Chamber and committees

Forgive me, Presiding Officer, but I will not take lectures from a political party that lost the election on this very issue. The member should know something about that, having stood in 2019 on a manifesto commitment to oppose a referendum and then losing to the Scottish National Party, which was committed to a referendum taking place. In last year’s election in the very same constituency, who won the election? Again, it was the Scottish National Party. [Interruption.] Excuse me? I am being heckled from a sedentary position, Presiding Officer.

I have made the position on legal advice clear. There is a basic democratic principle in all of this, which is that, when the public elects a party to govern, they expect it to deliver on the manifesto commitments that it has made. This Government was elected with a commitment to hold a referendum on the future of Scotland. On that issue, surprisingly, the Conservative Party wants the Government not to deliver on its manifesto commitment. It is a very odd set of priorities.

I do, indeed, share the concern that the bill risks undercutting this Parliament’s powers and responsibilities. Although the precise provisions of the Brexit freedoms bill have not yet been published, based on the UK Government’s recent behaviour I remain concerned that Scotland’s world-leading animal welfare and environmental standards will be undermined. For example, we know that the UK Government was willing, in a recent free trade agreement with Australia, to grant Australian agri-food exporters significant market access to the Scottish agriculture market while producing at lower animal welfare and environmental standards, therefore undercutting our domestic producers.

Turning to the question of subsidy control, an effective subsidy control regime should promote a fair business landscape while facilitating targeted and effective support. The regime that is proposed in the Subsidy Control Bill is asymmetrical, giving sweeping powers to the UK secretary of state with no equivalent powers for devolved Administrations. It may also disproportionately restrict agricultural subsidies that we may wish to offer in Scotland in future.

It is disappointing that the UK Government’s decision not to associate with Erasmus+ prevents Scotland from participating fully in its own right. Although we remain committed to Erasmus+, in the interim we are creating a Scottish education exchange programme to support participants from across Scotland’s education system. That is a programme for government commitment, and it will help to maintain Scotland’s place as an outward-looking and internationally connected destination for work and for study.

Donald Cameron must forgive me, but I did not get advance notice of the detailed question that he has asked. I would be happy to write to him.

I hope that Donald Cameron does not disagree with the notion, which is accepted across political parties, that Governments exist to deliver what they have been elected to do. That is what we intend to do, and that is exactly what will happen during the current parliamentary session.

It is quite clearly the duty of the civil service to support the elected Government of the day to develop and implement its policies, including those relating to the constitution. That is widely accepted, including by previous heads of the United Kingdom civil service. Members will also have seen that a former member of the Scottish Parliament, Professor Adam Tomkins, tweeted to accept that that is a proper role for the civil service.

The Scottish Government and its officials have had discussions with a number of organisations that are involved in adoption records, including the National Records of Scotland, as part of our initial engagement activities around historical adoption practices.

The Scottish Government is determined to improve the experience of those whom adoption has affected, and access to records is one of a number of areas that we are exploring. We are seeking a broad range of views and want to learn more about the impacts as we progress with our engagement. The information that we receive will help inform how we support those whom such practices have affected.

We have had no meaningful engagement with the UK Government on the Brexit freedoms bill. I spoke to the UK Attorney General just two days prior to the UK Government announcement. The meeting gave a clear impression of being for no other purpose than to allow the UK Government to say that discussions had taken place with the devolved Governments, when what was, in fact, on offer was a vague verbal briefing with nothing in writing and no advance briefing of any sort. That was totally inadequate given the sweeping changes that are proposed to law, including law in devolved areas.

The approach that has been taken by the UK Government is all the more galling for its proximity to the publication of the intergovernmental relations review. It runs completely counter to the principles set out clearly in the review of

“mutual respect for the responsibilities of the governments”

and for

“Building and maintaining trust, based on effective communication”.

I agree with my colleague, the member for Dundee City West. As is the case across the Government’s programme, the civil service will support the Scottish ministers in delivering commitments that are in the programme for government. We should not forget that, in 2011, when he wrote to party leaders on this very topic, the then head of the UK civil service, Sir Gus O’Donnell, said:

“It is right and proper that civil servants working to their respective administrations undertake the relevant work to support their ministers to pursue their aims, whether or not these aims are the subject of political controversy.”

I commend my colleague from the Conservative benches for raising the issue of progress, because it has been a long wait for people to see the progress that they want to see. I hope that Miles Briggs understands that the complexities of the issue are such that it is simply not possible to say that there is a fix to the situation in which we find ourselves. We are moving as quickly as possible and we are trying to find remedies across the piece. There are all kinds of complications involved with the process, but I agree with him that it cannot go on endlessly without finding resolution for people. I am happy to work with him and colleagues across the chamber so that they are fully apprised of what stage we are at and when we are likely to make announcements. I am happy to continue to update him as we make progress in this important area.