Scottish Register of Tartans Bill: Stage 1
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-2072, in the name of Jamie McGrigor, on the Scottish Register of Tartans Bill.
I welcome the stage 1 debate on my member's bill to create a Scottish register of tartans. I also welcome the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee's detailed and thoughtful scrutiny of the bill, and I am pleased that the committee supports specifics in my proposals and recommends that the Parliament agree to my bill's principles. The committee's stage 1 report can help to shape and further enhance the bill as it progresses. I will say more about that shortly.
The bill will create the first-ever publicly held statutory Scottish register of tartans. The register will be independent, accessible and sustainable. It will be established permanently and in perpetuity for the Scottish nation. The register will be maintained and run by the National Archives of Scotland, with continuing support and expertise from Scotland's tartan industry and tartan experts. The keeper of the records of Scotland will also be the keeper of the Scottish register of tartans. The committee agrees with those proposals. The approach will minimise bureaucracy and costs to the public purse and—this is important to me—will avoid creating an additional public body, which my original bill envisaged.
In taking evidence, the committee heard some of the passionate and deeply held views on tartan. The wovenist view is that tartan must be woven, and the modernist view is that tartan is a design that is mostly woven but which can be produced commercially in other forms. The bill envisages that the keeper will accept registrations of tartan designs that are woven, as the vast majority will be, and non-woven, of which the current registers receive only a handful each year.
If we are serious in our commercial intent to help the tartan industry promote and market itself, we should not discount the commercial and intrinsic value of both woven and non-woven tartan. We should do all that we can to draw through potential commercial opportunities for the industry. I am confident that the criteria for registration that are set out in the bill and the classification of tartans in the register by the keeper will strike the right balance between accepting genuine tartan designs, as happens at the moment, and recognising the woven use of the design. Section 4(2)(c) allows the keeper to deal with the classification of tartans. The minister will say more about that later.
The committee has heard some of the powerful arguments for helping to position the tartan industry in Scotland to maximise the commercial and creative opportunities from tartan as a design and as a product. For that reason, we should not unduly restrict the use of that design to one iteration or mode of production as a woven product.
I am concerned about the definition of tartan, because how tartan is distinguished from tweed or gingham, for example, is fairly crucial to the bill. The member has talked about design, but will he elaborate on the definition?
The definition is for the bill's purposes only. I am sure that arguments about the definition of tartan will continue in perpetuity.
The keeper will accept woven and non-woven tartans for registration. For that reason, section 6(9) says that an application to the keeper
"may include a woven … sample".
However, that will not and should not be mandatory.
I recognise the inherent and historic value of the woven tartan. The requirement in the bill to provide thread count information will mean that designs that come to the keeper must be capable of being woven. In recognition of the importance of tartan as a woven product, and to embed that recognition further in the bill, I am minded to take on board a suggestion that the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee made, and to lodge at stage 2 an amendment to the definition of tartan in section 2 of the bill in order to emphasise that the tartan is capable of being woven—which it will be, because of the provision of thread count information. I intend to use the words "capable of being woven".
The committee asked me to address whether a swatch of tartan should support an application for entry in the register and whether that would present opportunities for the textiles industry or a possible disincentive to tartan registration. Further views have been sought from industry sources that confirm a number of important points. They confirm that the possible opportunities that would result from requiring a sample are far outweighed by the possible costs of doing so and that there is a risk that requiring a sample would deter people from seeking to register tartans.
First, approximately 120 new tartans are registered each year. The volume of possible business from weaving samples is therefore low.
Secondly, there is no guarantee that a Scottish weaver would be approached to produce any such swatch—it could be produced overseas or at home on a hand-loom.
Thirdly, the likely size of a swatch or sample will not be large. If it is to be provided at all, the Scottish Tartans Authority seeks a piece 9 inches by 7 inches. However, weavers do not weave swatches; rather, swatches are cut out of sample production runs. The minimum quantity that a professional weaver would produce would be a sample length of between 4m and 10m.
Fourthly, in the light of an approximate swatch or sample cost of around £50 a metre, the process could quickly become very expensive and could deter individuals or groups from registering tartans. It would be unfortunate if a woven sample were provided and subsequently not accepted for registration because it replicated an existing tartan.
The committee heard about schoolchildren designing their own school tartans. A cost of between £200 and £500 for providing a swatch in addition to the registration fee could become a barrier to fostering interest in tartan among young people and more widely in Scotland and elsewhere.
Therefore, the best way forward is the way that has been proposed—to leave open the option of supplying a swatch, but not to make supplying a swatch a requirement of registration. That would still draw through any opportunities that might exist for weaving swatches or samples and for any woven or non-woven products that swatches end up being used in before or after registration. Such an approach would also reduce the risk of the cost of producing a swatch or sample deterring people or groups from applying to register tartans. In any event, I have stated my intention to amend the bill to include the words "capable of being woven" in the definition of tartan. That will clearly establish the importance of the woven tartan fabric. Requiring a woven sample is inconsistent, redundant and unnecessary.
In conclusion, the bill shows that tartan is an important part of Scotland's heritage and culture that we can be extremely proud of. I strongly believe that my bill strikes a balance between the exclusivity and the accessibility of tartan, and that it offers a valuable and workable way forward towards achieving a goal that has wide support in the industry: a Scottish register of tartans.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Scottish Register of Tartans Bill.
I gave the member in charge of the bill a little leeway. However, it does not take much imagination to realise that, with 16 more speeches to come, we are pressed for time. Members must therefore stick strictly to their time limits, please.
I call Tavish Scott to speak on behalf of the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee. He has six minutes.
In my capacity as convener of the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, I will deal with the wider debate before I deal with some of the points that Mr McGrigor has rightly raised.
I am a Ronald of Clanranald, which is a sept of clan Donald. My forefathers died fighting for Charles on Culloden moor, and I have, of course—dangerously—married a Campbell. The Campbells and MacDonalds scrapped it out up and down Scotland's west coast for many years—the Campbells were ultimately successful. In the interests of marital harmony, I may or may not agree with the considered view that the Campbells were more politically adroit than others. I also note—purely in the interest of stimulating an important family debate—that two Dukes of Argyll were executed for treason during the Scottish civil wars.
I have been told that, in times of yore—I hasten to add that—the McGrigors were a lawless bunch of cattle rustlers with a panache for publicity. That may or may not be the case—I am sure that Jamie McGrigor will keep me right. We think of Rob Roy in that context. Their name was proscribed at one stage, which meant that if any member of the clan were caught they could be beaten, robbed or even killed, without fear of punishment on the part of their captor. I have no doubt that Mr McGrigor will take issue with all that, given that he has introduced such a worthy bill. However, I note that his clan survived for 200 years as outlaws—no doubt as a Conservative, Mr McGrigor knows how that feels.
Does the member realise that the Campbell clan gave sanctuary to the MacGregors in the old days? I hope that that would still happen today.
I hope that we will hear something about the bill shortly.
This has been rather more entertaining. I take Mr Gibson's point.
