►
Description
Published by the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body.
www.parliament.scot // We do not facilitate discussions on our YouTube page but encourage you to share and comment on our videos on your own channels. // If you would like to join in our conversations please follow @ScotParl on Twitter or like us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/scottishparliament
A
Thank
you
before
I
go
into
the
next
active
business.
I
have
to
say
there
is
no
time
in
hand
now
whatsoever,
so
take
interventions.
You'll
have
to
absorb
them
afraid
into
your
time.
Allocation
next,
slides
with
business
is
a
debate
in
motion
22955
in
the
name
of
michael
russell,
on
legislative
consent
to
the
internal
market.
Bill
can
ask
those
members
who
wish
to
speak
in
debate
to
press
the
request
to
beat
barton's
hour
call
michael
russell
to
speak
to
and
move
the
motion
cabinet
secretary.
Please.
B
That
devolution
settlement
came
into
being
because
of
a
decisive
vote
by
the
people
of
scotland
in
1997.
labour
and
I'm
happy
to
acknowledge
scotland's
debt
to
the
party
and
to
donald
duer
legislated
for
that
devolution
referendum
and
my
party
campaigned
with
them
liberal
democrats
and
the
green
party
in
favor
of
establishing
this
institution.
We
did
not
agree
on
the
process
that
led
to
that
vote,
but
when
the
choice
came,
the
snp
backed
what
the
people
of
scotland
wanted
and
now,
when
that
choice
is
again
in
front
of
us,
we
do
so
again.
B
I
was
part
of
that
campaign
working
with
many,
including
alec
rowley,
to
persuade
our
fellow
citizens
to
mark
their
ballot
papers
with
a
double
yes
and
I'm
in
the
same
company.
Again,
although
I
do
not
relish
the
circumstances,
I'm
sure
that
labour,
the
liberal
democrats
and
the
greens
will
repeat
today
their
commitment
to
what
the
people
wanted.
Then,
as
will
we,
our
vote
will
follow
our
voice,
but,
alas,
the
tories
no
doubt
will
again
be
true
to
this
their
stance.
Then
a
stance
taken
directly
against
the
will
of
the
scottish
people.
B
They
were
against
empowering
their
fellow
citizens
then,
and
they're
still
against
doing
that.
23
years
later,
leopards
don't
change
their
spots
and
having
been
rejected,
then
they've
gone
on
being
rejected
most
recently
in
last
december's
westminster
election.
Yet,
despite
that,
they
are
still
seeking
to
take
a
wrecking
ball
to
scotland's
parliament
and
scotland's
democracy
that
wasn't
in
their
manifesto,
but
it
was
clearly
in
their
minds
then,
and
always
has
been.
I
give
away
elizabeth.
We.
B
For
that,
the
answer
is
no.
I
do
not,
and
indeed
the
fact-checking
service
proves
that
that
is
not
the
case
but,
as
I
said,
wrecking
scotland's
parliament
was
not
put
to
the
scottish
people
by
the
conservatives,
but
it
is
what
they
intended
to
do,
and
it
is
what
they
are
trying
to
do.
Presiding
officer.
B
The
memorandum
before
us
today
makes
clear
that
if
the
bill
becomes
law,
then
the
legislative
powers
of
the
scottish
parliament
and
the
executive
competence
of
scottish
ministers
as
they've
been
understood
since
1998,
would,
in
many
cases,
cease
to
exist,
but
as
well
as
an
assault
on
devolution.
This
bill
is
a
recipe
for
regulatory
incoherence
and
a
race
to
the
bottom.
It
is
also
a
breach
of
international
law,
presiding
officer.
The
fundamental
principle
of
the
ministerial
code
is
that
ministers
must
not
knowingly
break
the
law.
B
That,
in
itself
is
an
incontrovertible
reason
why
scottish
ministers
cannot
recommend
legislative
consent
for
the
bill,
but
I
would
also
argue
that
no
member
of
a
scottish
parliament
elected
to
serve
the
people
of
scotland
could
ever
recommend
consent
to
such
a
bill.
Members
will
be
familiar
with
the
main
provisions,
but
let
me
let
me
go
through
them.
B
There
are
new
measures
for
mutual
recognition
of
professional
qualifications
that
cause
grave
concern
to
bodies
such
as
a
general
teaching
council.
There's
a
new
oversight
body
tasked
with
second
guessing
the
policy
choices
of
this
parliament,
including
in
things
like
in
the
public
services
like
the
health
service
or
public
water
supplies
measures
at
part.
Five
of
the
bill
break
international
law
and
to
betray
a
cynical
disregard
for
northern
ireland,
which
has
already
alienated
many,
including
the
eu.
B
There
are
sweeping
new
spending
powers
in
part,
six
that
threaten
the
devolved,
scottish
budget
and
transfer
decision-making
over
areas
of
devolved
spending
from
the
scottish
to
the
uk
government.
State
age
will
be
reserved
which
could
affect,
for
example,
agricultural
subsidy
and
the
whole
act
would
be
placed
permanently
beyond
the
powers
of
this
parliament
to
mitigate
or
ameliorate.
B
For
those
reasons,
the
bill
is
wholly
unacceptable
and
should
be
rejected.
The
deceit
practiced
by
the
uk
government
with
regard
to
this
bill
is
now
a
matter
of
public
record
thanks
to
yesterday's
leak
of
documents
that
show
the
truth
about
how
it
was
deliberately
withheld
from
the
devolved
governments,
but
they've
been
other
deceits
too.
