Breton will join fishermen MacAskills on Berneray and Harris this summer and marvel that, two centuries on, the language in which they talk about fishing will still be Gaelic. It is a time for American Armstrongs and Canadian Galbraiths to return to Langholm and Crinan respectively, and to marvel that the first man on the moon was an Armstrong and that the father of modern economics, Harvard's John Kenneth Galbraith, was the grandson of an Argyllshire crofter. Carnegies returning to Dunfermline and Bells returning to Edinburgh will celebrate the founder of the US steel industry and the inventor of the telephone respectively.

I do not want to rain on the member's parade, but we should also remember who founded the Ku Klux Klan.

I do not know the tartan of that particular Klan.

Returning Davisons will recall that John D Rockefeller learned about business not from his carousing salesman father but from his thrifty Dundee-born mother. Let us not carp that the new Burns birthplace project is a year late and short of funds; instead, let us hope that those travelling to Ayr to pay tribute to the bard this year might include America's greatest living poet, who is a fervent fan of Burns. His name is Robert Zimmerman, he has a house on Speyside and he is also called Bob Dylan.

Today, we pay tribute in words to our cousins from the Americas; doubtless, we will have an opportunity to toast them with something more tangible at the many homecoming events that have been arranged throughout Scotland later this year. I urge every member of the Parliament to support the gatherings and ceilidhs in their areas and to wish ceud mìle fàilte—a hundred thousand welcomes—to our homecoming visitors. The aim is not just to look backwards and celebrate our historical links, but to look forward as well. I am happy to support the motion.

Follow that.

When I saw the business for today's meeting, I thought that I might prefer to be down at the Grange watching the Saltires play Middlesex, but the issue is nonetheless important. We cannot underestimate the importance to Scotland of our relationships with the United States and Canada. As the minister said, about 15 per cent—worth more than £3 billion annually—of our export trade is with the United States. About 450 US companies have invested in Scotland, employing about 100,000 people. Nearly 20 per cent of our visitors from overseas come from the United States or Canada and they spend about £350 million a year. There are strong links in many of the key sectors of our economy, such as energy, electronics, life sciences and financial services, which give potential for more investment and export opportunities, as well as opportunities for our companies to invest in the United States and Canada and bring foreign earnings into Scotland.

As Ted Brocklebank said, many of our major companies, such as FirstBus and Scottish Power, have already invested in America—I will not mention the Royal Bank of Scotland. Many of our universities, most notably the University of St Andrews in my constituency, attract large numbers of American students, who bring in welcome income to the universities and local economies. Those students also help to develop academic and research links, with long-term benefits for Scotland. Of course, I cannot mention St Andrews without mentioning golf, which is of great importance to Americans and Canadians. For all those reasons, it is essential that Scotland continues to develop our relationships, whether academic, economic or through tourism, with our cousins across the Atlantic.

As Ted Brocklebank rightly pointed out, there are strong historical connections across the ocean. Millions of people in the United States and Canada claim a direct link with Scotland, and many more claim an indirect one. There is good will for Scotland, as anyone who has been on a personal visit or part of a parliamentary delegation will know. In the 10 years since the Parliament was set up, I have had the great fortune to go on three visits to Canada and the United States. Two of them were Commonwealth Parliamentary Association visits to Canada. The first was to Quebec in 2001 and, two years later, I was part of the delegation that celebrated the 250th anniversary of the Selkirk landings on Prince Edward Island. We also visited New Brunswick. Last year, I had the good fortune to attend Scotland week as my party's representative, so I know the value of that week, which is highlighted in the Government's evaluation report on that event. I look forward to finding out about the benefits from this year's Scotland week in this year's evaluation report from the Government.

It is important that we examine what we do during such visits. It is easy simply to use them as a way in which to build links between parliamentarians, but the Parliament and the Government should work together more closely on the programmes to ensure that we all sing from the same hymn sheet and that we develop tourism and business links.

During Scotland week last year, we went to Virginia to see for ourselves how the much-lauded Scotland performs system—well, it is lauded by the SNP Government—was developed in Virginia. The visit was interesting and informative. For example, it informed me that, unlike Scotland performs, which has been used by the SNP Government, the system in Virginia is based on a board that includes representatives from the Government, the legislature and civic society, particularly businesses. That board develops the policy and the measures that are required. There are big lessons to be learned from that. If we are to have a Scotland performs system, that should involve our working together on what we should measure, rather than just measuring what the Government thinks we should measure.

We also went to Toronto in Canada, where we looked at energy issues, which are of great importance in Scotland and to me, as the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, of which I am convener, reaches the end of its energy inquiry.

We spent a great deal of time promoting homecoming and Scottish tourism, which we all felt are extremely important to Scotland's economy this year. The tartan parade was the highlight of the event. When I reached the end of it, I was pleased to get on to the VIP bus. However, I had to rush off it again suddenly when I saw coming towards me the banner of the University of St Andrew's alumni in New York, to whom I was able to speak. It was a great event and a great opportunity.

One of the key passages in the Scotland week evaluation report is about team Scotland. We miss that team Scotland approach. We need to work together—Parliament and Government—to work out our international framework and what the relationships are. We need to ensure that when we make visits as ministers and parliamentarians, we work together to develop Scotland's economy.

I hope that the international framework that was published by the Scottish Government last year will be developed. It says:

"Further plans on North America and further work on promotion and reputation management will follow during the coming year."

A year on from its publication, and still we have not seen the further plans on North America. It might have been useful to publish them before today's debate.

I think I said in my speech that we are in the process of refreshing the America plan. I have been keen to influence it myself, so it is slightly later than it might have been. Progress is good and I hope that we will publish something in the weeks and months to come. I will not tie myself down, but there will be a new plan.

The traditional Government response—it will be produced shortly.

The way forward for us is important. We need a focused approach in North America. We need VisitScotland, SDI, the Scottish Government and parliamentarians to work together to maximise our impact by concentrating on where we will get the best returns—for example, biotech industries and energy, where there are great internal and external investment opportunities.

We need to work now on what will follow homecoming. Although it is for one year only, we need to build on it and to start thinking about what we will do from 2010 onwards to develop any of the successes that homecoming might bring.

I am happy to support the motion and the amendment.

It is a great pleasure to speak in the debate. I am sorry to hear that Ted Brocklebank has never been fortunate enough to be part of a Scottish Parliament delegation, but I am sure that his speech today will serve as a job application to his party to be part of the delegation for Scotland week next year.

I was fortunate to be part of the Scottish Parliament delegation for Scotland week this April, together with the Presiding Officer, Sarah Boyack, Murdo Fraser and Tavish Scott. All of us who were part of the delegation would echo the view of the minister, Michael Russell, that the warmth of the welcome for Scotland in New York, Quebec and North Carolina will stay with us for some time to come.

In New York, the Scotland week march down 6th Avenue was well supported by the diaspora, to say nothing of the thousands of ordinary New Yorkers who turned out to give the marchers support. It was good to see that the homecoming Scotland team had been working well—as we walked, we saw many saltires that I am sure had been given out just before the march. The team had given out so many of them that by the time we came to the end of the march, they had run out. That probably shows the great demand for saltire hats and the like.

In Quebec, the delegation met committees to discuss joint concerns and opportunities around renewable energy issues, relationships with federal Governments and other opportunities for us all. It was clear that interest in Scotland was genuine and tangible. As a measure of that, the delegation was present as a motion to commemorate tartan day was introduced in the Parliament. It was interesting that the representatives of the federal Government, who were introduced to the Parliament just before the Scottish delegation, had nothing like the welcome from the Parliament that the Scottish delegation had.

Since I came back, I have referred in the chamber to the fact that our Presiding Officer was quite taken with being referred to as the President of Scotland. I know not what Mr Salmond, our beloved First Minister, would make of that, but the delegation rather enjoyed it.

I was also delighted to hear a good Fife accent when we visited St Andrew's church in Quebec. It turned out that the curator of the kirk came from Lochgelly, 2 miles away from where I was born and brought up, and her good Fife accent was undiluted after 30 years in Quebec.