I mention two incidents that I think are directly relevant to the bill. First, this morning at the Royal Highland Show I encountered the new top team of the Scottish Crofting Foundation, who were resplendent in the new crofters tartan—a corporate tartan. We might talk more about such tartans, which Mr McGrigor mentioned.
Secondly, earlier this week I and colleagues on the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, a number of whom are in the chamber, were in Vienna to consider tourism marketing and promotion. As we took in the Turkey versus the Czech Republic game on the big screen in a Vienna fanzone—purely in the interests of research, members will understand—we encountered four Scottish lads in kilts. Even when our team does not qualify, the tartan army goes on tour.
The Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, which I convene, strongly recommends that the Parliament agree to the general principles of the bill. I pay tribute to Mr McGrigor's work on the subject in this and the previous session of the Parliament. His success is the more notable because he has been able to bring together the Scottish Tartans Authority and the Scottish Tartans World Register and to secure a commitment from those bodies to make over their existing collections to the proposed statutory register.
The committee's discussions on the bill were rather more lively than we might have expected them to be. We came across the interesting and passionate debate between wovenists and modernists, which Mr McGrigor aptly described. The committee's collective view was that tartan has historically been defined by its woven character, so we asked Mr McGrigor to consider whether the definition of tartan in the bill should refer to the tartan being woven. We did not think that the suggestion was incompatible with his overall aim, which we share, and I note what he said about the matter.
The committee suggested that there should be a requirement to include a swatch with an application to register a tartan. Such an approach would help to promote the textile industry in Scotland, which the committee regarded as an important point. Members will want to consider the committee's arguments in the context of Mr McGrigor's comments about his concern that such an approach might have a deterrent effect. Members will want to return to the issue during the bill's later stages.
The committee acknowledged the importance of protecting and preserving the archives that relate to tartan and thought that it was important to make the archives more accessible to interested parties by linking the register to the family history centre that will shortly be opened at the National Archives of Scotland.
We had one or two reservations about the bill. First, we urge the keeper of the register carefully to consider how to develop the classification system in order to differentiate between tartans that have played an important role in our nation's history and tartans that have been registered for entirely separate reasons, for example for corporate or sporting purposes. Tartans that are designed for football clubs, in particular, were discussed in that context. The role of such tartans is surely quite distinct from the role of tartans that have historic links with particular clans or regiments. Mr McGrigor might want to reflect on the issue.
In our report, we also noted our concern about
"the lack of definition on the face of the Bill as to what constitutes a sufficient link between an applicant and their right to authorise the Keeper to register a tartan."
Mr McGrigor might consider how the matter might be clarified, either in the bill or in guidance that the keeper would develop.
On fees, we stressed the importance of finding a level that deters frivolous applications but not genuine applications. A balance must be struck in that regard.
Those appear to be the most important points on which Mr McGrigor might want to comment in his closing speech.
On behalf of the Scottish ministers, I am pleased to indicate Government support for Mr McGrigor's bill. I am glad that, in its stage 1 report, the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee recommended that the general principles of the bill be agreed to and acknowledged the potential benefits to the textile industry of creating a Scottish register of tartans.
The tartan industry in Scotland makes a significant contribution to the economy. An economic impact study that was commissioned as part of the work on the bill shows that the industry contributes some £350 million to the economy and supports 4,000 direct and 7,000 indirect jobs. It is therefore important and proper that Scotland's Parliament and the Scottish Government work to help promote and preserve key parts of our existing economic base, while also working to achieve our overall unifying aim of increasing sustainable growth. It is clear that the tartan industry is an important part of that, and an important part of Scotland's textile sector. We must do what we can to help it endure, grow and thrive.
I share the committee's view that the register will have a tangible economic impact. It will position the industry in Scotland to capitalise on the commercial opportunities that will flow from it; provide a springboard to promote the Scottish tartan industry; and open up marketing opportunities for the unique, authentic, high-value and high-quality products that the tartan industry in Scotland produces.
However, creating a definitive statutory register of tartans in Scotland will also have a number of wider benefits. It will preserve an important and unique archive of tartan designs and, in so doing, it will also preserve an important part of Scotland's identity. This cultural archive will be held independently, and—I like these words—in perpetuity for the Scottish nation. The register will make those tartan records more accessible and open than has previously been the case and remove the potential risk that access to them could be lost or restricted for commercial gain. It will help to raise an interest in tartan, thereby helping to keep tartan alive and vibrant and building economic value from what has been thus far an underleveraged brand.
In addition, the register will provide a focus on tartan for academic, family and genealogical research and capitalise on the huge interest in Scotland among diaspora Scots and others with an affinity for and an interest in Scotland. Furthermore, I am sure that the register will act as a stimulus for further academic research into tartans, including research into how they have evolved. As the committee heard, there are many diverging and passionately-held views on tartan, its genesis, origin and correct production and how and where it is displayed, worn and used.
The committee recognised that questions are being asked about the accessibility and long-term preservation of tartan records. I share those concerns. However, the establishment of the register will address those questions by capturing, for the first time, the tartan designs that are held by the two main private registers in Scotland. As the committee heard in evidence, both the STA and the STWR will cease to register new tartans in future. I assure the committee that the keeper will work with both those bodies to ensure clear signposting to the focal point of tartan registration—the national Scottish register of tartans.
In its stage 1 report, the committee welcomed the functions of the keeper and agreed that the classification of tartans is a detail that need not be included in the bill. However, it urged the keeper to devise a classification scheme that is easy to use and search and which differentiates historic and family tartans from the more commercial ones. I agree whole-heartedly with the committee on both counts. As Mr McGrigor mentioned, section 4(2)(c) of the bill achieves those aims by obliging the keeper to ensure that the register can be used "efficiently and effectively". We are working to adapt the existing classification schemes of the STA and the STWR to ensure distinct categories for the older, historic clan and family tartans and the more recent corporate and commercial tartans.
The National Archives of Scotland will work to preserve and enhance existing tartan records. Access to the register and information on the tartans that it contains will be free of charge. That will take tartan to a new level of universal accessibility and availability, which is crucial in helping to raise interest in tartan and Scotland and in promoting the Scottish tartan industry. However—given that this is Scotland—a fee will be charged for registration of a new tartan. We share the committee's view that an important balance needs to be struck between a fee that achieves genuine accessibility and one that deters frivolous or inappropriate registrations.
In his speech, Tavish Scott mentioned his interesting connection to clan Donald and Clanranald. I spend a lot of time at Kinlochmoidart and those connections are close to my heart. What he said about Culloden was also interesting. For many years, I looked in books on the clans for the name Mather but did not find it. However, I found it in the muster roll of Prince Charles's army. There were seven Mathers: some from the Forfar area and some from Aberdeen. It is nice to know that, at one time, Tavish Scott and I were on the same side.
I stand here with my MacDonald, MacIntyre and MacKenzie forebears to the fore. My uncle Hugh, who used to run Highland Homespun in Fort William and sold tartans very effectively, would be proud to see that we are looking after this great, iconic brand and, I hope, taking it to a new level. I congratulate Mr McGrigor on getting the bill so far and look forward to the bill making continued progress.
