Every member in this chamber is here today because of the trust placed in us by the people of Scotland, through their votes. Those votes have consequences and, thanks to our system of proportional representation, they matter and allow people to express their choices. That is what democracy is about—making people’s choices matter.

There is, of course, more to modern European democracy than just counting votes, but when that fundamental is undermined and people are denied what they have voted for, there is a risk that democracy itself will be undermined.

That places obligations on those of us who win elections. We must do our best to deliver on the mandates that we are given. It also obliges us when we do not win elections—and very few of us are elected at the first time of asking—to respect the decision of the people, acknowledge the result and accept the right of the winner to deliver the commitments that they were elected on. Not to do that, but instead to deny democracy, is a dangerous thing, but it is something that people in Scotland are becoming increasingly accustomed to.

I will focus on the outcome of three votes and on the question of how we who are privileged enough to be elected to Scotland’s national Parliament can best deliver what people in Scotland voted for.

The first of those was Scotland’s overwhelming vote, in June 2016, to stay in the European Union. By a majority in every single council area, 62 per cent of people in Scotland voted to remain part of the European Union. No part of Scotland voted to leave, yet, two years ago, we in Scotland were removed from the European Union against our will. This week, instead of celebrating 50 years of EU membership, of co-operation, multilateralism and solidarity between nations and of economic development and peace, we are stuck counting the cost of the Tories’ reckless Brexit.

The Office for Budget Responsibility estimates that, in the long run, Brexit will reduce productivity by 4 per cent compared to what it was during our EU membership. That equates to a cut in Scotland’s public revenues of around £3 billion every year, heaping further massive pressure on our national health service and other public services.

Those statistics are stark and they mask the human reality of the impact of Brexit: the small businesses that are going under because of the price of importing; the restaurants and hotels that are closing rooms and services because they cannot get staff; the firms that are passing on to customers their increased costs, which is helping to fuel record levels of inflation; the academics and scientists who are no longer involved in world-leading research because they are unable to get funding to collaborate with peers in the EU, which is diminishing our ability to innovate and be at the forefront of discoveries and is threatening our world-class standing; the loss of tax revenues that could have been used to fund public services; and the health and social care sectors that are dealing with a staffing crisis while trying to rebuild from a pandemic.

Brexit is harming everyone in Scotland and there are few reasons to be optimistic. Yes, times are tough globally, and every country is suffering from the effects of the pandemic and the global energy crisis. However, decades of mismanagement, compounded by the folly of Brexit, have left the United Kingdom economy utterly unprepared to weather this storm.

European countries that are comparable to Scotland are wealthier—

Given the opportunity to rise to the challenge and explain why the UK is the worst-performing country in the G20 on international comparisons, the member was unable to do so. It is an embarrassment, and the Conservatives should take responsibility for it.

The latest Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and International Monetary Fund forecasts show that the UK is set to have one of the highest inflation rates among G7 nations in 2023.

People in Scotland were promised that a no vote would secure Scotland’s place in the European Union. Just before the referendum, the then leader of the Scottish Conservatives said in the STV referendum debate:

“It is disingenuous … to say that no means out and yes means in, when actually the opposite is true. No means we stay in, we are members of the European Union.”

Oh really?

The then Secretary of State for Scotland said in November 2013:

“The only guaranteed way of leaving the European Union is to leave the United Kingdom.”

The better together campaign itself asked the question:

“What is the process for removing our EU citizenship?”

Its answer:

“Voting Yes.”

People in Scotland were promised a new era of respect for devolution, and that the United Kingdom would offer us a partnership of equals. Instead, we have seen the Westminster Government use its House of Commons majority to repeatedly overrule the Scottish Parliament, in breach of the Sewel convention. We have seen a series of power grabs through Westminster legislation changing and limiting this Parliament’s powers again and again without our consent, and now we have the UK Secretary of State for Scotland threatening, with a stroke of his pen, to overrule a bill that was overwhelmingly passed in this Parliament.

Indeed.

When the will of a huge majority of elected MSPs in Scotland’s Parliament can be reversed by a single figure from the Westminster Government, that shows clearly where sovereignty under the devolution settlement lies. Far from enhancing devolution, giving Scotland more powers and more control, the Westminster Tory Government is undermining and systematically dismantling devolution.

The motion before us says that the decisions of people in Scotland matter; that their votes count and that their future should be in their hands. This is about who decides Scotland’s future. Is it the 59 MPs from Scotland or the 591 from the rest of the UK?

I will in a moment.

European countries that are comparable to Scotland are wealthier and have lower income inequality, less poverty, higher social mobility, higher—often significantly higher—productivity, greater research and development spending and higher business investment than the UK has. Perhaps the member from the Conservative benches can explain why.

Perhaps the member on the Conservative benches will explain why the UK is doing so badly on international comparisons.

Is it the Scottish Parliament or the Secretary of State for Scotland? Is it a Prime Minister from a party that has not won an election in Scotland since 1955? There is only one answer: the people decide. Democracy demands it.

I move,

That the Parliament acknowledges the decision of the UK Supreme Court in the reference by the Lord Advocate of devolution issues under paragraph 34 of schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998; reaffirms its belief that people in Scotland have the sovereign right to determine the form of government best suited to their needs; believes that the United Kingdom should be a voluntary association of nations and that it should be open to any of its parts to choose by democratic means to withdraw from the union, and calls on the UK Government to respect the right of people in Scotland to choose their constitutional future.

The current climate is extremely difficult for all businesses, but the Scottish Government is actively working to support the gaming sector. We want to build on the recent success of Scottish games week by working with the sector to leverage the best support from the opportunities and assets that are available, such as our national tech scaler network, which is a £42 million investment that will widen access to entrepreneurial opportunities and support founders, including those in the gaming industry.

Michelle Thomson raises an extremely important aspect of the gaming sector’s success and is reflecting on its room to grow—I think that we are all in favour of a growing part of that sector coming from the female workforce. It is fair to say that the Scottish Government and everyone with an interest in building up and boosting Scotland’s games sector is keenly aware of the existing gender imbalance; I note that that imbalance exists across the digital economy more widely and is, sadly, not unique to gaming.

A recent paper entitled “Scotland’s Games Ecosystem—The State of Play: challenges and opportunities”, which was written by academics from the University of Glasgow and the University of Stirling in collaboration with the Scottish Games Network and InGAME, makes similar points in calling for the collection and publication of metrics that will evidence progress towards an open and inclusive games sector in Scotland. I commit to Michelle Thomson that I will pay close attention to that.

That double standard undermines the credibility of Labour’s recent constitutional report. It would be unacceptable for changes to devolution to be made without the agreement of the Scottish Parliament. Proceeding to implement proposals to change the devolution settlement on the basis of a manifesto pledge, while denying the right of a Scottish Government—which is elected on the same basis—to hold a referendum on independence, would further undermine Scottish democracy.

In passing, I note that, yesterday, the House of Commons debated measures that could have ensured that this Parliament would have the power to hold a referendum on Scotland’s future. The Tories voted to block Scottish democracy and the Labour Party abstained.

The Scottish devolution settlement is founded on the principle that the people of Scotland are governed only with their consent. The devolution settlement built in a requirement that changes to this Parliament’s powers should be made only with the agreement of this Parliament, either by approval of section 30 orders or by legislative consent under the Sewel convention. Unfortunately, the current United Kingdom Government has failed to adhere to the democratic principle and has restricted the powers of this Parliament without its agreement.