The Scottish delegation met the governor of North Carolina and both houses of the General Assembly, and the Presiding Officer made a presentation to them. Murdo Fraser and I had in-depth discussions about the federal Government's stimulus programme, to which I have referred in previous debates. The Scottish Parliament and the minister co-hosted a reception for the Scottish community and both houses of the Assembly. I was surprised to find out that North Carolina had the highest percentage of citizens claiming Scots ancestry in the United States.

The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body has yet to discuss what our future relationship with the US and Canada will be. We need an evaluation of the most recent Scotland week. However, I am clear that the Parliament and its MSPs have opened up great links with the state legislatures in the US and the provincial Governments in Canada. We have much to learn from their powers and their relationships with other Governments and by exchanging views on matters of joint interest.

It is clear that the Parliament has a role in making links with other legislatures, but the Scottish Government's Scotland week programme did not make full use of the parliamentary delegation. Many more joint events could have taken place. For example, the reception for the Scottish community in Raleigh, North Carolina—at which Murdo Fraser and I worked the room in our own inimitable way—was co-hosted by the minister and the Presiding Officer. It is clear to me from that event and others that the Scottish Government should in future work far more closely with the Scottish Parliament to ensure that we get as many bangs for our buck as possible from the Scottish Parliament's and the Scottish community's representation and to ensure that Scotland is showcased in the best possible way. I would like some commitment from ministers that, in future years, they will try to ensure that they and the Scottish Parliament work together far more closely than happened during the most recent Scotland week.

There is great interest in Scotland at every level—from the political to the personal, and from the industrial to the cultural—from people who share a heritage and a vision for our world. I am happy to support the Government's purpose of establishing new links and building on the existing ones. There is much more to be done, but no one denies that a great start has been made.

It is appropriate that we have such a debate in the year of homecoming. I say yes not only to the celebration of our historical, cultural and social links with North America, but, I hope, to an injection of hard currency to help maintain jobs in Scotland during the current recession.

I have had the opportunity to visit parts of the USA and Canada. North America is seldom dull: Pittsburgh and Vancouver are like nowhere else I have ever been, whereas Montreal and Boston feel somewhat like continental Europe. Contemporary politics in North America are anything but dull. The historic election of President Obama last November was sandwiched between federal elections in Canada last October and provincial elections in Québec last December. Incidentally, in the latter, according to Reuters news agency, the Parti Québécois increased its representation in the provincial Parliament while hardly ever mentioning a referendum on independence—that is just an aside.

I am a member of the Parliament's European and External Relations Committee, whose members have engaged with two important delegations from Canada in recent months. Last December, some of us met the agent-general of Québec province, Pierre Boulanger, who represents Québec in the UK; and, in March, some of us met a cross-party group of Canadian parliamentarians from the federal Parliament and various provincial Parliaments. Both sets of discussions were mutually interesting and useful.

The Minister for Culture, External Affairs and the Constitution gave evidence to the European and External Relations Committee on 31 March this year, soon after he was promoted—I was going to say appointed, but perhaps "promoted" is a more apposite term. At that meeting, the convener reminded him that the committee awaits receipt of the Scottish Government's refreshed North America plan, and the minister replied that it would be published in the summer. Well, the sun is shining today, but he gave a rather vaguer commitment a few minutes ago to Iain Smith. Perhaps he could have a go at telling us exactly when we will see the North America plan, because we are all very interested in it.

I seem to remember that I indicated during questioning at the committee meeting that I thought that there had perhaps been more documents in the past than there should have been. I think that Mr Gordon and the convener agreed with me on that, and I agreed to consider how we present the documents. I indicated in my earlier speech that we will refresh the North America plan—indeed, that process is under way. I welcome Mr Gordon's contribution and I am sure that he will take entirely seriously my assurance that we are not diminishing but intensifying our work and that we will have documentation that will be fit for purpose.

Let us hope that it will be a long summer and that we will see the plan before the end of it.

In the meantime, I have been reading the minister's blog on his official visits in Canada—a task that some may be averse to, but it is all in a day's work for me. The blog obviously came in handy for the minister when he was preparing the speech that he delivered earlier. I found the blog informative but a wee bit dull—I wondered whether it had been ghost-written by an apprentice spin doctor. If so, that might explain the incorrect use of apostrophes in parts of it. Whatever the case is, the blog is useful, but it does not capture the minister's ebullience, which we witnessed earlier.

The global recession has hurt Canada, although not perhaps in the same way as it has hurt our own country. Ontario province, with the great city of Toronto at its heart, has suffered many job losses at US-owned factories. For the first time in living memory, Ontario province will be a recipient of funds from the federal Government, due to its reduced living standards. Ontario and Canada generally want to reduce their overreliance on, and overexposure to, economic conditions in the USA. We Scots must plan and press for stronger trade links with Canada, not just stronger tourism and cultural links.

Canada is not a basket case—far from it. For example, Alberta province's oil reserves are second in scale only to those of Saudi Arabia; and the city of Calgary is consequently rising to become, possibly, Canada's wealthiest city. I received an e-mail from a constituent who visited Calgary in March, in which he said, incidentally, that he did not see any sign of the promotion of homecoming Scotland, but I will reserve judgment on that. I endorse all our efforts on homecoming. I am doing my own wee bit in that regard: there is a link to the homecoming Scotland website on the home page of my website.

There is an old saying that England and America are two countries separated by a common language. My experience of visiting the States is that the version of English that we speak in Scotland often sounds like a completely different language to American lugs. Indeed, I am sure that many of the interns who work for members throughout the chamber will testify to that. However, they will also testify that, while it may sound impenetrable at first, the common denominator is not so much the way in which our common language is spoken, but what is said.

For many decades—indeed, for centuries—Scotland has been lucky enough to speak a language of friendship with the peoples of North America, in both the US and Canada. That language of friendship extends to the principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that are mentioned in the American declaration of independence and in the bills of rights that have been adopted in Canada over the years. As with many such declarations around the world, Scotland's declaration of Arbroath and its assertion of the right of the people to choose who governs them inspired those documents and charters.

For that reason, 6 April—the date on which, 689 years ago, the declaration of Arbroath was signed—was picked as the date for the first US tartan day in 1998. It is worth noting that several Canadian provinces marked tartan day before the idea was adopted in America, but that is just more evidence of the close relationships among our three countries and the benefits that come from working and learning together. Tartan day has grown and evolved to become what we now know as Scotland week. I believe that we can all be proud of the Parliament's achievements in building on that relationship and in strengthening the dialogue between our countries.

This year's Scotland week events built on the success of those of previous years, with official events taking place in 10 cities across the US and Canada. There was an amazing amount of formal and informal activity, both in North America and in Scotland, to make the most of the week. The Minister for Culture, External Affairs and the Constitution recorded his experiences—as Charlie Gordon noted—in an exciting blog, which includes some impressive pictures of his time representing our country.

As the minister said, Scotland week is just one very visible and high-profile manifestation of the relationship between Scotland and the US and Canada, but links of all kinds take place on a daily basis. Anyone in Scotland who traces their family tree back through a couple of generations is likely to find links to North America. We often refer to Americans and Canadians as our cousins, and many families in Scotland literally have cousins or relatives who live across the Atlantic. Scotland's online national archives are well-known to American genealogists, and the popularity of TV programmes such as "Who Do You Think You Are?" and of Radio Scotland's "Digging Up Your Roots" testify that the interest and curiosity work both ways. Indeed, roots often go deeper. In my family, my father tells the legend that some of our ancestors moved to Canada, where they invented the McIntosh Red apple. I am not sure whether that is true, but I hope that it is.

Having mentioned the success of television programmes on genealogy, I should point out that TV entertainment is also shared by our countries. I happen to know that Scotland's own celebrity interior designers, Colin and Justin—whom I met at the Young Scot awards—are hugely popular in Canada. The culture minister will be delighted to know that they have offered their services to promote the year of homecoming in whatever way they can.

It is appropriate that today's debate on the success of Scotland week and on our relations with the US and Canada takes place during the year of homecoming. No one visiting Scotland this year, or with an affinity for Scotland, can fail to notice that we have opened wide our country's doors to welcome anyone and everyone who wishes to learn more. We want people to visit Scotland to enjoy what we have to offer the world, and we want to learn from them.

