The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-12869, in the name of Christina McKelvie, on European Union engagement and scrutiny of the committees of the Scottish Parliament on European Union policies for 2015-16. I call Christina McKelvie to speak to and move the motion on behalf of the European and External Relations Committee.
14:42
As the convener of the European and External Relations Committee, I am pleased to open the debate on our annual report of the EU engagement and scrutiny of the committees of the Scottish Parliament. The debate shows that Scottish parliamentarians take EU matters very seriously. I was pleased to see that the range, variety and depth of other committees’ reports to our committee this year reflect that fact.
My committee leads on the Parliament’s EU strategy for committees. We act as a mainstreaming hub, actively encouraging our fellow committees to strengthen their work with a wider European context and to engage early with EU issues that are of importance to Scotland. This year, we have again been successful in that aim, and I will outline briefly how we have achieved that. Before I do so, I sincerely thank the other eight participating committees for their on-going engagement and their reports to my committee. I also pay tribute to the clerks of the European and External Relations Committee for the work that they do, which has been very intense over the past year.
Since our previous debate, we have had elections for the European Parliament, in May 2014. In late 2014, we saw the formation of the new college of commissioners in the European Commission led by President Juncker, who presented a new-look, streamlined Commission work programme for 2015. Looking ahead, the United Kingdom elections campaign has featured EU issues more than ever before, not least in the context of the possibility of an in/out referendum. Given that backdrop, I am glad that we have this opportunity to share how we and other parliamentary committees have engaged with EU issues over the past year and what our future EU scrutiny priorities are.
This will be our last such debate for the current parliamentary session, so we asked other committees about their engagement on EU policies in 2014 and their plans for 2015 until the end of this session in early 2016. We did not realise that the end was coming so quickly, did we? We asked committees to identify their priorities in three main areas: the Europe 2020 agenda, the Scottish Government’s “Action Plan on European Engagement” and the European Commission’s work programme.
I will focus on the “Commission Work Programme 2015. A New Start”—or the CWP 2015 as it is known in the Europhile community—including my committee’s consideration of its new approach. The CWP 2015 approach is to focus on a limited number of 23 new initiatives for 2015, which is a lower number than was the case under the previous college of commissioners. Additionally, the new Commission proposes to withdraw 80 pending pieces of legislation.
In order to scrutinise and better understand the implications of the new approach, the European and External Relations Committee took evidence directly from the Commission. We were told that it wanted to focus on priorities and results, and to invest in proposals that would have the biggest impact on jobs and growth.
We also took the opportunity to ask how the new Commission was connecting with European citizens and making its work accessible and comprehensible. We heard that work was being undertaken to make the Commission website more accessible—I am sure that Willie Coffey will be delighted with that—as well as other initiatives to make its work much more transparent.
The Commission acknowledged that it
“needs to take measures to restore trust.”—[Official Report, European and External Relations Committee, 22 January 2015; c 15.]
Our committee entirely agrees with that sentiment. In our report, we have asked the Commission to keep us updated on how it progresses in that area. I hope that a future European and External Relations Committee will report on that very progress.
Given last year’s changes in the Commission and the streamlined nature of its work programme for 2015, there were fewer opportunities this year for committees to engage with the work programme. I am sure that that will change in the five years of the new Commission as more initiatives and policies are rolled out, which we can then scrutinise.
We gathered useful evidence from various perspectives so that we could report to Parliament on what team Scotland collectively thinks are the priorities for Scotland in the CWP 2015. I thank all those who gave us their views and insights, namely all six of Scotland’s MEPs, the Scottish Government and, finally—not forgetting—Stewart Maxwell and Patricia Ferguson. In particular, I thank Stewart Maxwell, with his Scottish Parliament member of the Committee of the Regions hat on, for his report to our committee, which was insightful and helpful.
In summary, we heard that the CWP initiatives important for Scotland included the digital single market, the energy union, the internal market, the capital markets union and the transatlantic trade and investment partnership, widely known as TTIP. I will pick out just one of those areas—the digital single market initiative—to give members a flavour of the work that our committee has done on the CWP. I will return to TTIP later to explain the more detailed work that the committee has been doing.
The committee has followed the digital single market initiative avidly for some time. I pay tribute in particular to Willie Coffey, who has never allowed an opportunity to be lost to raise the issue at a committee meeting. I commend him for his insightful work on that area, too. We were keen to seek assurance from the Commission that the digital single market initiative would improve issues in Scotland, such as bringing uniform broadband coverage to remote areas such as the Highlands and Islands. I am sure that Jamie McGrigor would be delighted to hear that, too—the issue is a hobby-horse of his that he likes to keep pressing.
We highlighted our concerns that the final EU budget agreed by the Council and the European Parliament reduced the connecting Europe facility budget, which could impact on the digital agenda.
The Commission told us that its new investment plan was intended to provide funding for projects such as rural broadband, and that the new plan would not mean less money for digital infrastructure. As members can imagine, we were quite interested in that. However, we noted in our report that we are not entirely satisfied with the level of information that is available from the Commission on the aims of the digital single market. Given the importance of the issue to Scotland, I would like to reassure the Parliament that our committee will continue to monitor any key developments and to assess how the digital single market might benefit Scotland.
I turn to other areas of importance for the Parliament’s committees. Some committees have declared their intention to consider aspects of the Europe 2020 strategy, which is the EU’s 10-year strategy for boosting sustainable economic growth and creating new jobs. As in previous years, committees can input directly into the strategy via the Scottish Government’s national reform programme, which sets out the distinct approach that is being taken in Scotland.
Similarly, the relevant committees will be considering the priorities identified in “Scotland’s Action Plan for EU Engagement”, in which the Scottish Government describes its focus in four main areas: being a committed EU partner; promoting EU reform; participating actively; and strengthening partnerships.
In summary, we can see how the work of the committees on the EU scrutinises both the bigger picture of the CWP and the specific Scottish perspective on EU initiatives.
I will not dwell on the specific topics that each committee has prioritised, which will undoubtedly be covered by colleagues from those committees, and I know that Hanzala Malik, our deputy convener, will reflect on colleagues’ contributions. Instead, I would like to highlight briefly some of my committee’s main areas of work in 2014 and thus far in 2015.