Scotland is uniquely fortunate in having a fabric that is recognised as Scottish across the world. Arguably, no other nation has as distinctive a national fabric as tartan or as distinctive a national dress as the kilt. Tartans have been created and adopted throughout the world. Canadian provinces and American states have their own tartans, and there is a Scottish Parliament tartan. There is even an Elvis Presley tartan. Earlier this year, the only Scots-born rabbi resident in Scotland created the first official Jewish tartan.
Those are new tartans, but the official clan tartans are not as traditional as many people suppose. The original tartans would have depended on the dyes and materials that were available. The first industrial manufacturers of tartan, Wilson and Sons of Bannockburn, began creating tartans in 1765, as they had the technology to create a reproducible repeat pattern. They originally allocated numbers to their designs, but later gave them place names or the names of clans to identify them and make them more saleable.
In 1815, the Highland Society of London wrote to clan chiefs asking them to supply samples of their clan tartans, but most of them had no idea what their clan tartans were and either referred the inquiry to older clan members, in case anyone had a recollection, or asked Wilson's to tell them what it was.
Tartan had been proscribed for 32 years after the second Jacobite rebellion—not because it represented the clans but because it was seen to represent Highland identity and rebellion. George Murray, the military adviser to bonnie Prince Charlie, would not have been wearing clan Murray tartan at the battle of Culloden, even if he was fighting on the same side as Jim Mather's and Tavish Scott's relatives.
The mythology that surrounds ancient tartans does not detract from tartan's symbolism or importance. Tartan is popular, fashionable and, despite its adoption across the globe, unequivocally identified with Scotland and Scotland's heritage. Tartan-clad football supporters are recognised and welcomed as Scots wherever they travel, whether they be our own beloved national tartan army or supporters of the individual teams whose tartan-clad followers will adorn European terraces later this year. By the way, Queen of the South has its own tartan, too.
Tartan not only promotes Scotland's worldwide image but contributes significantly to our economy, as Jamie McGrigor's bill recognises and as the survey undertaken by Scottish Enterprise's textile team proved. The survey indicated that approximately 3 per cent of all Scottish manufacturing jobs are in tartan-related industries, which contribute £350 million to Scotland's gross domestic product.
There is strong support for the principles of the bill among businesses involved in tartan manufacture. A single publicly held online register should raise the profile of Scotland-based businesses that rely on tartan, create new marketing opportunities to promote Scotland's international brand and stimulate further interest in broader Scottish culture.
The register will be kept by the National Archives of Scotland, with the keeper of the records having responsibility for its maintenance. As Jamie McGrigor said, that arrangement will overcome concerns about the creation of more public bodies.
The only controversial issue in the bill is how tartan is to be defined. As Jamie McGrigor said, there is a divergence of opinion between the wovenists and the modernists, who argue that non-woven tartans, which could be created through screen printing or ceramics or by computer, should be registrable.
Labour believes that weaving is such an integral part of tartan that any design described as tartan ought to be capable of being woven. I listened to what Jamie McGrigor said about the further work that he has done on the matter. The concern is how someone can prove that a design is capable of being woven without weaving it. My Labour colleagues will expand on that issue during the debate.
Labour is happy to support the passage of the bill through stage 1.
As we have heard, tartan occupies a unique multimillion-pound place in our textiles industry and, along with the kilt and bagpipes, has come to symbolise our nation's cultural identity.
My friend and colleague Jamie McGrigor is to be congratulated on his perspicacity and his tenacity over two sessions of Parliament in bringing the Scottish Register of Tartans Bill before the Parliament. Many Scots are fortunate enough to be associated with a particular clan or organisation that has a recognised tartan but, until now, there has been no official register of tartans as such. It is to Jamie McGrigor's credit that he has secured agreement from the two private organisations that hold registers to support and to provide advice and information to the new and official national register of tartans.
Of course, there are temptations on such occasions to seek to debunk tartans, as Elaine Murray gently sought to do. I note that Hugh Trevor-Roper has been getting a bit of posthumous acclaim for his book, which was published only recently, in which he claims that Scots history is more mythological than factual. Trevor-Roper, whose own historical credentials were debunked somewhat when he authenticated the forged diaries of Adolf Hitler, claims in his book that the kilt was invented in the 1720s by a Lancastrian industrialist and that most tartans that are now associated with the clans were bought off the peg in the early 19th century from the enterprising Bannockburn haberdasher to which Elaine Murray referred. Trevor-Roper also claims that one of those off-the-shelf tartans, which was labelled simply as number 155, was first authenticated by clan Kidd before being taken over by the McGregors a mere 200 years ago. I am sure that Mr McGrigor will be able to give us chapter and verse on that clearly scurrilous claim when he sums up.
It is certainly true that the tartan industry expanded mightily following the visit of George IV to Edinburgh in 1822 when, at Sir Walter Scott's instigation, the hefty Hanoverian appeared swathed in acres of royal Stuart tartan. The truth is that the forerunner of the kilt—the belted plaid—was traditional Highland garb and that identification of differing regional Highland groups by their colourful woven tweed check or tartan plaids was common in the 16th century and probably much earlier. If there were no tartans prior to George IV's visit, why was the wearing of the kilt and tartans specifically banned in the disarming act of 1746, in the wake of Culloden? Although wearing the kilt was forbidden in Scotland for 36 years after Culloden, the Black Watch had already adopted its distinctive dark tartan and, along with the other Highland regiments, it was allowed to retain the kilt and regimental tartans as part of its uniform. As Highland soldiers distinguished themselves in the creation and defence of the empire, clan chiefs and major landowners were attracted to the idea of personal tartan setts.
I have absolutely no problem with an official national register of tartans, no matter how recent the derivation of individual setts. Tartans make a lot of money for Scotland and, as the diaspora buys into its roots for occasions such as the forthcoming year of homecoming, tartans are likely to earn the nation a great deal more. For those of us who perhaps shake a less-mean shank than we once did and who are understandably wary of kilts, there is surely nothing to equal the sartorial splendour of a well-cut pair of tartan trews. Sadly, there is no Brocklebank tartan—despite appearances—although the rather grand golf club to which I belong has produced a splendid tartan of its own. Therefore, along with previously and similarly disenfranchised thousands, with the advent of an official national tartan register I, too, can become a bona fide member of the tartan industry.
For all the right reasons—a sense of history, belonging and style as well as the setting up of an official Scottish register of tartans making excellent business sense—it gives me great pleasure to support Jamie McGrigor's motion.
We have heard many reasons why we should have a tartans register. I am pleased to welcome Jamie McGrigor's initiative in introducing a bill to support the tartan industry. The proposal to enshrine an official register of tartans in law is an example of Scotland taking control of its identity. The register will bring order and clarity to the current haphazard arrangement of commercially run registers of tartan, of which there have been many over the years.