Such an initiative would be good and commendable at any time, but it is especially welcome now as the world experiences economic recession. Leisure travel and tourism often suffer early and seriously as disposable incomes diminish, so the year of homecoming will help to insulate Scotland by making an extra case for visiting this country at a time when people need to choose carefully where and when they wish to travel. The 200,000 potential visitors who are included in VisitScotland's loyalty programme receive monthly updates about homecoming, as do more than 2,400 diaspora organisations around the world.

Tourism from the US and Canada is worth hundreds of millions of pounds to Scotland's economy—almost £1 million per day, or some 22 per cent of the total spend by overseas tourists in 2007. We do not yet know how those figures will be affected during the economic downturn, but it is clear that such tourists will continue to remain of huge importance.

I know that many of us in the Parliament have done our own bit to promote homecoming. I have written to municipal representatives in towns and cities—such as Biggar, Saskatchewan, and Irvine, California—that share place names with towns in the South of Scotland, which I represent.

I have also been involved in trying to make it a little easier for people from Scotland who wish to travel to the US, especially those who wish to make an impact that will benefit Scotland in the long run. As members will be aware, the US consulate in Edinburgh stopped issuing visas several years ago so the recent understandable tightening of visa restrictions has resulted in more and more people from Scotland finding that they must travel to London to acquire a visa. That can prove particularly expensive for bands that wish to travel on tour. Bands such as Mogwai and representatives of other bands have told me about the high costs of travelling to London in order to play in the US. Such costs might have a negative impact on the cultural exchanges to which the minister referred, so I have had a meeting with the US consul, Lisa Vickers, to discuss the issue. Of course, independent countries such as Norway, Ireland and even Iceland have a full US embassy with all the associated visa and diplomatic services that are attached to such institutions.

There is much that Scotland, the US and Canada can learn from one another. Just as an aside, perhaps one important lesson is that deciding to have a Parliament whose purse strings are not controlled by London is no barrier to success in the modern world. However, even under devolution, Scotland continues to improve and develop its relationships with countries around the world. As today's debate has shown, our relationship with North America is among the most important and historic of them all.

It has often been said that we Scots travel well. The history of the world proves that—in the far east, where bankers and trading companies did exceptionally well in places such as Hong Kong, Malaya and Singapore; in Africa, where we exported Christianity to a significant extent; and in the United States and Canada. One of my earliest recollections of life, as a young child, was seeing large queues of people waiting outside the warehouses and docks at Yorkhill and Anderston to get on board the ships that would take them to Canada and the USA in the 1950s. It is a particularly acute memory—I often wonder what became of those people. We can be certain that the vast majority of them were a success, because we Scots tend to be a success when we travel. History is littered with success stories.

As has been mentioned, Scots have profoundly influenced the commercial, political and economic life of the United States and Canada. Carnegie and others saw the way in which industries could be built up with the degree of humanity towards fellow citizens for which we Scots are particularly noted.

Over the centuries, we Scots have also exported our warlike tendencies. We should not forget that the Royal Highland regiment, under General Wolfe, took the Heights of Abraham in Quebec and defeated the French forces of General Montcalm. We must also remember that the Scots contributed significantly to the combatants in the American war of independence. From my recollection of history, both sides included a strong representation of Scots.

One of the things that have bound Canada, the USA and many of us on this side of the Atlantic together is the way in which we stood shoulder to shoulder against the twin menaces of the 20th century, fascism and communism, and were able, in glorious combination, to stand up for the political and personal freedoms of so many people in Europe.

Of course, business is largely business. We need to build on the relationships and emotional and historical attachments that exist to ensure that they are demonstrated in more tangible terms. As Aileen Campbell correctly pointed out—although her figures were slightly lower than mine—we owe a great deal to those who come from across the Atlantic as tourists. According to my calculations, about 25 per cent of the total tourist take comes from Canada and America; that brings in £330 million a year. Obviously, we will have to see the effects of the recession. I hope—and Mr Mather may have some grounds for expecting—that the slump and economic depression may be compensated for to some extent by the fact that the pound has fallen in value against the dollars of both Canada and the USA. We need to consider what we can do to encourage the tourism business that is invaluable to so many communities in Scotland, especially more rural communities.

Of course, business is not restricted to tourism. We need to see how we can build on the associations that exist to provide opportunities and markets for our exporters. The plummeting value of the pound may benefit them in that respect.

We must also remember that, although there is a great demand for Scottish goods and memorabilia, and for the products of traditional Scottish industries, such as whisky and tweed, we are a contemporary country. We must accept that times change, and we must consider how we can make ourselves more attractive in commercial terms and export more in the way of tangible goods, rather than just emotional goods, to the USA and Canada.

We do not know what the future holds in that respect. It is fortunate that younger people now have a much more internationalist outlook than was the case 40 or 50 years ago, say. That is a very good thing. There will be opportunities in the years ahead, despite the recession, that will enable people to travel more. It is always said of politicians that it is advisable for them to get out more, and I genuinely think that it is a good thing for people to travel. It broadens the mind and widens our experience.

We have a great deal to learn from Canada and the USA. I have been privileged to visit those countries on several occasions, including with parliamentary delegations. Like other speakers, I have been amazed by the warmth of the reception that we have received, by the genuine interest in Scotland and by the genuine wish that connections can be built on and increased in both size and number in the years ahead.

This is a constructive debate, and the amendment is infinitely acceptable. There is little, for once in the Parliament, to divide us. I commend the motion.

The opportunity to share a discussion of the links between Scotland and North America highlights a very important part of our history and of our future. I will start on the Plains of Abraham. After the battle, a Gaelic-speaking Scots Highlander on the British side received the surrender from a Gaelic-speaking Scots Highlander on the French side. We should not forget, however, that General Wolfe said of the Highlanders that it was

"no great mischief if they fall."

The Canadian support for this country in our time of need in the past is one thing; the British Government's support for the Highlanders at that time was not in evidence. They were being used as mercenaries.

We talk about multiculturalism, and the Labour amendment is about

"Scotland's cultural diversity in a modern Scotland".

There is an interesting sidelight to that in the North American context. Ted Brocklebank mentioned the interest of Bob Dylan, who used the tune from the song about Lord Franklin for one of his early famous songs. Lord Franklin, who led the expedition to find the north-west passage, left from Stromness in Orkney. Of course, he got lost. The great Dr John Rae, who was himself from Orkney, was commissioned by the British Admiralty to try to find out what had happened—this was in the middle of the 19th century. Living with the Inuit, like many fur traders who brought back the riches of the Canadian west through the Hudson's Bay Company and the North West Company, John Rae reached the point where the Inuit could show that the Franklin expedition had been lost.

Interestingly, and to put it in a multicultural sense, John Rae was not welcomed when he reported on the matter on return to London. The people there would not believe the Inuit who had pointed out that the Franklin expedition had ended up decimated by the ravages of leaded tins—which they had not known about—and of cannibalism, when they had gone mad. Lord Franklin's wife would not accept it. To this day, there is a statue in London praising the fact that Lord Franklin found the north-west passage. It was actually John Rae who found the north-west passage. There is perhaps a need for the Labour Party to help us, using whatever influence it has in London, to get the statues there changed to show the truth. That would be a great help, and it would extend the multiculturalism of Scotland in this day and age. That link is an important one to make. Members should all see the brilliant Canadian documentary on the subject to appreciate how Scots learned to live with the natives in North America and were able to pursue the fur trade because of it. They did not die using the most modern methods of the day.

The cultural trade goes both ways. I am delighted that we have the transatlantic sessions at Celtic Connections, where we celebrate the music of both sides. There is much of that now, unlike in the 18th century, when it was a one-way ticket. However, it is even better to note that the principal magazine of traditional music, folk roots and world music in Canada, Penguin Eggs, is edited in Edmonton by a man from Dingwall in Ross-shire who is part of our diaspora; Roddy Campbell has made a great job of bringing together the French and English parts of music in Canada.