Our recent inquiry on the transatlantic trade and investment partnership—TTIP—was of great interest. The inquiry was held against a backdrop of the many discussion events on TTIP more generally that various organisations throughout Scotland, including the trade unions and the active group from the University of St Andrews, organised. I was very pleased to host one such event recently here in the Parliament that was organised by the Hansard Society on behalf of the European Parliament. It was sold out very quickly, and it involved a roomful of active and well-informed participants. There is so much heated public engagement on TTIP that we thought it only right to request a chamber debate on the issue, which I believe will take place very soon.
As I am sure that colleagues will be well aware, TTIP is a trade agreement that is being negotiated by the EU and the USA. In fact, the ninth round of negotiations is taking place right now in New York—it began on 20 April and will go on until 24 April. The key issues that our committee heard evidence on included the transparency of the negotiations, which is an extremely important aspect; the economic benefits of any agreement; the potential inclusion of the investor-state dispute settlement mechanism; and the impact of TTIP on public services.
Moving on to a different topic, in 2014 we began a major four-part inquiry entitled “Connecting Scotland: how Scotland can engage most effectively in a globalising world”. We have already taken evidence from representatives of the Catalan, Basque and Flemish Governments to give us a wider perspective. The next phase of the inquiry will involve us considering how non-governmental and third sector organisations in Scotland engage in the EU and internationally. We will talk to a wide range of organisations from the third sector, local government, civil society and universities and colleges to find out what they do.
I hope that the Parliament finds our report to be of interest, and I look forward to hearing colleagues’ thoughts and views on all EU subject areas.
I move,
That the Parliament notes the European and External Relations Committee’s 1st Report, 2015 (Session 4): EU engagement and scrutiny of the Committees of the Scottish Parliament on European Union policies 2015-16 (SP Paper 690).
14:53
I thank the convener of the European and External Relations Committee, Christina McKelvie, for setting out the conclusions of the committee’s report.
Before I go into the detail of that report, it would be remiss of me, in the context of a debate about the EU, not to begin by expressing the Scottish Government’s heartfelt and sincere condolences in relation to the dreadful drownings that have taken place in the Mediterranean over the past few weeks. The Scottish Government’s resolve to play a constructive role in helping those who are being smuggled in that way has got stronger. It is an issue that the Scottish Government and the Cabinet Secretary for Culture, Europe and External Affairs, Fiona Hyslop, have been involved in speaking out on for a long time, not just in recent months. We hope that, as a multilateral institution, the EU can come together. We must not turn a blind eye to people who are among the most vulnerable in the world. We must ensure that we do all that we can to help and support them. Above all, it is a humanitarian issue.
I very much welcome the committee’s report, particularly its observation that many of the Parliament’s committees have mainstreamed consideration of EU issues into their existing work programmes. In last month’s Government debate on the importance of EU engagement, I made it clear that such engagement is important not just as a means of influencing the rules and regulations that are made in the EU but because the EU itself is a
“a marketplace for exchanging ideas and for showcasing areas in which Scotland can display leadership.”—[Official Report, 17 March 2015; c 11.]
Indeed, there are areas in which Scotland can learn from others.
I formally acknowledge the important work that the committee has undertaken of late and, like the convener, I thank those behind the scenes, such as the committee clerks, who get the committee to run extremely smoothly and efficiently. Of course, its work includes last year’s inquiry into the Scottish Government’s proposals for an independent Scotland. We can all agree that, whatever side of the fence people were on, it was important for the debate to be had and for the proposals to receive our committees’ full and considered scrutiny. The Government will continue to co-operate closely with the committee’s connecting Scotland inquiry.
I also welcome the committee’s more recent report on TTIP, which the committee convener reflected on and the findings of which align with the Government’s own views. Transparency will be critical with regard to the TTIP negotiations. As the committee itself heard, there are different views on TTIP’s possible economic benefits, and we are clear that if there any benefits they should not come at the expense of the national health service or other public services or, indeed, the right of Governments to regulate. That is why the Scottish Government has pressed firmly and strongly for an explicit exemption for the NHS, and it is not convinced that the investor state dispute settlement mechanism is necessary.
I am encouraged by the fact that other committees’ work programmes contain items that have EU issues at their core, including important work on the roll-out of the new common agricultural policy and common fisheries policy packages. In that respect, I think that the simplification agenda will be key.
The Commission’s EU 2020 strategy, which has already been mentioned and which seeks to promote smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, chimes very closely with the Scottish Government’s own programme for government and our refreshed economic strategy, with their key themes of tackling unemployment and reducing income inequality. For the past four years, Scotland has produced its own national reform programme report as well as contributing to the UK Government’s report. Those reports provide a sense of Scotland’s performance against some of the key targets in the EU 2020 strategy with regard to employment, reducing poverty and cutting the number of early school leavers. Our 2015 report, which we will publish after the UK general election, has been informed by the successful stakeholder event that we held in Edinburgh in March.
Last month, I visited the WEST brewery in my Glasgow region. I am sure that many colleagues will be familiar with that fantastic company, which not only is a great success story in itself but represents why we are so proud of our engagement as members of the EU. The brewery is owned by a German national, Petra Wetzel, who came to study in Scotland and then went on to start her brewing business. Her staff now include half a dozen EU nationals, and the company’s craft beer is brewed according to a 1519 German purity law. I believe that all those components underscore the importance of freedom of movement and freedom of travel.
While I was at the WEST brewery, I launched the Scottish Government’s action plan for EU engagement, which refreshes the original action plan that was launched in 2009. As the convener helpfully pointed out, the action plan has four key areas, and I will go into each in a bit more detail.
First of all, we want to remain a committed partner and to make the case for our place in Europe. I believe that there is a consensus in this chamber for the UK and, of course, Scotland to remain members of the EU for the business, social, cultural and educational and academic benefits that membership brings.
Secondly, we will continue to promote effective and meaningful EU reform within the existing treaty framework. Key to that is ensuring that the EU institutions pursue an agenda that genuinely adds value and which addresses some of the EU-wide problems that member states acting on their own cannot address. That is why we welcome the Commission’s focus on tackling things such as stubbornly high youth unemployment, promoting energy security through the energy union package and tackling climate change.