Tartan epitomises generations of Scottish history. The register will be recognised as an authoritative national register of tartans and will function as a useful public service that is accessible to all. Just like whisky, tartan is a symbol of Scotland. The bill will ensure legal protection for the wealth of Scottish culture that is embodied in tartan. The register will assist in the marketing and promotion of a culturally rich Scotland.
It is important for the public to be able to refer to an official register that is a reliable resource and can be used for information purposes worldwide by individuals and industries. The increasingly popular pastime of genealogy will be helped by the register, which will provide an historical record of existing and new tartans.
As we all know, tartan has an international reputation. There is tremendous potential for media coverage of the register that will enhance Scotland's tourism industry. Every day, we see tartan products flood into Scotland from across the world, so it is especially important that we assert our ownership of tartan in this country. We must protect our tartan industry from competition from inferior imported tartan products. By safeguarding tartans in the register, we will provide security for our tartan. Once the register is established and our genuine tartans are registered, everyone will be able to know what is and is not a real tartan.
In my constituency of Ross, Skye and Inverness West there is still a strong culture of the clan system. Each clan is proud of the fact that it has had its own tartan over centuries. Ted Brocklebank mentioned the Black Watch. I think of the wild Macraes of Kintail, who took over Eilean Donan castle with the Mackenzies, both exhibiting their clan tartans. The system extends further than that. The identity of the Aran islanders on the west coast of Ireland is reflected in the weaving pattern of Aran sweaters, which is different for each family. In the Shetlands, the patterns of Fair Isle sweaters are identified with particular families. The tradition is strong not just in mainland Scotland but on our offshore islands.
Under the Scotland Act 1998, the area of intellectual property is reserved to the United Kingdom Parliament. For that reason, we will have to work with Westminster to ensure that we secure this asset—the register—for Scotland on the international stage. I am pleased to support Jamie McGrigor's Scottish Register of Tartans Bill.
Tartan is one of the priceless symbols of Scotland—money cannot buy such recognition as it gives us. There are other symbols of Scotland, but tartan is the most universally known. The tartan industry is worth an estimated £350 million each year to the Scottish GDP, so it is important. It is entirely possible for us to grow it as part of the Scottish Government's policy of enabling our economy to do better. The ECOTEC survey showed exactly how it can grow, because of tartan's marketability. The register that Jamie McGrigor proposes should not be knocked, as it has the ability to raise tartan's profile and is the key to producing real growth.
It is suggested that people invented the short kilt—the fèileadh-beag—because it was easier for quarry workers and others to work in it. The fèileadh-mòr, or large kilt—the belted plaid that Ted Brocklebank mentioned—is the garment that was banned by the orders issued after Culloden. People have a right to develop the kilt in many different forms—there are some rare sights at American Highland games—and the plaid can be worn in a modern sense. We should encourage the use of the plaid as well as the short kilts that many of us wear on special occasions.
In my view, including an official definition of tartan in the bill is a somewhat limited approach, because it is tied up with the idea that tartans must be woven. At the same time, when people are designing tartans, they will eventually want to make them out of cloth. The issue of whether they will have to produce a piece of cloth in order to register the tartan is fraught with difficulties. Of course, they must accept that Pantone colours and so on must be defined for designs. As was suggested, people must be careful, because a picture is not a tartan in itself. Looking at the tartans of different clans in books of tartans is different from seeing the woven tartans. We must find a way through all that. Perhaps we need to investigate how we can create tartan swatches more cheaply, so that people who want to innovate and create are not disadvantaged. I hope that, at a later stage in the bill, we can find out what can be done.
John Farquhar Munro mentioned copyright. We must try to work with Westminster on that, but it would be good if we could find a way of incorporating tartan copyrighting in the powers of the Scottish Parliament in order to bring that power together with the bill's powers. I say that because of the obvious way in which copyright affects Scottish things. New designs crop up all over the world. It is recorded in my register of interests that I am the president of the Kilt Society de France. People have registered tartans in Scotland from there. They want to produce tartans and are not trying to compete with the Scottish industry in the way that Lidl tried, and such foreign producers must be encouraged, because their tartans also spread the story of Scotland.
I, too, was at the Royal Highland Show today and saw the Scottish Crofting Foundation's tartan. I said that I would give the foundation a mention in the debate. The tartan is a fine green and brown one, and it is excellent. I do not know whether I got there first with that, or whether Tavish Scott did. However, the SCF is a great example of a body producing its own tartan. I want to see whether the Scottish Rural Property and Business Association designs itself a tartan.
Thank you, Presiding Officer, for the opportunity to contribute to the stage 1 debate on the Scottish Register of Tartans Bill. I thank Jamie McGrigor for giving Parliament the opportunity to debate the bill.
Tartan is an important part of our history, culture and economy. It is internationally recognised and plays a significant role in Scotland's tourism sector and, importantly, our textile industry. The register will incorporate 3,000 tartans that are held in the Scottish Tartans World Register and 6,000 tartans that are held in the Scottish Tartans Authority register. Those collections will form the cornerstone of the new register. It is a major and positive step for both organisations to agree to share their collections. Jamie McGrigor and the team involved are to be congratulated on taking forward this significant achievement.
We heard much in evidence about the bill's benefits, and I welcome and support much of what was presented. It is hoped that the register will increase the authenticity and standing of Scottish tartans. Furthermore, a single register will provide an enhanced marketing capability and profile. Given the importance of tartan to Scotland, I hope that the bill will receive cross-party support at decision time.
In written evidence to the committee, Alastair Campbell of Airds said:
"It is probably not fully understood how important tartan is as an icon to many … around the world … To the millions of overseas Scots, tartan plays a major part in identifying and recording their Scottish connection."
We see that at tartan week in America.
Tradition perhaps best encapsulates the main dividing issue around the register of tartan, namely the division between the wovenists and the modernists, which we have heard much of in the debate. Tartan has always been woven, but there is an argument about whether it is a pattern or a cloth. It was said in evidence to the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee that by not referring to "woven" in the bill, we would limit work for the weaving industry in some respects. As we have heard in the debate, the modernists believe that tartan is a design that can be reproduced in a number of formats, but the wovenists believe that tartan is historically a woven design and that that should be reflected in the definition in the bill.
The committee, as our convener stated, listened to much evidence on the issue. I have been persuaded by the arguments that tartan ought to be capable of being woven. I referred earlier to the importance of tartan to our history, culture and economy, so I am pleased that Jamie McGrigor has agreed with the points that were raised at committee and agreed to include the wording "capable of being woven" in the bill.
The committee highlighted that the requirement to include a swatch rather than just the thread count should be considered. I have much sympathy with that point.
Although I have no objection to tartan being reproduced—that is the modernist within me speaking—I believe that, as has been said, a picture is a picture, but a tartan is unique. I quote from written evidence that was given to the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee:
"tartan is first and foremost a fabric, distinguished from other fabrics in that it is woven … the Scottish Register of Tartans MUST BE A CLOTH ARCHIVE."
