Chamber and committees

The Scottish Government’s approach to international engagement is built on the same values of fairness and inclusion as guide our policies at home. Our international activities and domestic priorities are mutually reinforcing.

By offering our expertise and making a constructive contribution to addressing global challenges, we can continue to promote Scotland as a good global citizen. At the same time, our international work and engagement inform the achievement of our domestic objectives—for instance, by advancing a just transition to a net zero nature-positive economy.

That is an excellent question. Our new Copenhagen office will seek to increase Scotland’s economic and cultural visibility in the Nordic regions by promoting co-operation around shared challenges and seizing the commercial opportunities that come with it. For instance, the office will build on the extensive partnerships between Scotland and Nordic countries around energy transition, decarbonisation and renewable technologies. It will also expand existing co-operation on digitalisation, the blue economy and the creative industries.

I would be delighted to do so. Scotland’s international network creates domestic opportunities, attracts investment and ultimately benefits the people of Scotland. Our international offices use a range of both qualitative and quantitative indicators across five outcomes. An update on that work was provided to the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee as part of its inquiry into the Scottish Government’s international work. I have recently undertaken visits to Ireland, the United States, Canada and Germany, and was supported by our international offices in the respective countries. Those visits have demonstrated all those priorities in action.

I take the opportunity to repeat the congratulations of the Scottish Government—and, no doubt, those of members from all across this Parliament—on the re-election of President Emmanuel Macron for a second term.

The result creates an opportunity for the Scottish Government, particularly through our office in Paris, to continue our collaborative work with the French Government on shared issues such as culture, climate change, biodiversity and human rights. It also presents an opportunity to reaffirm our shared and strongly held European values.

I urge Alexander Stewart and all other colleagues who have an interest in this area to take every opportunity to recognise the excellent work that is being undertaken on behalf of us all by representatives in Scotland’s offices around the world. As I noted during my committee appearance, I was pleased to see the cross-party enthusiasm for and consensus on the excellent job that Scotland’s international offices do day to day.

We will respond to the committee’s report in due course, and I look forward to Alexander Stewart’s possible participation in the debate next week on the matter. On his particular point, we are committed to a continuous process to ensure that the work that is undertaken by our international network is measurable, transparent and available to the public.

I am delighted to have the opportunity to close this debate on the pertinent issue of press freedom and to join members in celebrating world press freedom day. I begin by thanking in particular Russell Findlay for lodging this important motion. As the many strong contributions that we have heard today emphasise, this is a critical discussion, and we must take the time to acknowledge the crucial work of journalists at home and abroad in providing us with high-quality news and information.

I have a clear interest in press freedom as the cabinet secretary for culture with portfolio responsibility for media policy in Scotland. In addition, like Russell Findlay, I am a former journalist, so the subject matter is close to my heart. I am incredibly proud of my decade as a broadcast foreign affairs correspondent, which included reporting from the former Yugoslavia during the civil war there. That taught me how important it is to report facts and for the public to be able to learn the truth.

I whole-heartedly acknowledge the important role that a free, independent and strong press plays in upholding a democratic society. It is important that we heard excellent contributions from all corners of the chamber—from all the main political parties. Rona Mackay, Pam Gosal, Christine Grahame, Sarah Boyack, Ruth Maguire and Stephen Kerr all had important things to put on the record. I associate myself entirely with the points that were made about the importance of Channel 4 remaining in the public sector.

On world press freedom day, I want to take a moment to recognise the importance of article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 embedding in law our right to freedom of expression. That right belongs to all of us, but today I highlight its particular relevance to journalists and news publishers. Our press must be able to be independent so that journalists have the freedom to criticise Governments and hold elected representatives to account.

A free and independent press is also an essential guarantor of human rights. Without press freedom, it is not only our right to free speech that is put at risk. Journalists play a critically important role in challenging and exposing human rights abuses of all kinds. That is true at a global level, and it is one of the reasons why repressive regimes around the world go to such lengths to intimidate and silence the press. As we know, that is one of the reasons why investigative journalists who challenge the official narrative—and we have heard about a number of them today—are so regularly exposed to threats and violence. Indeed, far too many have paid the ultimate price for speaking out. Today, we remember those journalists.