The third area of the action plan centres on active participation in the EU in order to secure investment, innovation and inclusive growth. I can go into that more in my closing speech.
Fourthly, we are committed to strengthening our European partnerships—and we will do that. We will continue to work to deepen our bilateral relationships with countries including Germany, France, the Nordic and Baltic countries, Ireland and Poland.
The action plan is currently on a digital platform, which allows it to evolve and be updated. It captures life-real case studies, and I hope that members have had a chance to look at it.
I was pleased to read that the European and External Relations Committee
“asked committees to identify their priorities for 2015-16 from the Europe 2020 Strategy ... the European Commission’s work programme”
and
“the Scottish Government’s Action Plan on European Engagement”.
Members will be in no doubt, of course, about our position on an EU in/out referendum. We will passionately advocate the benefits of being part of Europe. We do not agree with the necessity of having an EU in/out referendum, but if it happens, we hope that the UK Government, whichever form it may take on 7 May—or 8 May—will look at our proposals for a double majority.
The Scottish Government is very much committed to anchoring its own economic strategy firmly to the EU’s growth agenda in delivering sustainable and smart but fair economic growth.
15:01
I welcome this committee debate on the Parliament’s engagement with the European Union. Our committees do not often grab the headlines in the Scottish Parliament, but they are where much of the serious work of the Parliament takes place. The European and External Relations Committee has an important role in co-ordinating and scrutinising the European aspects of other committees’ work, and the report that we are considering provides an excellent overview of the areas that those committees are focusing on.
From previous parliamentary work, I know about the importance of Europe to the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee in particular. Decisions that have been made in Europe have a significant impact on our rural economy, our fishing sector and the Scottish Government’s attempts to meet our climate change targets. I note the detailed report from that committee.
The European and External Relations Committee’s report discusses the European Commission’s work programme, the 10 priority areas and the Europe 2020 strategy, as well as outlining the committee’s own work programme for the year ahead.
The Parliament has always been supportive of our engagement with Europe, and in its various forms over the years the committee has always had MSPs who have championed the importance of Europe to Scotland. With our focus on domestic affairs, including our recent focus on our constitution and our referendum, we can often be at risk of losing sight of the bigger picture. In the Parliament, we might focus on the detail of European directives or legislation, but we do not always do a good job of relating that to the public in their everyday lives. Historically, turnout at European elections is low, and the public often struggle to see the relevance of European policy. However, many of our policies that work to improve our air quality and water quality and promote biodiversity originate in Europe, and much of our positive workplace legislation and the regulations around maternity and paternity pay and hours at work start in Europe, although there is still much to do in achieving consistency across member states. Human rights and equalities laws are strengthened and enforced by Europe.
One look at the Commission’s priorities shows how important they can be. Developing a resilient energy union with a forward-looking climate change programme, a connected digital single market, and a new boost for jobs, growth and investment are just three of the Commission’s priorities. Those are high-level objectives, of course, and there will still be a lot of debate about how they can be achieved. The report demonstrates that our committees are engaged with those debates. Those priorities are aimed at collective action and strengthening the European Union in sensible ways that can bring benefits to member states.
I welcome the committee’s questions to the Commission on engagement with European citizens and making its work sufficiently accessible and comprehensive. There is a lot of work to do in that regard, and although measures on, for example, a more accessible website, social media and a transparency register are all welcome, much greater cultural change is needed if the Commission wants, in its own words, to “restore trust”. There needs to be tougher budgetary discipline, especially around potential waste in and inefficiency of EU agencies, and we must be prepared to look at where spending at the EU level can help to save money at a national level. We must also look at continuing to open up the EU decision-making process, implementing institutional reforms to help build levels of trust among European citizens and ensure greater parliamentary scrutiny and accountability.
This is a short debate, although there is much content in the report. I note that the committee observed that the level of European engagement by the Parliament’s committees for 2015-16 has declined compared with that for 2014. I support the committee’s encouragement of the Parliament’s committees and their EU reporters to actively engage. However, I am sure that we will return to many of the subjects in greater detail as the committees progress through their work programmes, which focus on a number of the Commission’s 10 priorities. Indeed, we anticipate the opportunity to discuss next week the committee’s inquiry into TTIP in more detail.
We are living in an increasingly global world with strong, competitive emerging markets and economies. Europe as a trading bloc needs to build new partnerships if it is to be competitive and create opportunities for its citizens. However, Europe has never been just about trade; it is about partnership, solidarity, fairness and peace. The heightening of the migrant crisis in the Mediterranean in recent weeks, to which the minister referred, presents new and complex challenges for Europe, but we must be guided by the principles that created the European Union when we are looking for solutions.
Europe needs to respond to the modern world and address issues of sustainability, economic fairness and stability, human rights and our role in the world. Those are the big challenges and it is important that this Parliament engages with that future.
Many thanks. I now call Liz Smith, who has a generous five minutes.
15:06
Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I begin by sending the apologies of my colleague Jamie McGrigor, who is unfortunately ill, to you, to the committee convener and to other colleagues.
Jamie McGrigor asked me to begin by thanking the clerks for compiling the report, which—as Claire Baker has just said—has a lot of content. In fact, it is a very interesting report. Quite rightly, the committees of this Parliament do a great deal to ensure that there is full commitment to EU priorities. I think that we in this Parliament would all agree that our committees are, in one form or another, impacted on quite heavily by European affairs and legislation, some of which can be extremely complex—perhaps some of the most complex legislation anywhere. I am therefore sure that it is a difficult job at times for the clerks and conveners to help us to decide how we should proceed for effective scrutiny. It is extremely important for us to consider how the EU works, and what works well and what does not work quite so well for Scotland.
The Scottish Parliament’s committees’ EU strategy, which is now in its fifth year, also plays an important part in scrutinising the Scottish Government’s EU engagement. I pay tribute to the European and External Relations Committee for drawing together all the strands in the way that Christina McKelvie outlined, and for acting as a hub for the Scottish Parliament as it goes through its business. Some interesting issues are thrown up by discussion of the EU. I will perhaps say more about that in my summing up.
