The Scottish Government believes that the best outcomes for Scotland will come if we ensure that more of the decisions about Scotland are taken by and for the people of Scotland. The First Minister is setting out a vision of a country free from child poverty, with higher living standards and with the powers of independence to create the kind of Scotland that we know is possible. We remain committed to publishing a final overview independence paper to give people in Scotland the information that they need to make an informed choice about their constitutional future.

The increased global economic volatility following President Trump’s announcements on tariffs reinforces more than ever the importance of Scotland having the security, stability and opportunity that come with EU membership. The EU is a rules and values-based organisation, with a single market of around 450 million citizens. Given the present global uncertainties, the importance of sustaining a Europe of countries working together for peace, prosperity and progress has never been greater. For those reasons, we are profoundly committed to Scotland achieving membership of the EU as an independent nation.

Yesterday, the First Minister announced an additional £300,000 to support humanitarian aid efforts in the Middle East through the Disasters Emergency Committee appeal and the Scottish charities the Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund and Mercy Corps. That is in addition to our previous contribution of £250,000 to the DEC appeal, SCIAF and Mercy Corps, as well as £750,000 for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East appeal in November 2023. That funding has helped to deliver life-saving food, shelter and medical assistance for people across Gaza and the wider region.

Humanitarian needs continue to escalate. The DEC appeal has so far raised £3.8m in Scotland and the Scottish public can continue to make a donation to it.

I assure Emma Roddick that the voices, views, needs, interests, concerns and expectations of arts organisations throughout Scotland, regardless of where they are, are important to the Scottish Government and to Creative Scotland. Where we have strategic partnerships, round-table events and on-going dialogue, I am very keen to ensure that everybody who can and wants to take part is able to do so.

As a parliamentarian who represented a north of Scotland constituency for a long time, I know how important Eden Court theatre is. All organisations that meet established criteria are considered equally for funding, irrespective of the interactions that they might have in person with Creative Scotland. Meeting the criteria is the sole factor that determines a funding decision, and I urge Eden Court theatre to get in touch with Creative Scotland directly if it has any concerns.

I will try my best, Presiding Officer.

We are very careful to make appropriate decisions in relation to the humanitarian response in Palestine. However, as Mr Bibby has drawn my attention to, there is wider funding that is provided beyond disasters and emergency relief. I will look closely at the point that he makes and write back to him. I will look at the issue, but I am sure, Presiding Officer, that you would wish me to focus my remarks on the humanitarian response in Palestine, which I have done already.

I join Murdo Fraser in paying tribute to the work of the consulate of the United States of America in Edinburgh. It has done a tremendous job over the more than 200 years that a US consulate has been in Scotland. Since 1798, there have been diplomatic relations between US diplomats and Scotland, and we very much value that.

I met Kathryn Porter, the consul general, this morning. The closure is a decision for the US Administration’s Department of State, but I observe that, in recent years, we have seen a significant increase in consular representation in Scotland. Many people would be extremely disappointed if the US were not part of the wider consular family of the international community that is based in Scotland.

I am happy to confirm that this is a Scotland-wide programme. Carole Mochan has raised concerns about some specific artefacts. I am not aware of those, but I would be grateful if she could let me know, as I want to look closely at those issues and understand whether there is anything that I can do to support their retention and display in the region that she represents.

Before I respond to the points that have been raised by members, I thank everybody who has participated in this afternoon’s important and timely debate. Given the breadth of the subject matter, I am pleased that members of the Parliament have had the opportunity to listen and to contribute to this afternoon’s discussion.

As the First Minister noted in his opening speech, the events of the past few days and, indeed, the past few months have challenged the international rules-based order that we have perhaps taken too much for granted. That has real consequences for people here, in Scotland. Global instability, conflict and economic uncertainty impact on jobs, investment and our shared desire for a just and fairer world. That is why taking an internationalist and outward-facing approach is vital, which means that we must actively engage with partners to protect Scotland’s economic interests, create opportunity for Scotland’s people and stand up for the values that we believe in. In the face of rising tensions and uncertainty, we cannot take the view that global events do not affect matters that come before this Parliament or, indeed, have no impact on Scotland more widely.

