Chamber and committees

No, I have to finish the list. It is quite a long list, so it is important that I finish it.

The impact has ended free movement of people and made it harder for businesses that need people to grow to attract them. With a trend towards a declining, ageing population, we need new Scots from Europe and the rest of the world, whom we will continue to welcome to study, work and make their home here in Scotland. That is why we call on the UK Government and other political parties to reject the politics of populists who have sought to divide us, face reality and seize the opportunities to repair some of the damage that Brexit has done.

If I can make some progress and I have some time remaining, I will let Mr Kerr back in. I have still not referred to his speech—I am coming to that in a minute.

Let us be under no illusion about that or anything else: no scheme or agreement can replace the benefits of European Union membership, and I continue to hope that the United Kingdom Government will rethink its position. Indeed, the forthcoming negotiations at the upcoming leaders summit between the UK Government and the European Union on 19 May are a critical opportunity to undo some of the damage that was done by the previous UK Administration. It is my sincere hope that the UK Government takes heed of Parliament’s motion today.

I will reflect on the contributions from Stephen Kerr and other members. I will begin with the contributions of Stephen Kerr and Neil Bibby, because, in many respects they were the same. Both had little to say about the European Union-UK summit or the fact that the UK Government has not shared documentation ahead of the discussions and might be prepared to make agreements in devolved areas without consent from devolved Administrations. Neither member commented on the discussions, and I am happy to give way to either of them if they wish to put their thoughts about that on the record.

Any reading of the record will show, as I pointed out, that neither Stephen Kerr—just then or in his opening speech—or, indeed, Neil Bibby, made any reference to the fact that the UK Government has not shared documentation ahead of discussions and might be prepared to make agreements in devolved areas without consent from the devolved Administrations. That is a very important point, and it is a great shame that neither of the Tweedledum or Tweedledee parties, which, in the previous UK Government—[Interruption.]

Patrick Harvie was absolutely right to talk about embracing the UK-EU summit’s opportunities, but rightly also said that the summit would only ameliorate some of the damage that Brexit caused. He was absolutely right to say that he is not yet seeing a reset. Yes, the tone has changed, but the actions of this Labour Government are exactly the same custom and practice that we became used to from the previous UK Government. That is evidenced by the lack of sharing documentation to devolved Administrations, which we are unfortunately now seeing from the Labour Party as well.

Alex Cole-Hamilton was absolutely right to talk about the prize—the opportunity of rejoining the Erasmus+ and creative Europe programmes.

Emma Roddick and Elena Whitham were right to stress why we need an ambitious reset in relations with the European Union, including on freedom of movement.

I appreciated Paul Sweeney’s speech. He was right to talk about Europe being essential, he condemned the damage of Euroscepticism and, in the context of Keir Starmer’s contemptible rhetoric, he said that he would not use such language. I am appreciative that a member on the Labour benches was prepared to say so.

Christine Grahame talked about the importance of the international context, and she was right to do so. George Adam was similarly correct to warn against the Farage-ism that is increasingly evident in both the Conservative and Labour Party rhetoric.

Foysol Choudhury talked about the advantages of European Union co-operation, and I agreed with him. He talked about progress in the trade agreement with India. I think that that was good. He did not mention the UK-US trade agreement, which maintains the levels of tariffs that are damaging to the Scotch whisky industry. That was an oversight.

Alexander Stewart had an interesting theme in his summing-up speech: it was a could-have-been theme. He and the Conservative Party could have taken the opportunity to stand up for the Scottish Parliament, the Scottish Government and other devolved Administrations in devolved areas, such as fishing, but they did not.

There are three days until the summit. The UK Government has not shared the documentation and the Conservative Party could not even bring itself to call for it to do so.

I will come to that specifically in a moment, and, indeed, in my summing up; I will answer that in full in the course of the debate, for reasons that will become obvious.

Last week, we marked Europe day, on which we remember the circumstances in which great institutions were founded and recall the ideas about international unity and co-operation between nations that we might learn the lessons of the past, base the world order on the rule of law and build trust over division. We need those institutions so that we can find common ground, tackle challenges by working together and, above all, rebuild trust. That common good is eroding globally today.

Nearly nine years ago, the Scottish people overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU while the UK made the regrettable choice to leave. Scotland stands steadfast behind the European idea and project, which are the founding principles of the European Union today. We uphold our shared values. Scotland is a proud European nation with a strong internationalist tradition and outlook.

That vote, and the Government’s commitment since then, leaves no doubt that Scotland’s place is in the EU and that we are committed to rejoin the EU as an independent member state. We welcome and support the UK Government’s intent to seek improved relations with the EU. We have tirelessly called for better relations. If the UK Government is serious about economic growth, it will drop its red lines and get back into the single market and the customs union. There are many areas in which a closer partnership with the EU could at least lessen the damage of Brexit.