Interestingly, in the issue of the magazine that I have there is a review of Billy Kay's book "The Scottish World: A Journey into the Scottish Diaspora" by a long-time Scots exile in Canada, Enoch Kent. Kent writes that Kay's personal travels in Canada are "interesting" and quotes Kay:

"No country in the world has been so profoundly influenced by the Scots as Canada, and the influence stems from ordinary humble folk to the great and the good of this huge country"

That is an enormous gift that we have given to the world. Indeed, it is useful for us to draw on some of the ideas that they were able to develop there. Let us not forget the Alberta oil fund that was set up when oil was being developed there, or the Alaska permanent fund, which has been giving people there $2,000 a head. The idea of using their non-renewable energy sources to support and improve their own communities is something that we could desperately do with having learned a good deal earlier in this country.

In the modern sense of energy, the competition or collaboration with people in Nova Scotia who are trying to develop tidal power at the moment is an important way to the future. The Bay of Fundy contains great potential there, as does the Pentland Firth in our country. I am glad to say that the competition will be to the good of the whole world because while we have installed a 2MW tidal device off Eday in Orkney—the first to serve the grid—the Nova Scotians are about a year behind us. However, they have Irish help and there will be a huge international competition in tidal power that will allow us to be able to help other people in the world eventually by exporting our technology when we perfect it. I hope that we win, but I wish the Canadians good luck also.

In talking about the potential for the future, we should not forget the past. It would be terrible if we did not recognise how people in Canada and the United States look to Scotland in a cultural sense. As Ted Brocklebank said, the blood is strong. Indeed, I heard Capercaillie singing at Aberlour on Saturday night and there was a large number of Americans in the audience for that homecoming event.

This is a very welcome debate. Everyone in the chamber will support the Scottish Government's efforts to build good relationships with our friends in North America. I have many connections with Canada: my Uncle Ralph was the Queen's equerry in Montreal in the 1960s; my elder half-brother was a professor at a Canadian university; and I have cousins and nephews strewn across the country from one side to the other. I visited the United States with the specific intention of spending time in Yosemite and celebrating the great contribution that our very own John Muir made to national parks there and eventually to national parks in Scotland.

It is in the context of the land, people and places that have been mentioned—the Inuit and oil in Alberta—that I come to the burden of my speech. Sometimes one comes across issues that one thinks need to be raised. I decided that it would be inappropriate to lodge an amendment on the issue, but I think that it is appropriate to raise it in this context.

Are the ministers aware of the plight of the Lubicon Cree of northern Alberta? Just last month, Amnesty International produced a film entitled "Poverty of Justice". One of the three cases that the film deals with is the plight of the Lubicon, who tell their story. In 1952, oil and gas was found under their lands and, despite their fierce objections, exploration and extraction began in the 1970s, alongside a massive expansion of logging.

In 1971, the Government in Alberta dismissed the traditional owners of the land as

"merely squatters on provincial crown land with no land rights to negotiate."

The Lubicon, however, viewed their situation very differently. In 1991, the Lubicon nation's chief said:

"We never had anything fancy, but we never went hungry. Then all of a sudden they found oil and we were caught in a situation where we were in the way."

The discovery of oil led to an all-too-familiar story. Once oil extraction began, human rights abuses and great poverty soon followed. Spills and leaking oil pipes have poisoned the groundwater, so the Lubicon can no longer trap, hunt, fish or even collect their water as they used to. In an 18-month period in the mid-1980s, 19 out of 21 Lubicon pregnancies were miscarried or stillborn, which was attributed to water pollution. Although the oil and gas fields have brought in billions of dollars for the Albertan Government, the Lubicon have not seen a penny.

In 2007—just two years ago—the United Nations warned about the continued plight of the Lubicon. The UN's special rapporteur called for a moratorium on all oil extraction on Lubicon land until a settlement had been agreed that was consistent with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, but that plea was ignored.

There are now a staggering four oil wells on Lubicon land for every man, woman and child. Just last year, the decision was taken to force a massive pipeline through Lubicon Cree territory and build a camp for 600 workers near the traditional Lubicon fishing lands. The pipeline will connect to the tar sands of eastern Alberta—it is the most polluting method of fossil fuel extraction that has ever been developed.

Ministers may regard the situation as something that is happening in a far-away place about which we know little. They may not regard statements supporting indigenous rights as politically correct or right. However, we should remember our own history. Many who left Scotland for Canada in the 18th and 19th centuries were forced out after their lands were stolen and their families divided. It would be a betrayal of their memory and our cultural heritage to remain quiet as others with equal rights to their land are exploited and ignored in the 21st century.

If minorities were treated in such a way in Scotland, we would expect the international community to speak out, to be their friend and our friend at the same time, and to urge a fair resolution and respect for human rights. Canada enjoys a very positive international reputation on human rights and was heavily involved in the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The treatment of the Lubicon Cree is therefore an exceptionally bad mark, which Canada's friends must encourage it to set right. Quite rightly, our ministers wish to derive social and economic benefit for Scotland from their activities in Canada but, in doing so, they should not turn a blind eye to the social problems within the country.

My plea to ministers is therefore to pledge to conduct human rights impact assessments for any oil and wood-related trade agreements that we wish to make with Canada; and to discuss the plight of the Lubicon Cree if and when the opportunity arises—or to create that opportunity—with our Canadian friends, and to communicate any responses to the European and External Affairs Committee.

I welcome the chance to put on record my thoughts following my participation in this year's tartan week. I enjoyed the cultural elements of the visit to New York—I will say a few words about that first, but I want to focus on our political discussions with colleagues in Quebec and the US. It is difficult to find an easy slot in which to do that in the Parliament, so this debate is an excellent opportunity.

We enjoyed meeting members of the New York Scottish community both on our visit to the UK's memorial garden for the victims of 9/11 and in relation to the work of the St Andrews society, which does a huge amount to build links between Scotland and the US, as well as doing charity work and organising of the tartan day parade, which Tricia Marwick and the minister have already mentioned. As Mike Russell said, we were very well served by our tartan day marshal, Alan Cumming, who is much better known and recognised in the US, and in particular in New York, his adopted home, than he is in Scotland. That is the measure of his success as a Scot who has gone abroad.

Although our visit to New York was interesting, I found the visit to Quebec a fascinating experience, because it gave us an insight into how asymmetrical federalism works in practice and offered interesting parallels with our development of asymmetrical devolution. It would be appropriate to record our thanks to the President of the National Assembly of Quebec and his deputies and their staff for the fantastic welcome that they gave us and the hard work that they did to ensure that we had a successful visit.

In Quebec, it was interesting to sit in another Parliament watching the mechanics of how members hold their ministers to account. The dynamic is very different, and not just in relation to the politics. Obviously, the nationalist Government there has been defeated, which was a cause for joy among at least three quarters of our delegation. The ministers and the Opposition parties are limited in the time that they have not just for questions, but answers. The clock ticks backwards, a bit like it does during our speeches, from 90 seconds, to 45 seconds to 20 seconds, which really forces the ministers to answer the question. If they do not answer the question, it is completely obvious—it is not just clear from the record. It was fun for us to consider how that might work in our Parliament.

The other element that I particularly enjoyed was the excellent presentation on Quebec's promotion of renewables. Quebec, like Scotland, has some fantastic natural and geographical opportunities. I had expected Quebec to be promoting marine renewables, as we are doing, but that is not its focus. When I talked to people there, I understood the reasons for that: they are focusing on proven technologies for wind and hydro power, for which they still have massive untapped opportunities. I am not saying that they put us in the shade; they just have different opportunities.

I found the differences very interesting. Quebec and Canada did not go through the Thatcher era. Its company, Hydro-Québec, is owned by the Quebec Government. Quebec has massive opportunities to exploit the resources and export to the US. As it toughs out the recession, it knows that it has a renewables dividend, which will come directly to the Government. All members of our delegation were pretty envious of that.

When I came back from the visit, it was interesting to reflect on how much more we could do with our public sector organisations in Scotland. We have debated the Forestry Commission Scotland and I know that Scottish Water has ambitious plans to promote renewables on its estate. What other land do we have that could be used for renewables in order to reinvest directly in our services?