As the contributions to this debate have highlighted, a range of issues affect our international work. I will reflect on the contributions of members who had something to say about the impact of the international situation. Neil Bibby was the first to do so. He said that there is much to discuss, and he is absolutely right. He was correct to identify the broad range of challenges, including the dangers of a trade war. I note his support for brand Scotland, which is extremely welcome, and I look forward to him and his party colleagues promoting its campaigns.

Patrick Harvie correctly warned about the range of crises and spoke about the importance of believing in hope and a better future. Alex Cole-Hamilton painted a vivid image of Ukraine and why the conflict there should matter to us all. George Adam said that we should aim for Scotland to play a part in the international community—actively doing so is, of course, the global norm.

Emma Roddick highlighted the impact of disinformation, which is ever more relevant both here and globally. Paul O’Kane highlighted the importance of co-existence and hope, and of not forgetting about frozen conflicts that sometimes appear less in the international headlines. He recounted his visit to Bosnia and Herzegovina with Remembering Srebrenica. Having led the first Scottish delegation to Srebrenica with Remembering Srebrenica, I recommend that all colleagues who have not yet been go—please ensure that the combating of genocide and Holocaust denialism remains a priority for all of us in Scotland.

Kevin Stewart made a powerful speech about the situations in Ukraine and Palestine and warned about the damage of tariffs and the danger of the far right. Michelle Thomson highlighted the impact of tariffs on bond markets and how that impacts on Scotland and our devolved governance.

Audrey Nicoll was right to reflect that we should give greater, not less, consideration to international developments. That includes the malevolent role of Russia around our shores, which we should all be alive to. Karen Adam warned of the dangers of othering, fear, rumour and blame—history is repeating itself in that regard.

Turning to the concluding contributions, I think that Daniel Johnson was right to describe the unique context that we find ourselves in at present and to say that the issues are so profound that we must discuss them. I agree with him. He went on to talk about the importance of the defence sector. I also agree with him on that and on his highlighting of northern security as an area where we all share a key priority.

Jackson Carlaw made a very expansive and considered contribution on behalf of his party. He talked about the importance of faith, co-existence and co-operation, about changing international relationships in a global context and the risk of war, and about the importance of trade and aid. I could not agree with any of that any more than I do.

In closing the debate, I emphasise the role that Scotland plays internationally and the importance of navigating global challenges with a clear focus on our values, interests and strategic priorities. Engagement with the international community matters to Scotland. As well as being an important opportunity to make a positive contribution on global issues such as climate change, renewable energy and economic prosperity, it affects how we are viewed by the rest of the world. Through our engagement with international partners, we demonstrate our commitment to democracy, the rule of law and the principles of co-operation between nations, which are enshrined in the United Nations charter and anchored by the rules-based system that has defined international relations for much of the past 80 years.

Many of those values are also those of our friends in the European Union, which is an endeavour that was forged in the aftermath of global turmoil and war in Europe. That is a point worth remembering—as it has been in this debate—as we approach the 80th anniversary of VE day in just two weeks’ time.

We will continue to work with partners to promote and strengthen multilateralism and global institutions, to protect human rights and, through our international development programmes and humanitarian responses, to help the most vulnerable where we can.

Last year, building on our global affairs framework, I was proud to launch the Scottish Government’s international strategy, which sets out our values-based approach to international relations. The international strategy emphasises Scotland’s aspiration to be a good global citizen and recognises the need for co-operation to build a more just and sustainable global system. That is central to our vision for Scotland’s place in the world, and it underpins the way in which we conduct ourselves internationally. In addition, the strategy’s core themes of economy, trade and investment; climate change, biodiversity and renewable energy; and reputation, influence and relationships will ensure that we maintain focus on priority areas, so that our international work is impactful and delivers for Scotland’s people and businesses.