Quite clearly the report has led to a wide range of topics being discussed, and it shows how much they underpin all the work of the Scottish Parliament. I was interested to note in particular the very significant evidence that was taken at the time on Scotland’s possible membership of the EU if there had been a yes vote in the referendum. I do not want to rehash any of the politics of that, but I am aware of just how many politicians and members of academia came to Parliament to give evidence. Like many other aspects of the referendum that were invigorating for our democratic process, that in itself was good because it makes this Parliament a better place in terms of how we go through our democratic work, irrespective of our political views.
The Education and Culture Committee began its inquiry in January into the educational attainment gap, which I think all parties in this chamber agree is one of the greatest challenges that Scottish education faces. Obviously, that relates to the Europe 2020 targets and the Scottish Government’s action plan on European engagement. The committee’s findings on how to reduce the number of early school leavers and raise the number who enter higher education will be of particular interest. Similarly, the committee’s intention to look at the experience of other European countries on how to promote sign language will, in the context of new legislation, also provide very useful evidence.
The Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee looked at the proposed digital single market initiative, which is of huge significance to Scotland and to the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee as we continue to ensure improvements to access and connectivity here to the digital services that are enjoyed by many other EU states at better levels than parts of Scotland. As a member who represents Mid Scotland and Fife, I am well aware of the frustration that is felt by constituents in rural communities, so I look forward to the work that will be undertaken on that.
There have been inquiries into freight transport in Scotland, with a specific focus on transport links to mainland Europe. That is an important area of work, from which we hope to learn a lot more about European models of freight infrastructure. I know that my colleague, Alex Johnstone, has been taking a particular interest in some of that.
The Justice Committee has continued to monitor the negotiations on the proposed European public prosecutor’s office, in order to focus on protecting financial interests. That is also an important area. As two members have already said, the EU faces some challenges when it comes to accountability and transparency.
Of course, at a time when human trafficking is uppermost in our minds, it seems to be particularly appropriate that the Justice Committee’s 2015 work programme also includes the Commission’s European agenda on migration and related issues.
To sum up, we should all pay great tribute to Christina McKelvie and her committee, which has made all the committees of this Parliament sit up and take notice not only of legislative implications, but of how the European and External Relations Committee goes about its business. Nothing that improves Parliament’s scrutiny of EU legislation and makes it more democratic can be anything but a good thing.
We now move to the open debate, in which I will allow generous four-minute speeches.
15:11
I hope that our EER Committee’s report provides the Parliament with a useful snapshot and summary of what is happening in the European Union. As our convener said, we must thank the other committees of the Parliament for examining the policies of the EU in detail in terms of their particular committee focus, and on how those policies might impact on Scotland.
The report indicates that the EU’s 2020 strategy for growth is pivotal to most of the work that is being undertaken, and is itself almost halfway through its programme. Our Scottish MEPs, Ian Hudghton and Alyn Smith, also reminded us of the value of European funding to Scotland—nearly €1 billion from the European regional development fund and European social fund over the current period—in helping Scotland to develop our innovative low-carbon economy as well as promoting international business, tackling poverty and getting people back into work. It is important to keep highlighting the benefits of our membership of the EU—if only to counterbalance the negativity that is coming from some people.
The current focus is on Mr Juncker’s 10-point strategy and action plan, which was published last December and was mentioned by Christina McKelvie. Jobs, growth and investment are key priorities, as they should be. There are one or two other priorities that stand out for me—in particular, the planned work to develop the digital single market across Europe and plans to engage more directly with European citizens. A digital single market across Europe must surely be one of the greatest opportunities for growth, for harmonisation of technology and for competitive pricing to drive down costs for consumers. According to Mr Juncker, we can create €340 billion-worth of additional growth and create hundreds of thousands of new jobs and a vibrant knowledge economy. He went on to say:
“The borderless nature of digital technologies means it no longer makes sense for each EU country to have its own rules for telecommunications services, copyright, data protection, or the management of radio spectrum.”
I certainly agree with that, so the focus on some of those issues will help.
However, let us not kid ourselves: companies create technology borders to make money, and they make plenty from us as we move from one political jurisdiction to another. If I make the trip from Scotland to Donegal in Ireland, the mobile phone charges are huge, although it is only 170 miles from here. If I go to Inverness, which is about 200 miles from me, the charges are the same as they are at home. That has nothing to do with technology—it is about exploiting jurisdiction changes to make money from consumers.
That is why I was disappointed to learn that the Commission is planning to delay for perhaps another two years its previously stated commitment to end roaming charges for people who move around Europe. Roaming charges were supposed to be phased out by the end of this year. If we are serious about the noble aims and objectives to create a digital single market using superfast broadband right across Europe, those issues must surely be resolved.
A true digital single market should mean that we get the choice of using any digital service providers in Europe for mobile and broadband—not just the restricted and diminishing choice that we have in the UK. It should also mean that consumers are free to choose what TV broadcast media they buy, for example. Why should consumers across Europe be restricted to their national broadcaster and, in some cases, forced to pay for that, when there are plenty of other service providers across Europe whose output they might wish to watch? I cite the RTÉ service from Ireland as a particular example. We asked EU Commissioner Jackie Minor about that, and she accepted that the Commission needs to take measures to restore trust, and said that plans are under way to help with that and with how we engage with European citizens. The EU’s public-facing websites are hardly designed and written for the ordinary citizen to connect with, and Mrs Minor recognised that.
That is a crucial area of work for the EU and the Commission. Telling the public in Europe the positive story about Europe and about how the nations of Europe benefit from and help one another is a great story to tell, but it needs to be told often and in much more accessible language than has been the case so far. If it is not, the negative elements that are fuelled by the anti-European press are only too happy to pick up on those issues and to use them to attack the founding principles of the EU—the promotion of co-operation, jobs, economic growth and peace.
I very much hope to see further progress on both the issues that I have highlighted today. Perhaps we might also get the chance to update Parliament before its session ends next May.
15:16
I welcome the opportunity to discuss the important relationship between Scotland and Europe, and our shared goals over the coming years. Our committees play a vital role in scrutiny of how effective that relationship is, thereby ensuring that we as a Parliament fulfil our commitments.
Scotland’s policy relationship with Europe is important for achieving stable growth through interconnectivity and contributing to the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy. José Manuel Barroso states in the opening chapter of the strategy document:
“Economic realities are moving faster than political realities, as we have seen with the global impact of the financial crisis. We need to accept that the increased economic interdependence demands also a more determined and coherent response at the political level.”