Part of the delegation went off to the Carolinas and the rest of us—Tavish Scott and I—went to Maryland and Washington. The trip to Maryland and Washington gave us a good opportunity to follow up discussions with different sets of politicians and officials. We spent a long time talking to the governor of Maryland's chief of staff. I understand that we are the third delegation to have gone there—Jack McConnell and John Swinney have been there—so it was interesting for us to follow up on earlier discussions. There was a big focus on climate change and the state statistics system. There is a very tough focus on management in the public sector, on how the dollars are spent and on allowing the public to see what they get for the money.

The journey that we took by train through the state gave us a good snapshot of the physical evidence of the economic restructuring that Maryland has gone through. We were privileged to get an hour of Governor Martin O'Malley's time.

Our visit to Washington was fantastic. We met US business leaders, with whom we discussed climate change and the Blue Green Alliance, which would translate in Scotland to a red-green alliance. It was very interesting to meet the Sierra Club, the trade unions, representatives who are working on the climate change bill in the United States and senior officials of the US Department of Energy. That is where the most stark differences were. All the states in the US are going for 25 per cent renewable electricity by 2020, but I have to say that their challenges made our challenges look easy. They do not have the planning system that we have. However creaking members will often say it is, we have a democratic system that offers certainty and does not just deal with issues in the courts. In the US, they have ambitions for renewables and for developing a smart grid. They have a very different energy system from ours. The transportation of electricity from one part of the US to another makes the transportation of our green electricity from the Highlands to the central belt and to the rest of the UK look like a piece of cake. I am not underestimating our challenges, but their challenges are much greater.

I hope that we can continue to have dialogue. That would not mean sending us all back to the States—much as I would love to go back on another trip. We could use teleconferencing and electronic communications. Thinking of ways in which our legislators can link together could offer interesting opportunities.

I have not been stopped yet, Presiding Officer. Do I still have 20 seconds to go? Are you being lenient with us today?

I can give you 20 seconds.

Many thanks.

I will watch the clock ticking down.

That is great—I knew that we would have slightly more time in this debate.

The other big lesson that I picked up in the States was from Obama's climate change ambitions and fiscal stimulus package. In the US, they are at a different stage in the debate: there is not the same level of acceptance of the need for action. The business community in the States is not in the same place as CBI Scotland, which sees the challenges but also the opportunities. Things are different in the US. Here, businesses have been brought on board to tackle climate change, and that is something that the US could learn from us.

However, we can also learn from the US. The minister will be delighted to know that I have found yet another country where domestic tax breaks are offered to people who put energy efficiency measures in place.

We also had the chance to meet people in Congresswoman Kathy Castor's office, to talk about how her staff will be working through the legislative process on their climate change bill, and to talk about her work on foreclosures to protect her constituents in Florida.

It was fascinating and a privilege to be part of the delegation; I very much enjoyed the opportunity. I will finish by picking up on Tricia Marwick's point. I get the sense that we could make more of some of these visits—both in promoting team Scotland while we are there, and in reflecting on the trip when we come back and thinking about how to broaden the links. We have to develop those links, not just on a personal basis but institutionally.

Ten years ago, I visited the town of St Andrews in New Brunswick. It is a beautiful town, dominated by the Greenock church of Scotland and by birdseye maple. The place was originally in Maine, USA, but after the war of independence, its empire loyalist folk towed its buildings on barges across the St Croix River, and set them up in Canada. We have heard of refugees, but I think that that is one of the very few examples of a refugee town.

We sometimes talk rather too much about our influence on the declaration of independence. Scotland's role has always been very lively in North America, but also very ambiguous. Robin Harper brought us that sad tale of the Cree in Alberta. I remind him of the last novel by John Buchan, who was Governor General of Canada in the 1930s. "Sick Heart River" is an extremely sensitive ecological examination of the problems of being Canadian at that time.

Our orientation towards North America started off in the 19th century with our anti-slave movement. We can speak of that experience with some expertise, because we still had our own slaves—our miners and our salt workers—until 1800. We inspired Abe Lincoln with his love of Burns and freedom, but there was also a conservative element that we donated to southern society. Mark Twain was on the tail of that in the 1880s, blaming the civil war and southern culture on Walter Scott—too many saltires, too many majors and colonels, too much Gothic prose, and too many klansmen, with a "k".

"We have heritage and we have correction," was what a politician from South Carolina said to me about the prospects for the state, which is not a very industrial part of America. There were two great alternatives: they could get girls to wear white dresses, sit in colonial mansions and shout "Fiddle-de-dee!" from "Gone with the Wind"; or they could show people round the prisons.

They say that the only place that George W Bush knew of in Europe was Scotland, which he had visited while he was a student. We are told by Newsweek that, every morning, he turned to the writings of an obscure Scots theologian called Oswald Chambers. Believe me, a theologian has to be really obscure for me not to have some notion of him. Basically, he told Dubya every morning that he was doing God's work—which is what we are now coping with today.

That worked to our benefit, however. Think of all the expensive members of the House of Representatives who are enjoying golf at St Andrews, paid for by Washington lobbyists, whose numbers exploded from 10,000 to 26,000 under President Bush. Those lobbyists stuffed representatives' pockets, with $50 million coming from one pressure group alone—come on, Westminster MPs, where have you been all this time? We could do well out of one sort of relationship, but we will have a lot to answer for. On the other hand, our own Canongate Publishing secured the rights to the work of an obscure senator from Chicago called Barack Obama and ran with them.

In the 2008 election, American electors threw out rule by giant corporations and corrupt politics. That would have brought joy to the second-greatest Scottish economist who, alas, died in 2006: John Kenneth Galbraith. He wrote a wonderful book that can be read almost as a contemporary history: "The Great Crash of 1929". Again, we have had massive frauds, notably that involving Enron in 2002, which should have inspired intervention. Instead, they promoted Westminster complacency attractive enough to encourage the migration to London of the Sarbanes-Oxley refugees and enough dodgy ingenuity to confuse poorly budgeted regulators. Special financial instruments hit the UK hard because of Gordon Brown's light-touch regulation. J K was, once again, spot on when he wrote:

"On the whole, the greater the earlier reputation for omniscience, the more serene the previous idiocy, the greater the foolishness now exposed … the social historian must always be alert to his opportunities, and there have been few like 1929."

Until 2008, that is.

The worst connection with North America that we can promote is such complicity in financial jugglery or freebies for lobbyists. The best is a link that promotes democratic thought and action. I will highlight one such example. Ideas are under way to establish a series of Scottish studies centres and programmes at US universities—something that Ireland and the Irish-American community have pulled off in the past with great success. Perhaps the most advanced current project is being discussed for Princeton University, where Galbraith lectured. Such promotion of Scotland at American universities will not only boost knowledge generation and academic co-operation but boost US awareness of Scotland, which has already been heightened by the Government's homecoming initiatives. It may spark long-term interest in Scottish literature, culture and products, benefiting Scottish exports, and it will make young Americans look towards Scotland as somewhere to visit, study, train and work—provided that Westminster's short-sighted new immigration regulations do not spell the end of the valuable internship programmes that we offer in Scotland. My colleague Kenneth Gibson has warned of that.

As one contribution to knowledge transfer and co-operation, and in homage to John Kenneth Galbraith—who ever wrote with more wisdom and wit of the "non-potable Scotch" of his Ontario boyhood?—I ask the minister to support the efforts of Scots-American academics to establish a Scottish centre at Princeton. And why not name it after the great Galbraith himself?

Until the speeches of Chris Harvie and Robin Harper, I thought that the rather prosaic title of the debate—"Scotland's Engagement in the United States of America and Canada"—should have been replaced with an alternative such as "Here's tae us—wha's like us?" A lot of the speeches have definitely been in that vein.

I do not want to rain on anyone's parade, as I said to Ted Brocklebank, but the debate could also have been called "What I Did on My American Jolly". It was not terribly serious to start off with. I know that that makes me sound like a bit of a sour old trout, but I do not have the scattering of cousins in North America and Canada that Robin Harper has—although my husband's cousin's son owns the bar that Shania Twain drank in.