I take a moment to draw members’ attention to the international network of Scottish Government offices and Scottish Development International posts that do so much work to promote Scottish interests overseas, strengthen our relationships with key countries, and protect and enhance Scotland’s brand overseas. Those networks and the people who work there create links and have helped to put Scotland on a path to a greener and more prosperous future. Recent global economic instability underlines the important roles that those networks play—and will continue to play—for Scotland’s businesses and the wider economy.

For those who do not know this, I note that there are 1,200 to 1,300 members of the GlobalScot network, who work on a non-remunerated basis around the world to promote inward investment, our economy and Scotland as a place to study, work and live in. I encourage members to do everything that is possible to support that network, which is the envy of many other countries.

The GlobalScot network is operated by Scottish Enterprise and Scottish Development International. No issues have been raised with me about any members of the network. Patrick Harvie brings up a historical case, which is factually correct. If he has any concerns, I am sure that colleagues at Scottish Enterprise would be happy to look at them. There is an extensive programme that involves the recruitment, retention and support of members of the GlobalScot network. The network works very well, and I think that we could look at expanding it. If colleagues have any views on that subject, I would be happy to hear them.

We live in an increasingly interconnected world in which no nation or individual is sheltered from the impact of global affairs. Indeed, this afternoon’s debate has underlined the influence and impact that global issues have on our nation. Whether we consider the United States tariffs and the knock-on effects on the global economy, the devastating impact of conflicts and climate change or the weakening of the rules-based system that governs co-operation between nations, the issues affect all of us here in Scotland. That is why I will close by reflecting on what can be achieved when we work together, collectively, across the chamber and across the country, to take a positive view of international engagement.

A very good example of that is the establishment of the Scottish Council on Global Affairs. The council, which has had the backing of other parties in this Parliament and, indeed, the United Kingdom Government, is helping to enhance Scotland’s reputation and to encourage others to think about what Scotland has to offer to global affairs. Its work has also helped to raise the quality of debate and the understanding of modern international issues across Scotland.

By working together in this Parliament, we can—and we must—continue to advocate for Scotland internationally to ensure that our voice is heard on issues that affect our international relations and our domestic policy, and to stand up for the democratic values of the rule of law, co-operation and respect for human dignity.

Thank you for the question, Mr Harvie. Perhaps it would help colleagues if I highlighted the annex to the Scottish Government’s position paper on this question. I most certainly would not want to read all of it into the record, as it would take far too long, but it goes into considerable detail about the regulatory systems in, among other countries, Switzerland, Australia and Canada, and explains how one manages systems there. Mr Harvie is alluding, I think, to my previous point about ensuring that the system that is in place must surely reflect proportionality and balance.

Mr Harvie also asked me about the UK Government’s position and whether I have an understanding of it. It seems to be saying two things at the same time. First, it is saying that it would wish common frameworks to succeed, which I agree with. Secondly, however, it is saying that the internal market act should be retained, specifically for reasons relating to the Windsor framework. That is the reason that it has given. Frankly, that is spurious—that is not the reason. There are plenty of other ways of doing whatever one needs to do in relation to the Windsor framework; one does not require the internal market act to be retained in toto for that.

Why, then, does one wish to retain the internal market act? I can only conclude that it is because UK Government ministers can imagine circumstances where they would wish to use the power to drive a coach and horses through devolution in order to stop something. They will work, in the first instance, to try to make common frameworks satisfy the processes in order to be able to say that they are respecting the devolution framework, that they have reset relations and that they are working in good faith, but somewhere in SW1, there is a fear that issues will come along where they would wish to override the devolution settlement using the internal market act.

That is the only rational explanation that I have for the act’s retention. If it is an agreed position that common frameworks are the appropriate way of dealing with things, and if everybody has agreed that the IMA is not required for anything to do with the Windsor framework and is not the only way of satisfying that criterion, that is the only logical conclusion that I can come to for its retention.