I take this opportunity to condemn, in particular, the actions of the authorities of the Russian Federation in closing down the few remaining independent media outlets that dared to challenge the lies and delusions of the Putin dictatorship. I also recognise the bravery of those who continue to expose the truth about Putin’s illegal war of aggression in Ukraine. Sadly, it is necessary also to pay tribute to the growing number of journalists who have been killed or abducted by Russian forces in Ukraine. Nor should we forget the repression of the Lukashenko dictatorship in neighbouring Belarus, and its long record of intimidating and jailing journalists and civil society activists. In fact, Belarus is one of the five worst states in the world for jailing and intimidating journalists, according to figures compiled by the Committee to Protect Journalists.

Of course, the vital role played by journalists in exposing injustice and upholding human rights is not confined to action that confronts repressive regimes such as those in Russia. It is an essential feature of every healthy, successful democracy. One need only think of the award-winning investigative journalism of Amelia Gentleman in exposing the Windrush scandal—one of the most shameful examples of human rights being disregarded and violated by the UK Government. Such journalism serves a very clear public interest purpose.

For Scotland to prosper, we must respect and genuinely value the diversity of Scottish society. We must commit to sharing and debating our different views and opinions in a spirit of openness and mutual respect, and dedication to shared values and pursuit of the common good. A strong and sustainable public interest journalism sector is essential for preserving media plurality. That is why my predecessor Fiona Hyslop established the short-life public interest journalism working group to consider ways to ensure the on-going resilience and relevance of the sector. I am carefully considering the working group’s recommendations and will respond to them shortly. The work of the working group is essential in ensuring that journalism in Scotland remains transparent and strong as a key element of Scottish democracy.

Today, I join others in celebrating the work of journalists in Scotland and around the world in keeping us informed about current affairs. It is only because of journalists reporting cutting-edge stories, from local news to global events, that we can stay up to date with fast-moving situations and develop informed opinions based on facts.

In closing the debate, I will take a moment to express thanks to all those who work in the press industry in Scotland. It is essential that the news media strive to reflect the plurality of views and opinion in the country as a whole, and I am pleased that we continue to have a vibrant news publishing sector in Scotland. I am committed to helping ensure its longevity, independence and freedom.

I am here specifically to answer questions in relation to the Scottish Information Commissioner’s ruling, and I can only repeat what I have said already. The ruling is significant, it must be considered in the round, and we will reply to it in good time, within the deadlines that have been set.

What I find quite interesting about the tone so far from the Labour Party and the Scottish Conservative Party is that there seems to be a willingness to depart from the established custom and practice in relation to legal advice. It might be helpful in the weeks ahead for both parties to clarify their position on whether they think that Government ministers in Scotland or, indeed, the UK should be able to receive information from their legal advisers with the confidence that has been custom and practice not just for years but for decades.

As I have said, we have received the decision from the commissioner, and we are considering its terms. Any departure from the convention is a significant thing. Legal professional privilege and the law officers convention protect legal advice that is given to all Governments in these islands.

Given that the commissioner’s ruling is significant, we want to consider it carefully. We will respond within the deadlines set by the commissioner.

The first thing that I would observe on that political speech, rather than a question, is that we should reflect on the fact that a majority of members of the Parliament were elected to deliver a referendum during this parliamentary session. Mr Kerr finds that fact very difficult to respect or even to acknowledge. It is entirely appropriate for the Government to pursue the policies that it was elected to pursue and to pursue the legal advice in line with the precedent of the UK and Scottish Governments. We will reply to the Scottish Information Commissioner’s findings in due course.

We have received the decision from the Scottish Information Commissioner, we are considering its terms, and we will respond within the deadlines set by the commissioner.

United Kingdom Governments and Scottish Governments have observed a long-standing convention that the Government does not disclose legal advice—that includes whether law officers have or have not advised on any matter—except in exceptional circumstances. The content of any such advice is confidential and subject to legal professional privilege. That ensures that full and frank legal advice can be given.