Let me make it plain that I love many things about North America, particularly the USA. I love Willie Nelson, Alan Jackson, Dwight Yoakam, Reba McEntire and all of the country scene, but I am not blind to the fact that we have an unequal relationship with the USA when it comes to nuclear weapons and things like that. That must be pitched into the equation when we are talking about our relationship with America.

Pauline McNeill said that Americans like us, but Americans do not know us. I was once in Atlanta, trying to check my bags through to Edinburgh, and I had to have an argument with the lady at the desk, who maintained that Edinburgh was in London. I had to explain that it was the capital city of Scotland. Do you know what the name on her badge was? Marie Stuart. She had never heard of Scotland or Scots, which is, unfortunately, true of a great number of people in America.

Tricia Marwick says that Americans have a great interest in us. Some of them have—I would not deny that some communities in North America know the difference between Scotland and Ireland and have a particular interest in Scotland—but I am more interested in what Chris Harvie said about building up a Scottish centre of learning, knowledge and true information at Princeton. I would back that any time.

Although I appreciate that tartan day has become Scotland week and that there are now 10 cities that have events to mark the week, I am still critical. Susan Boyle got coast-to-coast coverage on American television in eight minutes, but, in eight years, Scotland week is still not coast to coast.

I should correct the member on two points. First, far more than 10 cities are involved; I mentioned 10 cities only because those were the ones that the three ministers managed to visit. Secondly, by any definition, Scotland week is coast to coast. We mentioned events in New York and San Francisco and in Prince Edward Island and Vancouver. In both countries, it is coast to coast.

Scotland week would be a lot more coast to coast if it got on Craig Ferguson's "Late Late Show", which is one of the most important television programmes in America. I used to work with him in Scottish Television—for all I know, Ted Brocklebank might have worked with him as well. It would also be good to get hold of Dermot McQuarrie, whose father, Albert, was a Conservative MP and who is a vice-president of the Fox Broadcasting Company.

We have never exploited those avenues because we have not thought clearly about the priorities of Scotland week. Is the priority to promote the profile of Scotland and make ourselves better known as a community or to build up business links? I am not at all sure, but I think that the Irish know what their priorities are. First, they built on the notion of Ireland. Their television adverts promote the island of Ireland—I point out to Ted Brocklebank that they are not in the least hung up about reminding folk that the north of Ireland is still British; they simply market Ireland as an identity. We should do exactly the same thing: we should market ourselves not as part of the United Kingdom but as Scotland, distinct and unique.

If the priority is business, presumably it makes good business sense to target our effort either sectionally, geographically or both. Charlie Gordon got that right in his speech. I thought that I heard hints that that is happening already, and I hope to hear more about that when the minister sums up. We heard that there have been three visits to Maryland. Profile or business? I would like to know what the priority is. It is not good enough to say that they like us, so we go back to see them. There must be more focus.

I urge the minister to separate those two strands. He should think big with regard to identity and image and think in a focused way with regard to business. I am sure that I am trying to teach my grandfather to suck eggs, of course. Rob Gibson pointed to big thinking in terms of business when he talked about tidal technology. That is the kind of thing on which we can go international—we are as good as anybody in the world in that regard.

I have enjoyed the debate. I do not mean to sound like too much of a sourpuss, but I really think that we should be a bit more realistic about how ithers see us. Members might have been a little rose tinted in how they described the situation, but I hope that I am proved wrong.

Before I make the standard winding-up speech, I would like to refer to the speeches of three members in particular. Robin Harper's was most thought provoking, and I listened to it with great interest. Rather than rain on the parade, as she suggested she might do, Margo MacDonald gave us a timely reminder to examine what we are about. In his speech, Chris Harvie told me something that I did not know, which I found most useful. Like Margo MacDonald, I support what he said about John Kenneth Galbraith and Princeton.

I turn to the main speakers. Mike Russell took us through the issue extremely professionally. I am interested in his wife's ancestry, and I look forward to seeing the size of his grandchildren in due course; we shall see. He reminded us about the July gathering and, like Chris Harvie, referred to the link between the declaration of Arbroath and the declaration of independence. He also talked about the development of a new relationship between Scotland and the United States and Canada. That is extremely important because we cannot look only at the past, although I do not think that any of us does that. It is a question of building for the future.

"Black Watch" has been an astonishing success on the other side of the Atlantic, and my first main point is that I believe that we should hear more in such debates about the opportunities that exist for the British and Scottish film industries to use locations in Scotland. We have seen "Braveheart" and "Loch Ness", but a lot more could be done in the future.

That is an extremely good point, and it works the other way as well. When I was in Canada, I took the opportunity to speak to the mayor of Toronto, the mayor of Hamilton and the federal culture minister about the specific work that they were doing to attract film investment. If we had taxation powers, we could imitate their ability to attract production. That is a key issue.

That is an interesting remark. I hope that it means that we will have a constructive dialogue on the subject in the future; I do not doubt that we will.

I like Pauline McNeill's idea of having a permanent exhibition of Scottish inventions. It is a worthy thought, which we could do something with, and it deserves further examination. In a most wide-ranging and eloquent speech, Ted Brocklebank went all the way from Carnegie to poetry and Bob Dylan. I was amazed at the breadth of what was an extremely interesting speech.

My colleague Iain Smith mentioned my alma mater, the University of St Andrews, and the money that can be brought in for research. Like Tricia Marwick, he spoke about co-ordination between the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government. I put on record my thanks to Jim Mather because before I led the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association delegation to Canada—I have never been to the United States, but I have been to Canada once—he gave us a lot of help, for which we were grateful. If we could build on that example, that would be useful for both the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament. Iain Smith also spoke about what we should do after the year of homecoming. That is a challenge for the years ahead—we can learn from the events that lie before us.

My second main point is that people in my constituency want the homecoming to extend right up to the furthest parts of Scotland. It must have a meaning for Iain Gunn of Banniskirk and the Gunns and for Malcolm Caithness and the Sinclairs when they have their clan gatherings this year. I do not doubt that significant efforts have been made in that direction, but such linkage is hugely important and very much expected.

Reference has been made to cousins in Canada. Unlike Margo MacDonald, I have a diaspora of cousins in Canada, although there is a slightly sad aspect to that. My father's uncle Walter was killed in the first world war in 1917; I understand that he died bravely. When the family came to read his will, there was not much in it. He was a bachelor, but they discovered that he had left his money to some children—unknown to them, he had three illegitimate children in Canada. Therefore, I have cousins in Canada. I do not know them and they do not know me, but I wish that I did.

There is a certain sadness about that. I have often wondered whether I should put an advertisement in the Toronto Gazette or whatever it is called, beginning, "If you think that you are descended from my great-uncle Walter…". I find it very sad that people had to leave Scotland because of the social mores of the time, and it is worth remembering why some Americans and Canadians are living in those countries.

Rob Gibson mentioned Nova Scotia. During our visit there, we were overwhelmed by the sheer friendliness of the people. I should point out, Presiding Officer, that as I was making a speech and presenting a gift from the Scottish Parliament—a silver tray—to your equivalent, the Speaker of Nova Scotia Legislature, I was somewhat taken aback to be subjected to a barrage of bread rolls. I understand, though, that that is absolutely traditional and that it was nothing personal.

The same was true in Toronto: the Scottish diaspora could not have been more welcoming, and while there we went to what was simply the biggest annual St Andrew's ball I have ever seen. I was astonished to find that the people knew their reels better than we do—in fact, they were doing reels that we have long forgotten—and again I underline what other members have said and pay tribute to the friendliness of the Canadian people.

The Parliament could do more to link up with the US and Canada. For example, many of us have benefited from the help of the US interns who from time to time come into the Parliament via the University of Edinburgh. Given the boundless enthusiasm of those interns and the fact that they are a great asset, I have always been surprised that members of this Parliament and indeed at Westminster have not forged more such links and relationships. Some of those interns will have moved on into Congress and other legislatures on the other side of the Atlantic and will prove to be invaluable contacts for the Parliament in years to come.

I, too, have enjoyed this debate. Although I have a natural inclination to suspect any motion that includes the words "encourages the Scottish Government", I feel that on the face of it there is nothing in today's motion or Labour's amendment with which I disagree and there is much to applaud. Despite Margo MacDonald's disapproval, it has been fun to strut the old street cred with Mike Russell and others, and it is always refreshing to find new ways of rehashing research material, especially with a distinguished former TV colleague.