As members will be aware, there are so many areas of development that we can go into, which demonstrates just how much the European objectives for 2020 interact with our own policy process.
However, I will endeavour today to remain focused on one area. We as a Parliament have faced many challenges over recent months, as uncertainty over renewable investment and our clean energy sector has impacted on the success of key firms, including Pelamis in my constituency. I therefore wish to focus on research and development in the EU 2020 strategy and on what we are doing here to fulfil our potential in that key sector.
As the Scottish Government’s “Europe 2020: Scottish National Reform Programme 2014” report highlights, our capacity for innovation in new renewable technologies, in pharmaceuticals, in healthcare and in biotechnology requires that the finest minds from across the European Union and the global academic community see our shores as being a destination of choice.
One of the lessons that have been learned from the Pelamis closure is that innovation and collaborative working across Europe are necessary if we are to produce products that are commercially appealing. A strong research and development base on which to build is essential. In that regard, I am glad to read in the Scottish Government’s NRP that growth in that area will focus on the EU’s flagship innovation union initiative.
Research and development is important for making the most of our emerging industries, and that is particularly relevant in the renewable energy sector. Ensuring that the focus is on making our new technologies commercially viable is vital for ensuring that investment by the private sector is secure in future years.
The transition to a low-carbon economy is a key component in the success of the Government’s economic strategy, with investment meeting the twin aims of boosting our economy and achieving carbon-reduction targets.
In evidence to the European and External Relations Committee, which was cited in its report, the Scottish Government stated:
“The Scottish Government wants to see strong incentivisation, research and innovation to lower costs and ensure that energy efficiency, renewables (particularly offshore wave, tidal and wind), energy storage, and Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) can play their part in the EU energy mix, improving energy security and creating jobs and growth.”
That statement rings true, particularly when we bear in mind our recent debate addressing the need to incentivise innovation in wave power technologies. However, reform of the current laws that dictate state aid rules might also be necessary if we are to ensure that another loss like that of Pelamis is to be avoided in the future.
Members will be aware that, in committee evidence, the European and External Relations Committee asked about the possibility of the Commission changing its approach to state aid rules so that Scottish investment in renewable energy would allow the state to invest in wave and tidal power projects. Ms Minor stated:
“One of the five dimensions of the communication on the energy union ... will certainly be research and development. It will look at ways in which we can encourage more investment in research into clean and sustainable technologies. It is premature to speculate about whether it will look at the existing state aid rules but, from having accompanied the commissioner during discussions in London earlier in the week, I know that he is very enthusiastic about carbon capture and storage.”—[Official Report, European and External Relations Committee, 22 January 2015; c 18.]
We have the workforce and the skills to make Scotland a leader in the EU if we pay heed to the lessons of Pelamis and look to incentivise growth in new technologies in a more collaborative way, while also looking at how current state aid rules might be reformed to ensure that, where state support is urgently required, it may be given.
15:21
As the Justice Committee’s EU rapporteur, I am pleased to speak in the debate. I am also a member of the European and External Relations Committee and I acknowledge the considerable work that that committee’s clerks and convener have done in putting the committee’s report together.
Before I look ahead to future work, I will touch on an aspect of the Justice Committee’s EU scrutiny that started in 2012 and concluded at the end of last year: the UK Government’s opt-out decision, which came into effect on 1 December 2014. In the run-up to that date, serious concerns were raised about how that decision would impact on Scottish interests, whether the European arrest warrant would be affected and what the implications might be if there was a gap between the block opt-out coming into effect and the opting back into individual measures.
During that time, we received updates on the various Westminster committees’ inquiries on the issue and we requested written submissions from the Lord Advocate, Police Scotland, the Faculty of Advocates and the Law Society of Scotland. We held regular evidence sessions with the Scottish Government, although we did not quite persuade a member of the United Kingdom Government to meet us. I thank all those bodies for keeping the committee updated on such a significant issue and I am pleased that there seems to have been a smooth transition from the opt-out to individual opt-ins on 1 December.
It is important for Scotland to remain a member of the European Union, and I am pleased that others in these islands support the First Minister’s call for a double majority if there is a referendum on EU membership. That call has also received support from the First Minister of Wales, at least as a concept worth looking at.
Our engagement with Europe should be about co-operation and the exchange of best practice. For example, Scotland has become part of the vanguard initiative for new growth by smart specialisation, which aims to influence the direction of innovation and entrepreneurship in Europe’s member states and regions.
The Justice Committee’s priorities for this year focus on five areas: the Scottish Government’s updated action plan on European engagement; the European Union’s e-justice strategy, the Scottish Government’s justice digital strategy and how they interact; criminal procedure dossiers and the European public prosecutor’s office proposal; the European agenda on migration; and the EU’s justice and home affairs agenda for 2015 to 2020. I will look at those in turn.
The Justice Committee will look carefully at the Scottish Government’s updated action plan on European engagement and will seek to identify any key justice issues for scrutiny. We will also keep a close eye on the justice and home affairs agenda as and when new proposals are published, to ensure that Scottish interests are protected.
On e-justice, in recent months, the committee has heard much about the Scottish Government’s justice digital strategy and we are keen to see how that fits in with the EU’s e-justice programme. The Scottish Government has confirmed that there are common objectives between the two, and it is identifying which of the e-justice actions might help it to progress the four main justice digital strategy projects, which are the digital platform, justice portal, justice communications and legal projects. We expect a further update from the Scottish Government on that work in the months ahead.
The committee has an on-going interest in the European public prosecutor’s office regulation proposal, having reported subsidiarity concerns about it in 2013. Although the UK Government does not wish to opt into the proposal at this stage, there might still be implications for working arrangements between Scottish prosecutors and the EPPO, so we are keen to keep an eye on how the proposal develops. We understand, however, that negotiations on the proposal might take some time, so that is likely to be a long-standing piece of work.
Finally, on the European agenda on migration, the committee is considering the Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. We are keen to hear more about the European agenda on migration, which was listed in the Commission’s work programme, to see whether there is any interaction. Of course, in the light of the recent unfortunate events to which the minister referred, it seems that that aspect of the European agenda will merit much greater attention at a European level in the months ahead. I believe that this Parliament would be wise to keep a close eye on the European agenda on migration.