As the convener of the committee has said, at stage 2 we will have to examine closely the arguments and seriously consider placing a requirement on people to produce a swatch before registration. As 70 per cent of employment in textile weaving and 25 per cent of employment in textile finishing is directly related to the tartan industry, I suggest, as a modern wovenist, that there is a strong argument for producing a swatch. I look forward to debating that point at stage 2, and I urge members to support the general principles of Jamie McGrigor's bill.
I, too, congratulate Jamie McGrigor on what is perhaps the most distinguished service that a member of his clan has given to Highland society since the demise of Rob Roy. I suppose that the one major figure from the Highlands to impose himself worldwide was invisible for most of the time and was a reptile. I refer, of course, to the Loch Ness monster.
In looking at the history of tartan, it is important to note that we are still too generalised about it. Ted Brocklebank introduced us to the wonderful world of Hugh Trevor-Roper, an expert in forgeries of all sorts, who ultimately was tripped up by a man from Stuttgart. Nonetheless, the story of tartan is one of myth covering myth. I would like more attention to be paid to the role of the prince consort, Albert the good, that German innovator and scientist who saw to it that tartan met its necessary partner—aniline dyestuffs—in the 1850s.
The impact of Balmoral must be considered, as must the Crimean war—from the thin red line through to the notion of bravery and heroism—which really gave tartan its impact. The impact of tartan at that time was not felt only in Scotland. For example, the German Tracht movement—the German movement for peasant culture and clothes—arose in the 1880s. It was one of the themes of the historicism of people such as mad King Ludwig of Bavaria—who, logically I suppose, would have been the monarch of Scotland, had Rob Roy had his way. The Scottish tradition made a breakthrough that other national movements followed.
I must emphasise the importance of protecting the definition of Highland Scotland. I have no axe to grind—I do not think that the Harvies penetrated north of Motherwell during the Victorian period—but we must remember that the Victorian period witnessed the industrialisation of not only tartan production but tweed production. Tartan and tweed should go together.
I made a film on Harris tweed for the Open University in 1978. At the time, there were 800 weavers there, but now there are fewer than 100. We ought to apply to tweed the same degree of protection—a good Tory principle, I suppose—that we are applying to tartan in the bill.
The great trinity of Scotland is tweed, tartan and whisky, and they must all receive special consideration. In a competitive world, one can either go global and be wiped out or stand four-square for one's own particular interests. There is a bit of Scottish bloody-mindedness in that.
Finally, I make a plea. Professor Susan Manning, of the University of Edinburgh institute for advanced studies in the humanities, told me today about a farm on Mull where the tartan that the people weave comes from the coats of the local sheep and uses local dyestuffs. I hope that the register of tartans will protect oor tartans—the absolutely original and unrepeatable tartans that we get from that sort of production. I like to think that an organic tartan is waiting in the wings.
Members have a choice: they can be either a wovenist or a modernist. Jamie McGrigor is a modernist. I am a wovenist. Rob Gibson has said that he is kind of a wovenist. Marilyn Livingstone said that she is a modern wovenist. In evidence to the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, the minister said that he was a pragmatist. He will find that sitting on the fence can be somewhat painful.
A terrific array of woven tartan ties is on display. I will happily give way to any member who cares to identify the tartan of my tie.
MacDonald of Clanranald.
Wrong. That was said only because I said that I was a MacDonald of Clanranald.
I am not looking for many interventions of this sort.
I will take one more, Presiding Officer.
Polo by Ralph Lauren.
No, that is my underwear, but we will not go there.
There is no divide on the demand for a register. The industry has wanted one since 2002, and probably even before then. We should have one. We should keep a record of an iconic Scottish product that is recognised worldwide as uniquely Scottish. However, there is a clear divide at the heart of the argument: wovenist or modernist? As Marilyn Livingstone explained, wovenists are on the side of the Scottish Tartans World Register, which maintains that tartan is a piece of woven cloth and that any tartan on the register should be produced in cloth form. The modernists, including the Scottish Tartans Authority, say that tartan is a design, and that as long as it has a sett and a thread count to prove that it can be woven, that is enough. I do not agree.
In evidence to the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, Mr Keith Lumsden—who I am delighted to see is in the public gallery—said that he was a die-hard wovenist. He said, "Tartan is three-dimensional", and that weaving creates a pattern that is two-dimensional. We have heard about the tartan army. Why is it called the tartan army? It is not because its members tour the world supporting Scotland, wearing designer gear—although some do. It is called the tartan army because its members wear tartan kilts and other tartan clothing. That is what distinguishes them. As we have heard, tartan is as iconic to Scotland as whisky, golf and haggis.
When he appeared before the committee, the keeper of the register, Mr George MacKenzie, raised the issue of tartan design on shortbread tins and so on. Those designs are usually a clan tartan and are not designed on a computer. We also heard of an airline wanting a tartan design on the tailfin of its aircraft. To me, that is not tartan; it is just a striped design, and an attempt to gain kudos from Scottish branding.
Why should we support the wovenist argument? There is an economic argument for having a national register. The tartan industry supports some 7,000 jobs—0.5 per cent of all employment in Scotland, or 3 per cent of manufacturing employment—and contributes £350 million to Scotland's GDP. If a swatch of cloth was required for all new tartans, the industry would gain further benefit.
Mr McGrigor mentioned schools. Mulbuie primary on the Black Isle—I apologise if I have pronounced that incorrectly—and St Stephen's primary in Sighthill in Glasgow have designed and produced their own tartan. Others could do the same. Cost is not a barrier.
Mr McGrigor mentioned the rules for application. He said that he is prepared to accept that the design should be capable of being woven. I welcome that, but I give notice that while I welcome the bill, I am minded to lodge an amendment stating that in applying for registration to the keeper, all new tartans must come with a sample to prove that they can be woven.
So far, no one has identified my tie. It is the Al-Maktoum tartan, which was designed by a pipe major for the pipe band of the former ruler of the United Arab Emirates. It is based on the Cameron, and was produced for the Al-Maktoum Institute for Arabic and Islamic Studies in Dundee.
I support the bill but give notice of a possible amendment.
As a McMillan, I am spoiled for choice for tartans—I have six to choose from. As a piper, a tartan kilt is a must, as it is for festival-goers, wedding-goers and sports fans alike, although I am sure that some of my friends and officers in the London Scottish Regiment, with whom I used to be a regular player, would disagree, as they wear the hodden grey.
Alongside our tartan heritage we often find our clan history. Translated, the McMillan clan motto, perhaps fittingly for a politician, is, "I learn to succour the unfortunate." At times, however, it is impossible to aid those unfortunate souls in opposition parties.
These days, most proud Scots will happily don tartan and, as the industry is generating more than £350 million for the Scottish economy every year, we cannot afford to ignore it. For a small country, Scotland is fortunate in having five major global brands: golf, whisky, bagpipes, haggis and tartan, predominantly for kilts. They bring huge sums of money, and thus jobs, into the Scottish economy. That being the case, I welcome any methods of protecting the integrity of any of those brands for Scotland's benefit. The Scottish Register of Tartans Bill certainly appears to do that with tartan. Having a public body as the keeper of the register will ensure that not only Scots, but anybody with an interest in tartan, will be able to source information about it for many years to come.