I thought there were a number of interesting speeches. First, I agree with the minister that we must strengthen and nurture the diaspora in a modern way. We look forward to seeing the minister's revised American plan, and I agree with Iain Smith that it should pick up on the work of and the lessons that we learn from the year of homecoming.

I am indebted to Margo MacDonald for informing me that the founder of the Ku Klux Klan had Scottish roots. I will certainly check with Jamie McGrigor as to whether that particular klan has officially registered a tartan.

Back in February, I, like Charlie Gordon, met the cross-party group from Canada and was particularly interested to hear the latest about oil development in the Athabasca tar sands. As Mr Gordon pointed out, the tar sands hold more oil than anywhere else in the world, with the possible exception of Saudi Arabia. Surely this development presents a great opportunity for Scotland's oil field technology, particularly in relation to maximising the flow of heavier crude—in this case, crude that is infiltrated with sand—and I hope that Jim Mather and his team are promoting possible joint ventures as we speak.

That said, we must bear in mind Robin Harper's eloquent plea on behalf of the Cree Indians and his remarks about how their human rights are affected by the oil developments. As a member of the European and External Relations Committee, I feel that the committee might well want to do more work on that matter. I certainly look forward to hearing more about it.

I agree with Rob Gibson that, in looking forward, we must not forget the past. After all, according to the Inuit proverb, "To know where you are going, you first have to know where you have come from". I am always struck by how proud Americans and Canadians are of their Scottish roots. For example, the world's biggest annual Highland games are held at Grandfather Mountain in North Carolina over two days in July. It is remarkable how many of the 40,000 attendees whose names are not obviously Scottish are still desperately proud of their Scottish lineage—and I have seen statistics that indicate that Scottish is the nationality claimed by most Americans after their own.

I certainly enjoyed Bill Aitken's memories of the emigrant ships leaving from the Broomielaw in the 1950s. In that respect, it has been estimated that between 1720 and 1920 alone more than a quarter of a million Scots—not just Highland Scots but Scots from all parts—left the old country. Most had already gone by the mid-19th century, but it is interesting that two vessels—the Metagama and the Marloch, which were packed with Lewis women—sailed from Stornoway for Nova Scotia as late as 1921 in the wake of the sinking of the troopship Iolaire. With the loss of more than 200 young Lewis men returning from the first world war, the island was bereft of marriageable menfolk. The Lewis women turned to Canada.

It is interesting that one of them was Mary MacLeod from Tong, who was to marry the son of a German carpenter called Friedrich Trump, whom she met in New York. Their son, Donald MacLeod Trump, is trying to promote his own version of homecoming with his controversial multimillion-pound development at Menie in Aberdeenshire. Some call it progress.

I have never been hung up over terms such as "clearances" as distinct from "voluntary migration". If the economic circumstances made it impossible for people to stay in any meaningful sense of the word, they were "cleared". Chris Harvie talked about Ken Galbraith, whose people emigrated from Crinan. When Ken Galbraith returned to visit his great-grandfather's grave, I asked him whether he thought that the Galbraiths had been right to go. The great man, who was 6 feet 8 tall, stood, looked around and said, "On economic grounds, certainly." He then looked around again at the beautiful Argyllshire country and said, "On aesthetic grounds, perhaps not."

The reluctant Scots émigrés who left or were forced to leave the old country went on to fight and die with Davy Crockett and his Texans at the Alamo and for the British against the American rebels at Moore's Creek Bridge in the Carolinas. Bill Aitken reminded us that Wolfe turned to his Scots regiments to launch the final attack on the Heights of Abraham and wrest Quebec from the French. He knew their mettle: only 13 years earlier, the Highlanders had fought against him when he was a young officer at Culloden.

Rob Gibson recalled Wolfe's alleged remark that it was

"no great mischief if they fall."

They did fall, not only at Quebec but at Ticonderoga on the shores of Lake Champlain, where, against the French, the Black Watch sustained its greatest ever losses prior to Passchendaele. Rob Gibson called them mercenaries; by the time of Ticonderoga, most British were calling them patriots because, as well as winning most of the wars, the Scots helped to win the peace with the French. Hugh MacLennan, the great Canadian novelist wrote:

"There wouldn't have been a place called Canada if the Scots hadn't formed the mortar that bound the English to the French."

All too often, that mortar was mixed in blood.

Does Ted Brocklebank agree that, shortly after Wolfe's battle, many Highland soldiers, in the spirit of friendship, married French girls in Quebec?

Absolutely. Those things happened in peace and war.

In these more peaceable times, Scotland, America and Canada have a long and proud history and culture in common and deep economic ties that will, I hope, strengthen after the year of homecoming.

It gives me great pleasure to support the motion as well as the Labour amendment.

The year of homecoming and Scotland week have allowed us to put our relationships with the US and Canada under the spotlight, to accentuate the positive, and to consider the potential for growth in trade links. I will address some issues that have been raised in the debate, which has been interesting.

I take Ted Brocklebank's point that the year of homecoming should be about the straightforwardness of Scottish fishermen being in the same place as American fishermen and making a cultural link, but it would be wrong to miss out on building on our success and exploiting our connections. I hope that Jim Mather agrees that there is work to be done in that respect.

We know that our visitor numbers have fallen by 11 per cent, which is a worrying trend. We cannot miss the opportunity to do something about that, as well as to celebrate in Scotland week and the year of homecoming. In some ways, the year of homecoming could not have come at a better time for Scotland. The following of our most famous poet, Burns, has created an opportunity for us to appeal to Scots abroad and to those with a connection to Scotland to come home to Scotland or simply to visit it.

We heard a constructive plea from Tricia Marwick, who was part of the Scotland week delegation, for a more central role for MSPs in the future. She made her point very well and confirmed that Scots are well received by Americans. Perhaps Americans like their Celtic connections, even if they do not really know where Scotland is.

Charlie Gordon called for the North America plan to be available by the end of the summer. He is doing his bit for the year of homecoming through the link on his website. I am sure that we should all follow his example.

Aileen Campbell has clearly met a few stars in the past few months. She reminded us that we have important Scottish celebrities. K T Tunstall complains about her success in America. She says that she is so well known because Katie McPhee, a star of "American Idol", chose to sing her song "Black Horse and the Cherry Tree". After that, K T Tunstall went from 79th to 22nd in the American charts. Whatever the reason, she has been successful in breaking into the American market, which is an extremely difficult thing to do. In the 1960s and 1970s, the UK had almost 10 per cent of the music market there, but now the figure is less than 1 per cent, so K T Tunstall's is no mean achievement.

I liked listening to Bill Aitken—who has clearly had enough of us, as he has left the chamber—speaking about the place where he comes from. He said, rightly, that there is little to divide members on the issue. Rob Gibson always tells us what he has been doing at the weekend—we now know that he was listening to Capercaillie last weekend. He makes the important point that there is a huge American following for such music. Eddi Reader, with whom Rob Gibson is also familiar, has a huge American following, particularly as a result of her modern portrayal of Burns. I was struck by Robin Harper's speech and the human rights issue to which he devoted it—I was completely unaware of that issue. We are all the wiser for that and I am sure that we will think deeply about it.

Sarah Boyack, who was also part of the delegation to Scotland week, compared a legislature in Canada with the Scottish Parliament. She also mentioned opportunities to learn from countries such as Canada about what we want to achieve here in renewable energy. We always learn something from Christopher Harvie's eloquent speeches. Today, he reminded us of important connections when he told us that Canongate Books published the memoirs of Obama. As ever, Margo MacDonald brought a reality check to the debate. She mentioned the phenomenon that is Susan Boyle. To me, that story suggests that we cannot hold talent back, whatever we do. There is a lesson to be learned from that.

Margo MacDonald also made an important political point, which perhaps not enough members have made, about the relationship with the United States. We will perhaps debate another day what Obama might do in the middle east and how, through the relationship with America and other important parts of the world, we might change the world for the better. She also asked us to consider whether the priorities for Scotland week should be about trade or profile. Perhaps it can be about both—I certainly think so.