15:26
I am particularly pleased to contribute to the debate, as a fairly new member of the European and External Relations Committee, and I congratulate all my colleagues past and present on the committee on releasing the report, which outlines how we and other committees have engaged on European issues over the past year and sets out the priorities for EU engagement in the coming year.
“Scotland’s Action Plan for EU Engagement”, which the Scottish Government published a few weeks ago, sets out that Scotland firmly believes that its best interests lie in remaining part of the European Union and maintaining its strong relationship with Europe. Scotland’s place in the EU has led the way to prosperity, sustainability and security throughout the country for more than four decades, and that will only increase as our relationship grows stronger.
The mutually beneficial relationship that Scotland and the European Union share is essential for both parties. Within that relationship, Scotland aims to influence key EU policies to meet our country’s best interests.
Through careful examination of the Europe 2020 strategy, the Scottish Government has decided which elements should be prioritised. Those are the points at which European engagement will be focused.
Although many committees throughout the Parliament have made a priority of considering EU engagement, including the scrutiny of EU policies, it has to be noted that, sadly, the levels of engagement in the topic have declined since last year. It is therefore essential to be reminded that maintaining Scotland’s strong relationship with the EU is essential. However, we must continue to hold the European Union accountable and evaluate its policies as they fit in with our needs.
The European and External Relations Committee aims to lead the Scottish Government in its engagement with the European Union and will continue to scrutinise the Scottish Government and its engagement with the EU. To carry out the scrutiny functions, early engagement is key, as is prioritising the monitoring of European legislation that is being drafted or implemented. I am sure that the committee will happily act as the hub for that scrutiny and engagement in the Scottish Parliament to guarantee that Scotland’s best interests are being met in Europe.
I am sure that my colleagues will agree that there is no doubt that Scotland is an essential part of the European Union and that the European Union is an essential part of Scotland. To maintain the best possible relationship, it is necessary that the Scottish Government continues its efforts to best engage with and monitor the policies that the EU sets forth. That will ensure that Scotland continues to thrive as much as possible as part of the European Union.
I call Liz Smith, who has a generous four minutes.
15:29
Christina McKelvie gave an interesting introduction when she talked about the increasing depth of committee reports when it comes to EU matters. She also talked about the EU’s increasing influence on Scottish affairs and hinted at some streamlined changes that are necessary to bring about greater accountability. That is a valid point.
Christina McKelvie referred to the impending referendum on Europe. Politics aside—I stress that this is not the time to make party-political comments—the impending referendum provides an opportunity to re-examine how Europe, and Scotland as part of that, does things. That is important for two reasons.
There is no question but that those of us who wish the UK to be firmly established as part of the EU, primarily because of the huge economic benefits that that brings, want some reform. I suspect that all parties in the chamber want reform of some sort, particularly the tougher budget discipline that is required.
It is unquestionable that people want greater transparency. There is also no question about the need for greater accountability. I think that Christina McKelvie introduced the issue of trust. Trust needs to be rebuilt. It is important in politics to have trust, and one of the issues that the EU faces is that it has lost trust throughout the continent for a variety of reasons. That needs to be addressed.
I chair the cross-party group on colleges and universities. Some interesting things are happening in that field that make clear the need for greater accountability and transparency as our young people and our mature students look much further afield.
One of the most interesting developments to happen recently is that the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service system is being opened up beyond the current UK system. That is good news because it means that our young people are looking abroad to study and, obviously, we want to attract more people to come to this country, including people from the EU.
I am conscious of the Government’s attempts to improve that process. It has been let down a bit by the Westminster Government on that. We debated that a little while ago and I fully support the Scottish Government’s moves to address that.
Lots of interesting things are going on in how we look at the EU, but there is unquestionably a need for trust in the institutions to be restored. The world is changing fast. I think that it was Humza Yousaf who said—rightly—that the EU is a big marketplace. It matters a great deal to us as a trading nation and as part of the UK trading nation. We have to ensure that the processes by which we engage in it are fit for purpose, and there are question marks over that.
The committee’s report has been important for pointing us in the direction of some of the challenges that we face. As I said when I closed my opening remarks, anything that can make the democratic scrutiny in this Parliament better must be a good thing. There are many question marks over the Parliament’s committee system, and the Presiding Officer wants to lead some discussion on that. That is right and proper because, if anything about democracy is most important, it is the scrutiny that allows for transparency and for trust in the process to be rebuilt.
15:34
This is a brief debate to recognise the role that our committees play in engaging with Europe, to examine the priorities that they have identified as having particular importance for Scotland and to consider the EU priorities. The European and External Relations Committee plays an important role in encouraging early engagement; mainstreaming the scrutiny of EU legislation into the subject committees, which can identify its relevance to their areas of expertise; and mainstreaming and co-ordinating the implementation of legislation.
We often bemoan the poor turnout at European elections—only 33.5 per cent of the electorate took part in the 2014 election—but the turnout throughout Europe is not much better. Although the overall figure across Europe was higher than our third of the electorate, 2014 still saw the lowest recorded turnout figure for a European election.
Some members have referred to a possible EU referendum. We are weeks away from a UK election, and Europe and our membership of the EU are perhaps not as prominent as commentators predicted they would be a few months ago. It feels as though the agenda has moved on to much more domestic matters and there are more exciting predictions for commentators to speculate about than those on Europe.
Despite the talk of Eurosceptics, I feel that most of the electorate are fairly apathetic towards European politics, and it is marked that the EU referendum seems to have fallen off the agenda. There are many reasons for that public apathy, but I suggest that there continues to be a lack of understanding of what Europe delivers for us in the modern world. That is partly the responsibility of European leaders, who continue to be institutionally focused, as well as member state leaders, who often prefer to present the positive measures from Europe as their own but take the opportunity to criticise Europe when there are challenges. That is combined with a lack of confidence from citizens that Europe is working for the ordinary person.
