Chamber and committees

Thank you very much for your submissions. You have given us so much evidence. I also very much appreciate your frankness, which I think will help us to move things along—although that will be subject to the Government having an appetite for change.

That leads me to my first question. To what extent do you think that the Government really has an appetite for doing this better? I do not mind who goes first. You are smiling, Professor Bell, so you can go first.

For the record, I state clearly and openly that I am dismayed by the rise of the far right across the world. History has shown us that, when the far right is strong, it can lead to wars, poverty for many, the removal of rights and the weakening of the judiciary. It seems ironic that, in Scotland today, women have had to battle to reassert their rights and science has been consistently denied. Just at the weekend, we had dangerous commentary about the judiciary, which we should all condemn whole-heartedly. I say that because we cannot afford to be complacent and we need wise heads to prevail.

In my short remarks, I want to focus on Trump’s tariffs and their implications. First, it is useful to understand how arbitrary they are. Their levels are based on dividing the US trade deficit in goods with each country by the value of that country’s imports, then dividing by 2. However, if that formula had been imposed consistently, countries such as Australia, with which the US runs a trade surplus, would be due money back. Instead, the calculation was abandoned for countries that have little or no trade deficit with the US and a 10 per cent tariff was imposed on them. It is a myth that the UK got a better deal because of Keir Starmer cosying up to Donald Trump.

The most obvious consequences of the tariffs have been a destabilising of international markets. At close of play yesterday, the Dow Jones industrial index was trading approximately 6,000 points lower than it was at the end of January, while the relative safety of precious metals such as gold meant that their price was up again.

For many, the biggest concern is the less-well-reported impact on the bonds market. The US has introduced a rise in the cost of debt of which Liz Truss would be proud. The cost of debt has risen for the US but also for the UK, which is paying over 4.5 per cent—in the eyes of investors, that is a clear measure of a lack of fiscal resilience. That will ultimately lead to a decrease in public sector spend and Barnett consequentials, or tax rises. That is why this debate is highly relevant for the Scottish Parliament.

A fear of rising inflation in the US and the possibility of a global recession are just part of the price that is being paid for Trump’s incompetence. It is not only the large advanced economies that are being hit; poor countries are affected as well. Malawi, for example, has been hit by a 17 per cent baseline tariff by the US.

US stocks ended sharply lower overnight after Trump intensified his criticism of the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, raising concerns about the central bank’s independence and unsettling investor confidence. That has further weakened the US dollar, with further overnight declines against most major currencies.

What, then, of trade negotiations? Some countries, including the UK, seem to be signalling that they will go down the path of appeasing Trump. Fears are being expressed that that might include compromising on domestic standards, particularly for our Scottish food products, for which provenance and quality are our calling card. My fear is that taking the path of appeasement will only embolden Trump. I can see no sign that he is open to calm reasoning.

I end by making the obvious point that we need to revisit and revise Scotland’s export strategy in the light of world events, as well as our economic and financial policies.

I note the conciliatory tone that the cabinet secretary has adopted. I am especially pleased now that women’s voices will, eventually, be listened to. I add to the list, in addition to For Women Scotland, the likes of Sex Matters, Murray Blackburn Mackenzie, which has done such sterling work, LGB Alliance and so on.

Many of us noticed at the weekend the really quite shocking and disgusting language being used at some of the debates, including wishes to urinate and defecate on women. It is ironic that sex was not included as a protected characteristic in the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021, with the promise that there would be a misogyny bill. Can the cabinet secretary give any indication of when that bill will be introduced—I appreciate that it is under a different portfolio—and, fundamentally, whether it will have women as a sex class at its heart?

Thank you. Do you have any final words, Susan?

My couple of questions will help to bring that in. I have a quick question that I will invite Susan Love to answer first. How do you see the advent of artificial intelligence affecting skills provision in the future and what active thinking are you doing on that? We are talking about a very wide landscape and we do not know what we do not know but, as I have said previously, there is a juggernaut coming down the track and we need to try to factor it in in some way. Could you give me some reflections as to what you have thought about thus far? If you have not thought about it, that is also okay.

I appreciate that AI is a massive area. I am not at all surprised and I am entirely heartened to hear about the amount of work that is going on in your sector.

The reason why I am asking about this is to probe the Scottish Government’s work mapping a pathway that ensures skills provisioning across the piece and its ability to take cognisance of AI across the piece. Are you getting the sense, as we talk about the skills landscape and, in effect, being fit for the future, that consideration of AI is very much on the table in the way that it is in what you have outlined about your sector?

Okay. I will bring in the other three panellists with my next question, and then give you a chance, Susan.

I have been listening very intently to this wide-ranging session and part of the committee’s challenge is how to fashion recommendations. If I were to be cruel and ask what your top two asks are in terms of ensuring that our skills system works and is fit for the future of your sector, what would those top two asks be? You are smiling, Kellie. You have to come in.

Exactly.

Thank you. Ian, do you want to come in? [Interruption.] You are on silent.

I accept and concur with the warnings about tariffs, but, given how frequently tariffs have been talked about over recent weeks, was the member as surprised as I was that there was no strategic consideration or thinking in the spring statement about their potential impact?