To maximise the achievements from Scotland week and the year of homecoming, there has to be collaboration between the Scottish Parliament and the Government. I believe that that has taken place. Despite the comments in my opening speech about ensuring that we give a true reflection of Scotland when we go abroad, I accept that the Deputy First Minister made an excellent speech during Scotland week about Scotland's history and its contribution to innovation and invention. I am glad that at least Jamie Stone supported my suggestion that there should be a permanent display in Scotland on that contribution, of which we are all proud.

I believe that the year of homecoming will be successful, but the message has got a little lost. It has not been clear at times who the Government is trying to entice here. Some companies have said that the Government has advised them that the priority is to promote the homecoming in Scotland and not abroad. I seek clarification on that. A bit more resource would ensure a much more spectacular programme. Although there are interesting parts of the programme, for whatever reason it does not include artists such as K T Tunstall, Franz Ferdinand, Simple Minds or other great Scottish acts. I would have liked them to be included.

There is work for the Government and all of us in strengthening and nurturing Scotland's relationship with the US and Canada. There is a lot to build on for the future. I support the Government motion and I am pleased that the Labour amendment will be supported.

Having listened to all the speeches, I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak in the debate. It is clear that all of us in the chamber feel strongly about the relationship between the United States and Canada and us—I certainly feel strongly about it and I am convinced that it is vital to our country's future wellbeing.

I am grateful for the speeches that we have heard; by and large, they were constructive. I do not agree with all of them, but I will take some suggestions forward. I acknowledge that we must take seriously and build on our engagement in North America. The US remains the world's largest economy. As has been said, it is our largest market for exports, inward investment and tourism.

I declare an interest: my career has been heavily skewed to the US and Canada. It has involved Seagram, which was based in Montreal, IBM and ComputerLand. In its golden era of the early 1970s, IBM taught me a great deal. Sometimes, I have more affection for IBM than for some educational institutions in my pedigree. I am happy to see IBM reinvent itself and I might talk more about that later.

We have a live interconnection not just through visitors, but through the 4,000 US students who come to Scotland every year. Our universities collaborate with some of the most prestigious institutions in the US. Christopher Harvie described his idea of a new centre. I am interested in how we can synchronise collaboration and activity in both countries, with an academic focus on the new beginning that we debated in Margo MacDonald's members' business debate last night. Our banks—in recovery and learning from mistakes—can come together with the vast strengths that we have in investment trusts, fund management, the life and pensions sector and actuarial, legal and accountancy skills to meld with academics and others in those professions in North America, to achieve a strong new beginning. That includes Canada, which is also significant for us. Our exports there amounted to £375 million in 2007 and it is second to the US among countries outside Europe for export importance to us. The wealth of opportunities for us in Canada in culture, education and the oil and gas sector are perhaps the most significant. The Scots diaspora population there is higher than that in any other country.

Since I became a minister, I have been a fairly frequent visitor to Canada and the US to make the case for Scottish business and to build its profile and opportunities, as Margo MacDonald suggested. I have taken the message about the new Scotland to the east and west coasts of the United States and to several mid-west states and I have visited the Canadian provinces of Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia.

Just last week, I made a short visit to Houston in Texas to attend the offshore technology conference, which nearly 40 Scottish companies and some 400 Scottish delegates attended. I am proud and pleased that The Press and Journal has supported a delegation to that conference since 1976—it has taken a delegation across and made that happen year in, year out. That conference is the premier energy trade event of the year and it presents a fantastic opportunity for Scotland to showcase its innovative technology and skill set. I make a special mention of the Aberdeen-based company Caledyne, which was presented with the 2009 special meritorious award for engineering. Are we getting the message across to Americans and Canadians? Of course we are, as we are with the Mexicans, who still have their share of the Gulf of Mexico to develop. We also showcased Scottish companies just last year in Edmonton and Calgary in Alberta.

The most recent visit to the US highlighted the fact that Scotland can compete with the best in areas such as offshore technology and in some cases is the best the world has to offer. It has never been more important to ensure that those messages are heard and understood in our key overseas markets and here. We have world-class facilities to broadcast the message about.

When I was in the United States in April as part of the Government's Scotland week delegation, I met some of the biggest investors in Scotland—companies such as Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan, IBM and the Bank of New York Mellon, which was founded by Alexander Hamilton. John Adams called him the bastard son of a Scottish pedlar, which was an unfortunate, but probably accurate, description. Alexander Hamilton was Washington's first Secretary of the Treasury and set in place an economy and an institution that will survive and move forward.

My role in Scotland week has been not only to build profile along with other ministers but to make economic opportunities. We have been doing that with the stellar facility of the Scottish Development International team. There was a lot of mention of team Scotland, and I take Iain Smith's and Michael Russell's points on that. Team Scotland is now SDI, Scottish Enterprise, VisitScotland, the Government, the Parliament and parliamentarians. I look forward to developing that approach in future. I will come back to that idea in a moment, but I will focus on Scottish Development International's professionals, who are opening doors for us big time. They make the calls and get us in, and we help by turning up and elevating them so that they talk with us to companies at chief executive and chairman level.

The great news that I have to bring back following the session with Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan and others is that those companies are convinced that Scotland remains a great place to invest in and do business. They intend to remain in Scotland and most of them intend to do more here. The compelling reason why they intend to do that should warm the hearts of all members; their Scottish employees are held in the highest regard. Those employees create the necessity for the companies to remain here and the opportunity that they perceive to develop further.

Scotland week provided an ideal opportunity to promote the tourism industry and tell the Americans that 2009 was not only a good year to invest in Scotland but a great year to visit. It was an ideal opportunity to broadcast the year of homecoming. The tourism sector's message was well received not only because of the strong dollar but because of the element to which Ted Brocklebank referred: the aesthetics that could have brought John Kenneth Galbraith back. We were able to underscore the fact that the strength of the dollar against the pound makes it much more cost effective to visit and that it gives them access to a fabulous time in Scotland. We were also able to tell them how well organised we are getting in tourism, which is coming together strongly with the Scottish Tourism Forum. We recognise that the real emphasis on tourism must be industry led, and that is now happening through the offices of Iain Herbert and Gavin Ellis.

Throughout my time in the States in April, it was evident that a huge amount of good will exists towards us. Michael Russell tells me that it was exactly the same in Canada. Along with the Presiding Officer, I had the pleasure of hosting a special Scotland week reception in Raleigh, North Carolina, which was attended by members of the state legislature, the Scots diaspora and our parliamentary deputation. [Interruption.]

Order. I am sorry to interrupt you, minister. Can we have less noise in the chamber, please.

That reception was a heartwarming event at which we struck a chord. As house calls on some newspaper titles were made beforehand, I am sure that that chord resonated elsewhere. That demonstrates the huge opportunities that exist for us.

Tricia Marwick's point that we could do more and that we should reflect more on Scotland week when we come back—a point that Sarah Boyack augmented—makes immense sense. It is important that we sit down after the event and consider what we can do to learn more and to connect more with chambers of commerce, voluntary organisations, legislatures and other bodies that have specific things to teach us.

Will the minister inform us whether the Scottish Government has asked the appropriate American authorities whether the visa service will be restored to Scotland?

I assure Margo MacDonald that we are always pressing on that. She brought pessimism and realism to the debate. The important point is that we are building our profile and business and will continue to build both.

Pauline McNeill made an important point about the fact that were out supporting business but we also need to support exporters. That is exactly Scottish Development International's nature: it is a two-way valve in that respect. We can go and make house calls to make it rewarding for people who are investing in Scotland to continue to invest here—and to invest more—but we can also work with Scottish firms and help them to open up new markets.

Some of Pauline McNeill's less generous comments about the homecoming event are perhaps best skipped over. The issue is that my multicultural family is proud of our status as a mongrel nation. We will continue to be that and, with the year of homecoming, will continue to seek to attract people who are affinity Scots, many millions of whom could come to Scotland and take part in sound activities.

I am glad that Charlie Gordon got to Alberta. The Albertans have a great line: Albertan resources for the Albertans. That is another lesson that we can learn from Canada.