I welcome the actions of the Scottish Tartans Authority and the Scottish Tartans World Register, which support the bill. Furthermore, as Rob Gibson mentioned, the ECOTEC study into the economic impact of tartan found that a single register would give the industry enhanced marketing capability and profile so, in addition to protecting part of Scotland's heritage, the register should provide economic benefits.
There is no denying the affinity that Scotland feels with tartan. As Iain Finlayson writes, tartan and tartanry
"like many other Scottish fetish, has taken on wider, almost global significance."
The bill does not say that Scotland equals tartan tat; rather, it safeguards part of our society that has become an internationally recognised symbol. There is nothing wrong with supporting an industry that provides more than 4,000 jobs directly and 7,000 indirectly.
I have a simple question: are you a wovenist or modernist?
I am neither.
I beg your pardon, Presiding Officer.
That is a debate for other people, if they want to have it; I just want to ensure that Scottish tartan is registered in Scotland and that it can progress with the register.
By defining tartan within the register and providing a point of reference for tartans, the bill seeks to preserve the plaid as we know it. Therefore, I am pleased that many in the industry support the bill, which asks the Court of the Lord Lyon and the National Archives of Scotland to play a vital role in maintaining the records. Tartan is an immense asset for Scotland. If the national register, which will be overseen by the keeper of the Scottish register of tartans, will protect such an important factor of Scottish life, it deserves to be welcomed.
I notice that Jamie McGrigor has commented on the BBC that the previous Administration asked him to put his original member's bill on hold while it assessed tartan's economic value to Scotland. Thankfully, the current bill is now progressing through the Parliament. I have a few points to raise about it, which I will do at a future date, but I congratulate Jamie McGrigor on introducing it to the Parliament and the Scottish National Party Government on recognising tartan's importance to Scotland as a nation by supporting the bill.
Despite the broad support that we have heard today, there have been several occasions over the past few years when I, for one, doubted that the proposal for a register of tartans would ever make it to the statute book. It is a matter of congratulation that we have reached the stage 1 debate today, albeit this is the proposal's second stage 1 process. Everyone whose efforts and persistence have got us to this point—particularly Jamie McGrigor—should be applauded.
My interest in and support for the bill is long standing and primarily due to the persuasive powers of my mother-in-law. Deirdre Kinloch Anderson is one of the prime movers, if not the prime mover, behind the bill. I welcome her and many others to the public gallery for the debate. For the avoidance of doubt, I should say that although I have strong family ties to the industry I have no financial or commercial interest in it and I doubt that my endorsement will add much to the custom of the Kinloch Anderson business.
If we look at other areas where there is a particular manufacturing interest—Champagne and Parma, which is responsible for Parma ham, are just two examples—we see industries and Governments working together and often using trademark, copyright or intellectual property legislation to defend that interest and heritage. The bill does not offer us that level of protection, but it is a significant step in the right direction. This is not about Scotland taking control, but about asserting our authority over tartan and not allowing others to cheapen the brand—although, before we get too superior about our sense of history and tradition, it is important to acknowledge that two of the most popular tartans in our kilt hire shops are those of the good old Scottish clans Celtic and Rangers.
Notwithstanding the arguments between modernists and wovenists, the industry has united around the idea of a tartan register. The different sectors concerned—the weavers, the kilt makers, the genealogists, and the two existing registers—have not always, or perhaps ever, agreed on the way forward, and it has been no mean feat to bring them together.
The whole dynamic of the bill has been fascinating. At one point, the support of the then Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning, Allan Wilson, was crucial. More recently, the momentum gained through the involvement and support of the Lord Lyon and the keeper of the records of Scotland—as well as the Government's support for the bill, of course—has given the proposals added credence.
It is fair to say that Jamie McGrigor and I do not see eye to eye on every political issue. I was asked by a friend who saw me on the news, at the launch of the bill, why I was attending the Tory party conference. Whatever our political differences, however, it was easy for me to appreciate the merits of creating the tartan register.
I am only too aware of the hammering that the Scottish textiles industry has taken in recent years. Daks-Simpson, William Baird and Coats Viyella are just a few of the companies that have closed or moved abroad. I do not believe that any member here would feel comfortable at the thought of Scottish tartans, our weavers or our kilt makers moving offshore and of our tartans being sold back to us. We can take action. Before us today is a modest but practical proposal that will support and encourage this vital Scottish industry.
The new register will not be commercially or privately controlled; it will be a public, non-judgmental and inclusive document. It will make the brand that is tartan more Scottish, and I believe that it will be of benefit to our country and our businesses. The creation of the register will itself generate further interest in tartan.
We are rightly proud of our history. As well as protecting our heritage, Parliament's job is to look to the future. I believe that the register does just that, and I am happy to lend my support to the bill.
First, I apologise for coming in a bit late, after Jamie McGrigor started speaking. I congratulate him on introducing the bill and acknowledge the support of the Scottish Government and the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee so far.
Like many other members, I have a substantial constituency interest in tartan. Daiglen of Scotland is based in Tillicoultry. It is the last of a long line of textile and tartan-producing concerns across the hillfoots of the Ochils. It is where I got my most recent kilt. AS Campbell is based in Alva, and the oldest manufacturer of tartan is in Bannockburn, part of which is in my constituency.
To my mind—although I am not nearly as expert as some previous speakers—the bill is about using the credibility and integrity that would arise from the establishment of a register for the further exploitation, if I may use that word, of the commercial and cultural potential of tartan. That is entirely right.
Although we should consider classification and accept the reason for it, we should not be at all snobbish about tartan. What Rob Gibson had to say was true: many people have tartans for many reasons, and we should not seek to circumscribe those reasons. We obviously wish to protect tartans with an ancient history and a cultural background, but people will see that from the register and will know exactly what kind of tartan they are looking at.
We have heard about modernists, wovenists and modern wovenists, but not yet about woven modernists. I am not sure what that would look like. We could also have dye-hard wovenists—is that a woven one that is hard to dye? I am not sure. Anyway, we should not be snobbish about classification, and we should make it as open as possible.
Kenneth Macintosh was right to say that Celtic and Rangers have their own tartans. So does Hibernian. It is a very nice green tartan that I am holding up now, if anybody is interested to see it. As Elaine Murray said, each Canadian province has a tartan, and they all have official status in Canada. The Royal Marines have a tartan, which surprised me more than the fact that the United States Marine Corps has a tartan, too. Our universities have tartans—and even individual university departments are now declaring that they have a tartan. Apparently the Hare Krishna movement has its own tartan. I find that very interesting. On a more serious note, the veterans have the Erskine tartan, which is interesting to note as we are about to go into veterans week.