I am happy to make an intervention. No, I would not be pleased to see defence and security co-operation being conditional on any other consideration. I believe that defence and security serve us all, and they should be key priorities. However, I hope that the member recognises that it is a hugely deficient situation that, with only Friday, Saturday and Sunday—three days—to go until the summit meeting in London, and when he is able to read about the issues on the front pages of UK newspapers, Government ministers in Edinburgh, Cardiff and Northern Ireland have not been informed by the UK Government about any of the detailed discussions.

If the member does not mind, I will not take the intervention now as I want to make a bit more progress.

It is important that we understand and respect that the people who have come to Scotland from the European Union and the rest of the world are just that—people. That is their defining characteristic. They are not just migration statistics, but people with the same dreams and aspirations as everyone else, and they deserve to be treated with the same dignity and respect as everyone else.

Back in 2005, the then First Minister and Scottish Labour leader said:

“The way to preserve schools and hospitals and services in this country and the way to have a strong economy in the years to come is to have more fresh talent in this country.”

Commendably, Jack McConnell also noted that immigration goes beyond the economic benefits, vital though those are for Scotland. He said that it is about our values and our place in the world, and he was right.

How far Labour has fallen since then. On Monday, instead of echoing that hopeful, optimistic, welcoming and inclusive message, the Prime Minister engaged in ugly, damaging and disgraceful rhetoric. Instead of standing up to the far right, he chose to lie down in front of Nigel Farage. For Keir Starmer to use words such as “squalid” and “strangers” and to describe those who have come to the UK as being part of “a lab experiment” was truly a new low for Labour.

Let me reassure all those from Europe and beyond who have made Scotland their home and who may well be feeling bruised and uncertain today. I say to them: the Scottish Government values what you do. Your contribution to our health service, our care homes, our businesses and our communities is immense. You are part of us. You will always be welcome, and we thank you for making Scotland your home.

Freedom of movement has been one of the European Union’s greatest achievements. The opportunity for people in Scotland to live, love and work in 27 other countries should have been celebrated, not denigrated. Like all great partnerships, the EU will of course have its moments of discussion and disagreement. However, like all good relationships, it has established mechanisms to come to agreements and make them work.

When the EU’s founding values such as equality, democracy and the rule of law can seem under threat even from some within the union, now is the time to proclaim those values even more loudly.

I will.

I always welcome economic growth, but I will not welcome holding discussions on behalf of the Parliament, the Scottish Government and the country but not involving its institutions. The European Union is sharing the text of the potential outcomes of next week’s discussions with its member states. The UK Government is not doing so with devolved Administrations. There are a few days for that to be changed. Perhaps Mr Bibby will pick up the phone to speak to his colleagues in London and ask why it has not done that.

In advance of the leaders’ summit, which will take place in London on Monday, we have outlined our position in recent publications on a youth mobility agreement, Erasmus+, creative Europe, closer energy and climate co-operation, and core needs for a veterinary, food and drink agreement with the EU. We also strongly support closer working with EU partners on defence and security.

At all times during the build-up to the summit, we have offered to be constructive partners with the UK Government, and although a number of meetings have taken place, it is unacceptable that today—only a few days from the summit—no draft text has been shared with us or other devolved Governments. That is in stark contrast to the way the EU treats its member states.

Indeed, they are, and there is largely consensus on that. At least, perhaps there is consensus—I am not entirely sure what the position of the Scottish Conservative Party is on measures that would boost our economy, support our care sector and national health service, give young people the opportunity to live and work throughout Europe, and, indeed, support continental European young people coming to this country. There is a shared agenda, and I think that there is a majority in the Parliament for it.

I hope that the UK Government is listening, and I hope, with some days to go, that it chooses to conduct its business with the devolved Administrations in the UK with the same dignity and respect that the European Union does with its member states.

Let me finish by reiterating a core point: the best relationship that Scotland and the UK can have with the EU will always be as full member states of the European Union. That is what we hope that Scotland can look forward to in the future.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees that the best relationship that Scotland and the UK can have with the EU is to be a member of the EU; calls on the UK Government to drop its red lines on the single market, customs union and freedom of movement; further calls on the UK Government, at its forthcoming summit with the EU, as a first step, to negotiate an ambitious veterinary, food and drink agreement, closer energy and climate co-operation, greater freedom of movement, including opportunities for young people, and further measures to lessen the ongoing economic, social and cultural damage of Brexit, and believes that it is unacceptable that the UK Government has not shared any draft summit texts with the Scottish or other devolved governments.