We are seeing huge economic challenges across Europe. Our fellow Europeans in many countries are continuing to experience levels of poverty and economic downturn not seen for many years. Many countries have a crisis in youth unemployment, which leads to significant social problems and often depopulation, as those who can begin to look for opportunities elsewhere. Those are significant challenges with no quick solutions. In response to that, Europe—the Parliament, the Commission and the Council of Ministers—for too many people does not look as though it is responding adequately and yet, if we could see delivery on the 10 priorities that everyone has spoken about, we would see a modern, responsive union that is able to address the pressures of our modern times.
Expansion of the European Union has changed the funding opportunities and the funding landscape for Scotland. Although we remain part of CAP funding and our farmers receive support, that is an example of how the focus for agriculture is starting to change, with a much greater focus on land management and the environment. The Commission is starting to change how it spends its resources.
The funds that Scotland receives for regeneration have changed dramatically over the years, but there are still opportunities, including the European social fund, which some members talked about. The minister knows that I have previously raised concerns from the university sector about the proposed changes to the horizon 2020 programme.
However, we need to be alert to opportunities, and the committee’s report—and some of the members—talked about possible opportunities in regeneration; in e-health, which the Health and Sport Committee looked at; and in potential funding for cultural heritage, which the Education and Culture Committee looked at. The committees have an important role to play in overseeing that.
Liz Smith highlighted the freight transport report, which demonstrated how Europe has an impact on many areas of our economy. Christina McKelvie and Willie Coffey talked about the digital single market and highlighted competitive pricing and the need for more consistency across Europe. It is a borderless economy and it makes no sense to have multiple rules. That is a good example of how Europe and the Commission could make changes that benefit the average European citizen. As Willie Coffey said, those issues should be resolved much more quickly than on the proposed timescale.
Malcolm Chisholm talked effectively about the challenges facing the renewables sector and the need for a greater concentration on research and co-operation in Scotland. He highlighted the innovation proposals and the need for more collaborative research. We still have some way to go before some renewables are commercially viable and there needs to be a greater focus on that. As Malcolm Chisholm said, the report mentioned that, when the committee asked about state aid rules, there was not a lot of clarity from the Commission. There were certainly warm words and positive noises, but there was not a lot of clarity about where we might see changes.
I was struck when reading the report that there are many opportunities for co-operative working and sharing good practice. Christina McKelvie mentioned the TTIP report that will come from the committee. TTIP can give us trade opportunities in an expanding world, but there is largely a consensus across the chamber that the NHS needs to be excluded from any proposals that are put forward.
Rod Campbell spoke about the Justice Committee’s work. As we consider the introduction of the Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Scotland) Bill, it is sensible that the committee intends to take evidence from Europol and EU experts on human trafficking. I support the minister’s comments about the need to address people smuggling as a humanitarian issue.
The Equal Opportunities Committee is seeking to learn from EU counterparts in progressing its work on female genital mutilation. When we are facing such a situation, which is evident throughout Europe, it is important that we work together to find solutions.
Anne McTaggart referred to the debate on Europe that we had earlier this year. Although that did not result in a motion that we all agreed to, there was quite a lot of consensus on the importance of Scotland and the UK engaging with Europe and of our continued membership of the EU. I thank the European and External Relations Committee and I look forward to opportunities for the Parliament to explore some of the issues in the coming year.
15:40
The debate has been brief, but we have covered a number of issues and topics that are not only important in members’ constituencies but of great national importance.
Malcolm Chisholm rightly raised the important issue of renewables, and wave and tidal technology in particular, segueing into a discussion of research and development and innovation. Claire Baker also touched on the theme, mentioning horizon 2020 at the end of her speech. She has consistently expressed her concern that any further budget reduction for horizon 2020 might impact on our research and development and our academic institutions. I hope that I have given strong assurances in that regard, and I reiterate that we share such concerns.
Willie Coffey spoke eloquently about digital connectivity and having a true single market. He was right to use the word “exploitative” in speaking about some of the multinational corporations, and right to advocate that we take a sensible approach to a variety of digital issues. I know that digital issues are a matter of great concern to Willie Coffey, and over the years he has been consistent in raising those issues in the chamber.
Roderick Campbell spoke about justice issues, which I will reflect on further in a moment. Liz Smith, speaking on behalf of Jamie McGrigor, spoke about a variety of issues such as transport, education and migration as well as energy union, which is an issue that Jamie McGrigor has raised on many occasions during chamber debates on the EU.
I am grateful to have the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the Government’s behalf. It is important in terms of EU engagement priorities that the Government has a locus with regard to the European Commission’s 2020 programme, which will be taken forward through the Commission’s work programme in 2015.
In effect, the programme is a 23-point plan to take forward the growth agenda in the EU. I wrote to the European and External Relations Committee in January to set out the key areas of interest for the Scottish Government. The work programme is more focused than it has been in previous years, which is perhaps a sign that the Commission is serious about reconnecting with its citizens. As Claire Baker and other members have suggested, and as I think the Commission would be the first to say, the EU has fundamentally failed to connect with and make itself relevant to the citizens of its member states. The work programme perhaps demonstrates the Commission’s understanding that doing less, but doing it more effectively and strategically, is a better approach to take.
Although the programme is more focused, there are a number of strategic issues that will be of considerable interest to a number of our committees. As has been mentioned, climate change will loom large ahead of the major conference in Paris towards the end of the year in which countries of the world will seek to hammer out a global climate deal. The Scottish Government will of course play its role in that conference, which will—as Claire Baker said—potentially help us to reach our own targets here in Scotland.
I know that the energy union package is incredibly important to Jamie McGrigor, who cannot be here today. The package is a critical initiative, and I welcome the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee’s intention to consider the strategic framework for energy union in the context of its work on oil and gas, wave and tidal power and energy efficiency.
There are many other elements of the Commission’s work programme that will have major relevance to committees as we move forward. My consideration is clearly limited by time, but I want to make a point about migration, which other members have mentioned. It is a key issue in the Commission’s work programme, and I welcome the Justice Committee’s intention—as Roderick Campbell highlighted—to examine how the Commission intends to deal with issues of people trafficking and smuggling as part of its migration strategy. It is a major issue that needs to be addressed. The Scottish Government has of course been deeply disturbed by the deaths in the Mediterranean of so many migrants who have sought to enter the EU from Africa.
Many other elements of the Commission’s work programme will have major relevance for committees.