Members have spoken about their own tartans. I have a choice of two. I was surprised to hear Stuart McMillan say that he has a choice of six. One of my choices is the MacMillan tartan; the other is Lamont. The MacMillan was named, I think, after a haircut sported by a 12th century monk—which counts against using that one. The clan motto, which Stuart McMillan mentioned, contains the word "disco", which put me off a wee bit—although it means "I learn" in Latin. The clan fought at Bannockburn, of course.
Lamont, to commend it, is believed to have come from the Norse for "law man". It is associated with great legends of the statesman-like rulers of Cowal and Argyll of Irish and Norse descent. As against that, we have Johann Lamont, John Lamont and Norman Lamont. In any event, I chose the Lamont tartan in the end because it is nice and is more like the Hibs tartan.
The bill has a lot to commend it. I do not have the background on it that other members have, but I wish it every success and will certainly support it when it is brought back to the chamber.
Like the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee's debates on the bill, this afternoon's debate has been interesting. I, too, congratulate Jamie McGrigor on introducing this extremely important bill.
There is a strong economic case for the bill, and a strong cultural case. On the economic case, most of the statistics that we heard come from the ECOTEC report, which was commissioned last year by Scottish Enterprise's Scottish textiles team. In Scotland, there are 17,000 jobs in textiles, 7,000 of which it is estimated come from tartan. As we heard, tartan contributes about £350 million to the economy each year, or about 0.5 per cent of GDP.
The Scottish Register of Tartans Bill presents an opportunity to lift the industry to the next level. The textiles industry in Scotland is trying to reposition itself to an even higher end of the global market. We cannot compete on price, so we have to compete on value and quality. The register will give businesses a marketing tool to do that and a springboard to promote their wares. Further, it is a chance for the tartan industry as a whole to take a more joined-up approach to worldwide marketing, as the cashmere subsector has done. The register will be good for individual businesses, for the tartan industry, and for the textiles industry as a whole. Those are the direct benefits.
Indirectly, because there has been a lot of interest in tartan, particularly with the year of homecoming 2009, there are massive potential tourism gains the length and breadth of Scotland. The study of family history could be boosted even further by an officially sanctioned register, and there will be a boost to other industries in the supply chain. Most of the 7,000 jobs, or at least a healthy proportion of them, are indirectly related to the tartan industry.
On the cultural case, having an official register will help with the authenticity of tartan and of Scotland's image. Having a definitive national repository will give tartan an even higher place than it already has. The register will be public, it will be easily accessible and it will be safely preserved in public hands, we hope for ever. The danger with private registers is that if the organisations that hold them fold, a lot of the information goes with them. That danger was pointed out clearly to the committee.
The register will enable us to claim tartan as our own, or at least to ensure that it remains claimed as our own. Evidence was led that Canada might have considered creating a register of tartans, and one person who gave evidence voiced concern that Australia might be thinking about doing it as well. A Scottish register of tartans will make it crystal clear that tartan belongs to Scotland and will continue to do so.
The debate between modernists and wovenists was raised in the committee and again today. Rather than go into one camp or the other, I will try to look one step beyond. The important thing is to ensure that the definition of tartan and the process in the bill do not stifle innovation but protect the brand in the long term. The bill must not allow tartan to become diluted. There is a danger of that, and if it happened we could have a problem with tartan in the long term. It is important to get the right balance, but we do not necessarily need to jump into one camp or the other.
The classification issues that we heard about are better dealt with by the keeper, who can issue guidance, than in the bill.
There are strong economic and cultural reasons for the bill. For that reason, I urge members to support it.
There is a lot of cross-party support for the bill and agreement on the importance of tartan to the Scottish economy, now and in the past, so, in closing the debate for the Labour Party, I return to the main issue of disagreement at this stage—whether a tartan must be proved to be capable of being woven in order to be registered. We have heard a variety of wovenist positions, ranging from the extreme wovenism of David Whitton to the positions of other members who had a degree of wovenism in their arguments. For good reason, I, too, am a wovenist, partly because of the history of tartan.
Tartan probably originated from the French word "tiretaine", which referred to a woven part-wool, part-linen cloth rather than to any particular type of design. I am not arguing that tartan did not exist prior to the 18th century, but it did not exist in the forms in which we know it now, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Evidence of material with a chequered design, dating from somewhere between 250 AD and 350 AD, has been found in Falkirk. It is possible that the Romans, who were in Britain at that time, observed people wearing an ancient form of tartan.
Prior to the 19th century and the development of mechanical looms that could reproduce patterns easily, each tartan would have been uniquely created by the weaver using the dyes that were available. Bright colours were used for celebratory occasions, symbolising the wealth and status of the wearer; darker colours were used when the wearer wished to blend into the natural environment. That may be the origin of the notions of dress and hunting tartans.
What is clear is that tartan was a woven material long before specific designs were allocated to particular clan names or geographical locations. During the mid-19th century, weaving and the textile industry were the predominant manufacturing industries in Scotland. Ken Macintosh referred to the decline of the textile industry over the past century.
The tartan industry in the early 21st century accounts for around a quarter of the remaining textile jobs in Scotland. So, in supporting the wovenist position, those of us who describe ourselves as wovenists believe that we are supporting the Scottish textile industry and the retention of the skills of its designers and manufacturers. As David Whitton informed us, the Scottish Tartans World Register strongly supported that position, arguing in written evidence that, historically and culturally, tartan has been woven and that computerised tartan images could easily be produced by mathematical formulae. It argued that the inclusion of such designs in the register would trivialise tartan. As Marilyn Livingstone and Rob Gibson pointed out, a picture of tartan is very different from the actual cloth.
The success of tartan worldwide is a testament to Scotland's entrepreneurialism. I recently discovered a story about a Japanese golfer called Tsuneyuki "Tommy" Nakajima. I had not heard of him before, but I do not know a great deal about golf. Apparently, while he was in Scotland, he went into a tartan shop on Princes Street to ask whether he would be entitled to wear a tartan. He received the response, "Do you want to see the hunting Nakajima or the dress Nakajima?" Let there be a hunting or a dress Nakajima; I hope that, as long as it is capable of being woven, it will be accepted into the register of tartans.
The issue of wovenism notwithstanding, Labour members are pleased to support the general principles of the bill and to see it progress to stage 2. We await with interest the arguments about how to address the issue of a tartan's ability to be woven and whether a cloth sample should have to be provided to allow a tartan to be registered.
I welcome members' contributions to the debate, especially John Farquhar Munro's statement about Scotland controlling its own identity. I liked that. I am sorry that he is no longer in the chamber, as I thought that the war stories that he could tell might lead on to stories about a few dances in the 1950s and 1960s in his neck of the woods.
In a debate on the bill back in February 2007, I said that I welcomed a more detailed examination of the rationale for a register of tartans. I also quoted Professor Michael Porter, the world expert on competitiveness, who noted that Scotland is one of only 15 or 16 countries on the planet that has a truly vivid national brand and a high standing that it owes, in great part, to tartan. Along with whisky and golf, tartan accounts for the fact that Scotland means something to 98 per cent of the world's population. That appreciation of who we are and what our values are is a function of our iconic national brands. The images conjured up by golf, whisky and tartan play into that. Our open and welcoming aspect, innovative spirit, and being the birthplace of Hume, Smith and Scott and the cradle of the enlightenment mean that we are well-placed to promote our nation and values. The new tartan register will help us to do that.
