The member from Mr Whitfield’s party’s front bench was not able to clarify the Labour Party’s position on whether the Sewel convention should be put on a statutory footing. What is Martin Whitfield’s preference? Should it be on a statutory footing?

Common frameworks.

Common frameworks.

Will Neil Bibby take the opportunity to confirm that, were there to be an incoming Labour Government, the Sewel convention would be incorporated on a statutory basis? Yes or no?

It might be a forlorn hope, but would it be possible to hear what the member’s view is on the Sewel convention being raised on to a statutory footing? Will he give us a clear statement of his position?

It is a genuine pleasure to wind up this debate, in which we have discussed a motion that draws attention to the fact that the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Senedd

“refused to give consent to the Internal Market Act because of concerns over its potential to undermine democratic decisions of the devolved legislatures”.

The motion goes on to say that we agree that

“those fears have been realised to the detriment of the people of Scotland, and that the devolution settlement has been fundamentally rolled back by the Act”,

and that we call for

“the repeal of the ... Act and for the UK Government to stop taking back control to the UK Parliament of policy decisions that should be made in Scotland.”

That is an eminently sensible statement of fact that should command the support of members from across the Parliament. I pay tribute to my colleague Jamie Hepburn, who made a powerful and persuasive opening speech regarding the erosion of the Sewel convention and the implications of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020.

It was a pleasure to listen to much of the speech from Neil Bibby on the Labour front bench. His party’s amendment calls on the UK Government

“to develop a more consensual means of preserving common standards and safeguards across the UK that does not undermine devolution in any part of the UK.”

In one slight criticism, I say that, at some point, the Scottish Labour Party will have to be clear about what it will or will not do with the Sewel convention. Frankly, given what we have learned about how the convention is abused by the UK Conservative Party, the only way for that to work is on a statutory basis. I hope that the Scottish Labour Party will move to support that in time.

We also heard very positive contributions from Michelle Thomson, Keith Brown and Martin Whitfield. Again, I have one minor criticism, on the Scottish Labour Party’s inability to commit to incorporating Sewel on a statutory basis. We heard powerful interventions from Christine Grahame, Ross Greer and Clare Adamson, who reminded members of the advice that her committee has received from Scotland’s leading constitutional academics.

What we are debating this afternoon are well-established facts about the undermining of devolution.

I thank Liam McArthur for sharing the positive impact of mobile cinema in the communities that he represents in Orkney. I encourage any other colleagues from across the chamber who have had similar experiences—I am sure that there are many of them—to be so kind as to forward information to me on that before the meeting that I hold at the beginning of next month. Those experiences will be very material to the discussions that we are having about the future of the Screen Machine service, which is much valued.

I am absolutely clear on the value that Screen Machine brings to the communities that it visits, including the Western Isles, the esteem that its audiences hold it in and its contribution to cutting carbon emissions through reducing audience travel. All those matters will be subjects at the meeting that I will hold early next month.

Yes, I do have such plans. I will meet Regional Screen Scotland on 5 October to hear directly about the challenges facing the future of Screen Machine. I recognise the valuable role that Screen Machine plays in bringing cinema to rural communities for which access to culture is limited, and I note the £176,000 funding that Screen Scotland provided to Screen Machine earlier this year, which is allowing Screen Machine to lease a temporary replacement cinema until April 2024.

I begin by welcoming Ian Liddell-Grainger of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association to our proceedings this afternoon.

In answer to Emma Harper, I say that our international network provides a range of benefits to the people of Scotland. Working alongside Scottish Development International, our offices focus on attracting overseas investment, helping business trade internationally and protecting Scotland’s interests in the European Union and beyond. The hard work and dedication of our civil servants deployed overseas, working collaboratively with their excellent counterparts in SDI, help ensure that Scotland is the most attractive location in the United Kingdom outside London for foreign direct investment, thus securing and creating thousands of real living wage jobs.

Our offices also work with officials in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and other UK bodies to deliver impact on behalf of Scotland. I am pleased that their effective joint working was recognised by the Scottish Affairs Committee at Westminster in its report, “Promoting Scotland Internationally”, which was published last week and to which I was happy to provide evidence.