Chamber and committees

There was an important debate to be had today about the future economy. There is a challenge. Many people have recognised that, as much as Covid presents us with challenges, it has accelerated many factors that were present in the economy before.

We have to embrace a knowledge economy that is grounded in skills, but, critically, we also have to focus on productivity based on investment. Ultimately, today’s economy is global; it does not recognise borders. Those who seek to construct borders are trying to push water uphill. However, we have not debated that today. It seems that we have had parallel debates, with two parties of government speaking from parallel universes—both have been on an entirely different planet.

I find myself, not for the first time, in active agreement with Willie Rennie. We have had a debate in which two parties have tried to present things as black and white, but they quite simply are not so.

I say politely to the Scottish Government that it has to recognise the context in which we entered Brexit—it was not one without any issues whatsoever. A characterisation of the economy that I read discussed high unemployment but low productivity, low-quality jobs, a need for increased research and development, shortages and mismatches in the labour environment, and a hollowing out of the labour market. Those things were not stated in some random report, but in Benny Higgins’s report on the future of the economy. They were stated very clearly on an explanatory page. Those were the issues that the Scottish economy faced, and those are the issues that the Scottish Government should have been tackling over the past 14 years. Quite simply, it cannot escape the legacy of its own policy decisions.

Equally, the Conservatives have to face up to the fact that Brexit causes costs: businesses face challenges and there is a shortage in the labour market. Those are simple and unarguable facts. We were in the European Union for decades. [Interruption.] I will take an intervention in a moment.

The single market was created in 1992. From that point, we benefited from the free movement of goods, people and capital, on which businesses came to depend. Costs are created when we break up such a union and put up a border, and businesses cannot simply switch overnight. That is the fundamental reality that is being faced in the economy, and that is why we have skills issues.

If Stephen Kerr can answer those points, I will be glad to give way to him.

Okay—if Oliver Mundell can define one opportunity.

I hope that I do not need to declare an interest when it comes to talking about Edinburgh.

Following the First Minister’s announcement yesterday, the chief executive of the Edinburgh Festival Fringe Society, Shona McCarthy, said that it is “hugely disappointing” that there is still no clear guidance on how the event can go ahead this year, in particular with regard to 1m social distancing. We can all understand the difficulties in stating when changes will occur, but the Government must be clear about what the restrictions will be when they come into effect. Can the cabinet secretary confirm that there will be no further delays to the social distancing guidance and that he will engage with the fringe festival on how it can implement the guidance once it is released?

I welcome the statement: the sooner that redress Scotland is up and running, the better. With that in mind, I am concerned that the secondary legislation will not be passed until after recess and that the chief executive is not yet in place. Is the December start date safe? Will the Deputy First Minister explain what will be open from December? Will it be only the application process? Will he clarify when he expects redress Scotland to make the first payments?

Does this situation also present an opportunity for us to reflect on why industries were so reliant on migrant labour in the first place? Does the minister consider that there needs to be a look at wages and productivity in the round?

Will Jim Fairlie make up his mind whether borders that are imposed are a good or a bad thing? Right now, I am confused as to where he sits on that issue.

I am grateful for that intervention.

We must talk about how we address the long-term skills needs. Fundamentally, it is about people and skills, and investment in and support of enterprise and industry.

It seems to me that the Scottish Government has overly relied on the national transition training fund and has simply restated figures around modern apprenticeships. We welcome the apprenticeships and the support, but the Government has to acknowledge that the national transition fund has fallen well short of what it was set up to do. Apprenticeship starts are 20 per cent down on where they were in quarter 4 of last year. Quite simply, young people deserve better because we know that they will be the hardest hit in any downturn. They were the hardest hit in the 2008 financial crash, when youth unemployment almost doubled, and we have seen 15,000 more young people become unemployed in the past year.

However, we must also see better investment and support, because there is an over-focus on skills. Unless we have investment in productivity and in plant and equipment, we will simply continue to be reliant on the low-wage, low-value jobs about which a number of members—in particular, Paul Sweeney and Ross Greer—set out their concerns.

I am grateful to the member for giving way. She is absolutely right to ask those questions of the Scottish Government. However, I ask a question of her: does she accept that businesses up and down Scotland are facing very real costs because of Brexit?

I keep hearing about those opportunities, but I seldom hear them defined, let alone quantified. [Interruption.] I am afraid that I will not give way. Until that happens, I will struggle to take a word that is said about such opportunities seriously, let alone acknowledge them.

I will gladly look at the removal of tariffs. However, on trade deals that amount to little more than 0.2 per cent of gross domestic product, we will see in a single year—in the first year of the deal—beef exports from Australia to the UK quadruple in comparison with what Australia was able to export to the EU as a whole. I am very sorry, but—[Interruption.] If Mr Kerr would like to intervene again to define and quantify an opportunity, I would be happy for him to do so, but I suspect that he is remaining in a sedentary position for a very good reason.