It is good that in this Parliament we have had a positive discussion about the benefits of the EU. In other Parliaments across these islands, there might not be such a constructive debate or a real consensus about the benefits. We know about the benefits, such as the single market of 500 million people with access to 20 million businesses. In 2012, the EU was the world’s largest economy in terms of gross domestic product, with a higher figure than those for the United States and China. I have touched on the benefits from migration for our education institutions as well as the social and cultural benefits. I welcome the commitment from across the Parliament to engage constructively and positively on EU issues.
The Government is committed to a number of key points. It is committed to continuing to engage with the Parliament as early as possible on forthcoming EU legislation, and we hope to publish updated transposition guidance soon. We will continue to make the case that Scotland is best served as a member of the EU. Of course, we think that the UK is stronger for being in the EU and that the EU is stronger for having the UK as a member. Because of that, our clear position is that we do not support an in/out referendum and we believe that, if one happens, a double lock should be in place.
We will continue to make the case for EU reform. No member state ever tells me that it believes that the EU is perfect. Every single one of us wants reform, but we believe that that can be done within the existing treaty framework. We are keen that Scotland should get its share of the investment package, and we are working closely with the UK Government in that regard. We want to support innovation and promote inclusive growth through active participation in the EU. We also want to use the heightened interest in Scotland since 2014 as a platform to deepen a number of bilateral relationships across the EU.
The Scottish Government firmly believes that the EU is the best international framework to deliver social and economic gains for the people of Scotland and to tackle some of the difficult global challenges that face Scotland and its partners worldwide. We do not consider that there is a viable alternative to our EU membership that is capable of delivering the same economic and social prosperity to our people or of enabling us to fulfil the Scottish Government’s ambition for international engagement.
As I say that, if I listen closely, I can almost hear Margo MacDonald’s voice telling me otherwise. It is important that we recognise that there are a number of voices in Scotland who are not quite convinced of the case for our continued EU membership. Therefore, I do not doubt that the Government and politicians across the Parliament have a job to do to be firmer about the benefits of the EU. Members might find the Scottish Government’s booklet on the benefits of Scotland’s membership of the EU a very handy guide in doing that job.
Subsequent to the Smith commission report, the Scottish Government will continue to work and engage constructively with the UK Government to press for strengthened safeguards to ensure that Scotland’s voice is heard in the development of UK policy on EU issues that touch on devolved matters. That is of particular importance and interest to members across the Parliament.
Once again, I thank the European and External Relations Committee for its report, as well as all those who were involved in putting it together.
I call Hanzala Malik to wind up the debate on behalf of the European and External Relations Committee.
15:48
I am pleased to be able to close the debate today for the European and External Relations Committee.
I thank all members for their contributions, including Humza Yousaf and Claire Baker. I also thank the committee clerks and other committee clerks who assisted, as well as all the people who gave evidence to the committee. It is greatly appreciated.
We have heard about what other committees’ European priorities were in 2014 and what they plan to do for the rest of this parliamentary session. As our convener, Christina McKelvie, said, last year was one of great change in the European Union. I will talk about some of the themes that came out of the European and External Relations Committee’s report.
I agree with Malcolm Chisholm and Anne McTaggart that EU funds are very important to Scotland. For example, Scottish MEPs told our committee about the €985 million for Scotland from the European regional development fund and the European social fund in the period up to 2020. We heard that those funds will go into a range of projects to help Scotland build a low-carbon economy, as well as promote international business opportunities, tackle poverty and get people back into work.
I want to mention the importance of the reformed common agricultural policy and the common fisheries policy, which are closely scrutinised by the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee. That committee’s work on this area includes hearing from European Commission officials on the topic.
The Local Government and Regeneration Committee has been considering EU funds in some detail in relation to its continuing interest in the development of Scotland’s regional economies. In 2015, it will look at the operation of the European structural funds programmes in Scotland.
The European and External Relations Committee noted in our report that the Scottish Government has identified youth employment as a key objective for the structural funds in Scotland. The committee is taking a special interest in the roll-out of the EU youth employment initiative.
The Education and Culture Committee has been scrutinising the Scottish Government’s actions on youth employment in 2014. It considered the European Commission’s youth guarantee scheme as part of its inquiry into Scotland’s educational and cultural future, and it will follow up that work in 2015.
The digital agenda is important. The Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee told us about its continuing interest in that and it will take evidence on it directly from the European Commission. It took evidence on how Scotland is performing on the digital agenda and on what more can be done to encourage digital participation.
Willie Coffey and Roderick Campbell talked about the digital agenda and the justice challenges that Scotland faces. Our Justice Committee told us that it intends to monitor the EU’s work on e-justice, with the background of the Scottish Government’s digital strategy in Scotland. The Justice Committee intends to pursue a variety of other important issues, such as the Commission’s European agenda on migration and the Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Scotland) Bill. That is an area in which the European and External Relations Committee has a special interest.
The Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee continues to track developments relating to the EU 2020 climate target and the establishment of an EU 2030 framework for climate and energy policies. I know that it will follow very closely the negotiations leading up to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change meeting in Paris in November.
The Equal Opportunities Committee hopes to mainstream EU issues into several work areas, such as its inquiry into the experience of social isolation faced by people in Scotland, and also in an upcoming race and ethnicity related inquiry, which is very important, because many in the minority community in Scotland feel let down.
I hope that others have found our report interesting. I look forward to another year of effective scrutiny and mainstreaming of EU issues of importance across all subject committees. Please wish us well for success in that.
I take this opportunity to wish Jamie McGrigor, who is unwell, a speedy recovery. He is missed here daily and is particularly interested in the common agricultural policy as well as the common fisheries policy. I do not want him to feel that his absence or his interest in those areas has not been noted.
I stress that the digital network is crucial for the growth of the Scottish economy. It is important that our MEPs take the fight to the European Union to ensure that we get all the support that we can in rolling out that programme.
Presiding Officer, how much time do I have?
I can give you another minute or so.
That is very kind. Thank you.
In conclusion, I thank the committee’s convener, Christina McKelvie, who worked tirelessly to ensure that we delivered an effective programme last year. I look forward to our doing so this year, as well. I also thank all the people who gave their valuable time in coming to the Scottish Parliament to give evidence. It was important that we shared their experiences, as that helped us to put our report together.
Previous
Portfolio Question Time