I am pleased by the involvement of the Government, particularly through its agency, the National Archives of Scotland, which has further refined and developed the proposals to the stage that they are workable, straightforward and affordable and will streamline, improve and enhance existing public services. I was particularly taken by what Ken Macintosh said about the united industry and the bringing together of the registers, the industries, the Lord Lyon and the national archive. That is important, because the fact that the records have survived is due largely to the committed effort of a small number of tartan experts and enthusiasts. Prominent among them are Brian Wilton of the Scottish Tartans Authority, and Keith Lumsden of the Scottish Tartans World Register.
The progress that has been made is also a direct result of the dedicated input of industry experts such as Ken Macintosh's mother-in-law, Deirdre Kinloch Anderson, of Kinloch Anderson Ltd in Leith, who has been very much on the front foot on this issue. Nick Fiddes of Scotweb has also been instrumental in helping to shape the proposals for the register. I am grateful to them and to all who have contributed to the project.
As a result, the register will be comprehensive and credible, and it will rely on the on-going support and involvement of Scotland's tartan experts and industry. It may not have gone unnoticed that the Government is supporting Jamie McGrigor and his bill to the hilt. Although it might strike some members as an unusual arrangement, the Government sees this as an innovative and far-sighted collaboration with Mr McGrigor. [Interruption.] I believe that Mr Rumbles wants to say something.
I was just commenting on your point that co-operation between the Scottish National Party and the Conservatives is an unusual arrangement.
We are co-operating on this bill, but we are open to collaborating and co-operating with others, given the strength of our agenda.
I will talk more about the listening pragmatism that Mr McGrigor has shown. Overall, this is a pragmatic, reasonable and realistic approach to legislating in areas such as this. It transcends political boundaries where there are good ideas to be developed, and it shows a level of practical, issue-by-issue collaboration that was the widely held aspiration when people voted in the 1997 referendum and in the first election in 1999.
I appreciate the fact that the minister supports Mr McGrigor's bill, but will he support the textile industry by saying that a swatch of cloth must be produced along with the tartan design?
We will support Jamie McGrigor's listening pragmatism and his proposed amendment about the tartan being able to be woven.
There is a delightful irony here. In 1603, the Privy Council issued an edict banning the use of the name MacGregor. Many adopted the names of Murray, Graham, Stewart, Grant and even Campbell, and MacGregor was not fully restored until 1774. Now a McGrigor is playing his part in protecting and enshrining the tartans of many of the other family names in Scotland. I delight in that irony and believe that it adds to the appropriateness of the bill. I am equally delighted to offer the Scottish ministers' support for Jamie McGrigor's bill, and I commend it and this way of joint working to the Parliament.
I thank members for their amusing and good contributions to the debate, and for their broad support for the bill.
I turn to David Whitton's remarks about tartan being woven or not. I feel strongly that the register should be inclusive. We have achieved consensus after a five-year debate and to exclude one sector, even if it is just a few registrations a year, would be a mistake. I prefer to sing from "Hymns Ancient & Modern" rather than favouring one expert over another, because I have so much respect for the experts whose names have been mentioned today. It is because of their consensus that we have got as far as we have, and I would hate to lose that at this stage.
Members may remember that I first introduced proposals for a Scottish register in the previous session. That bill attracted a good level of support, but I withdrew it to allow work on the options for a register to be undertaken. That has happened, and I am grateful to the minister for allowing me to remain in charge of the legislation. He might have introduced an Executive bill, but he chose not to. I am very grateful for that.
With Government support and on-going engagement with the tartan industry in Scotland, the revised bill retains my original proposals. They were for a statutory footing for a Scottish register of tartans, a statutory definition of tartan and a keeper of tartans to operate the register.
On the question of a definition, Jamie Stone asked how to differentiate between tartan and gingham or another check. As the committee heard, reaching a universally acceptable definition would be difficult, but the definition in the bill has been agreed by the tartan industry experts and will be applied on a consistent basis by the keeper.
The bill now proposes a much more cost-effective, streamlined and less bureaucratic way to deliver the register—and that is very welcome. It will minimise cost to the taxpayer and reduce bureaucracy. It will use existing public and private sector expertise and infrastructure and, importantly, avoid adding to the public sector landscape by creating a new public body.
I am pleased that the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee welcomed the fact that the keeper of the records of Scotland will be the keeper of the Scottish register of tartans. I am also pleased that the committee recognised that the functions of the keeper will ensure that the register is maintained in a way that protects and preserves the tartans in it while making them more publicly accessible.
Will the member give way?
I want to make some headway.
Over time, a quality assurance approach by the keeper to tartan registration will help to develop the credibility of the Scottish register and the authenticity of the tartans that it contains. It will be the first and only national register of tartan maintained in the spiritual home of that important and iconic symbol of Scotland.
As well as including existing tartans and tartan designs, the bill empowers the keeper to ensure that new tartans meet certain criteria for entry into the register. In my view, those criteria are stringent and will enhance the tartans in the register. They include meeting the first ever statutory definition, as endorsed by Scotland's Parliament, and showing that the design has been considered in detail, including colour, thread count—the DNA of tartan—and sett.
Will the member give way?
I would prefer not to; the member has made several interventions.
There will also be criteria to ensure that the person seeking to register a tartan has a clear link to its name. The committee raised a valid point about how to prove a sufficient link to a tartan, but we can do that in several ways. For an individual, it may simply be through proof of surname, region of origin or residence. On behalf of an association, business or organisation, it could be a letter or other confirmation from a body or organisation confirming the link.
Order. Too many conversations are taking place.
Thank you, Presiding Officer.
In either such case, I suggest that the appropriate way forward is for the keeper to have discretion to consider each application on its merits. I envisage that the keeper will develop guidance on the issue, which he will have power to do under section 4 of the bill.
The bill is the culmination of long and assiduous work by many in the tartan industry in Scotland and among tartan experts and enthusiasts. Let me say again that I am grateful to them all for their efforts. Their on-going engagement with the register will be important. The register can become a focal point for tartan and tartan research and it can help the tartan industry in Scotland to capitalise on the commercial opportunities that will flow from the register and increased interest in tartan. Nested alongside the family history centre at the National Archives of Scotland, the register will help in the wider aim of promoting Scotland and interest in Scotland.
However, the bill is about more than that. It will create a register that will be a valuable national asset in that it will preserve Scotland's tartan records in perpetuity—not just for Scotland but for all who have an interest in and affinity with our proud nation and who have an interest in our iconic Scottish tartan product.
I return to Tavish Scott—
You should be closing now, Mr McGrigor.
I should close—okay. In that case, I will not return to Tavish Scott, other than to reply to his remarks about clan Gregor. He was correct about the proscription of the name. The words of defiance on Rob Roy's grave sum it up: "MacGregor Despite Them".