Firstly,
the
ridiculous
assertion
that
the
bill
represents
a
power
surge.
The
opposite
is
true,
as
the
explanatory
notes
make
clear.
B
In
fact,
there
will
be
a
new
blanket
constraint
on
the
exercise
of
the
parliament's
powers
and
the
scope
of
the
constraints
can
be
adjusted
at
any
time
at
the
discretion
of
uk
ministers,
regardless
of
other
views.
Secondly,
there
are
the
repeated
assurances
that
the
bill
will
not
lead
to
a
race
to
the
bottom
in
standards,
but
the
uk
currently
enjoys
high
standards
by
virtue
of
eu
laws
still
applying
during
transition
period
under
the
bill.
B
Should
scotland
wish
to
maintain
those
standards
would
be
forced
still
to
recognize
lower
standards
set
elsewhere
in
the
uk,
and
the
uk
government
has
blocked?
No,
I
will
not.
Uk
government
has
blocked
ever
because
I'm
just
coming
to
one
of
your
key
assertions.
The
uk
government
has
blocked
every
proposed
move
to
provide
legal
guarantees
that
high
environmental,
animal
welfare
and
food
safety
standards
would
prevail.
B
Thirdly,
let
me
rebut
the
claim
that
this
bill
is
necessary
merely
in
order
to
replace
at
uk
level,
the
system
of
uk
market
rules.
In
fact,
the
bill
introduces
a
system
of
unqualified
powers
for
uk
ministers
to
effectively
impose
rules
on
the
whole
of
the
uk,
even
in
devolved
areas,
which
is
the
very
opposite
of
the
principle
of
co-decision
and
agreement
between
sovereign
member
states
that
lies
at
the
heart
of
the
eu
rules.
Eu
single
market
rules
also
recognize
policy
objectives
alongside
market
considerations
and
the
principles
of
subsidiarity
and
proportionality
are
crucial
aspects
of
them.
B
And
finally,
let
me
talk
about
jobs.
Mr
lockhart's
amendment
talks
about
the
550
000
jobs
being
protected
by
this
bill.
Nonsense
in
fact,
nonsense
on
stilts
as
exposed
in
the
fed,
fact-checking
website
last
night,
presiding
officer,
or
they
don't
like
the
truth,
presiding
officer
at
the
end
of
december,
the
uk
and
scotland
will
leave
the
brexit
transition
period.
The
transition
is
ending
because
of
the
astonishing
and
reckless
decision
of
boris
johnson
to
refuse
an
extension
that
was
on
offer,
despite
the
fact
of
a
global
pandemic
and
a
deep
economic
recession.
B
Yet,
even
at
this
late
stage,
the
possibility
of
leaving
in
the
worst
possible
way
with
no
deal
remains,
and
even
if
there
is
a
deal,
it
will
be
a
low
deal
vastly
inferior
to
what
we
experience
now
and
hugely
disadvantageous
to
business
and
disruptive
to
everyday
life.
So
presiding
officer,
the
real
jobs
threat
comes
not
from
the
devolved
administrations
but
from
the
brexiteer
ultras,
who
have
captured
the
conservative
party
and
those
in
this
chamber
who
have
meekly
accepted
their
writ,
no
doubt
because
it
saves
their
own
jobs.
B
The
way
to
avoid
all
this
damage
is
not
only
clear
but
to
hand
we
can
do
so
by
returning
to
the
voluntary
common
frameworks
process
devised
by
the
devolved
governments
in
the
uk,
which,
despite
our
differences
over
eu
exit,
has
been
able
to
make
progress
over
the
last
few
years.
Frameworks
are
based
on
principles
of
equal
negotiation
and
agreement
for
any
missing
areas,
as
claimed
by
michael
go
very
late.
B
In
the
day
we
commit
ourselves
to
closing
those
gaps,
we're
also
willing
to
act
as
if
all
the
frameworks
were
already
enforced,
whilst
they're
being
finalized,
and
I
think
the
same
commitment
is
being
made
in
wales,
so
the
if
the
uk
does
that
we
could
move
on
from
this
present
impasse
and
the
deepening
crisis
presiding
officer.
This
bill
is
not
only
unacceptable
to
the
devolved
governments.
It
is
also
unacceptable
to
a
wide
range
of
organizations
and
individuals
across
scottish
society
who
are
deeply
worried.
B
Now,
of
course,
there
are
differing
views
of
scotland's
ultimate
constitutional
destination
across
this
chamber,
but
regardless
of
those
views
we
can
come
together
today
we
can
say
on
behalf
of
the
people
of
scotland,
that
we
do
not
consent
to
this
bill.
We
can
stand
up
against
this
tory
power
grab
and
urge
the
uk
government
to
change
course
and
therefore
presiding
officer.
I
move
that
the
parliament
agrees
not
to
consent
to
the
united
kingdom
internal
market
bill
as
it
reduces
and
contrains
the
competence
of
this
scottish
parliament
and
breaches
international
law.
A
D
D
As
members
know,
I've
always
sought
as
a
convener
to
try,
where
possible,
to
reach
a
consensus
on
committee
reports
and
in
the
main
we
managed
to
do
so.
However,
there's
a
clear
division
of
views
between
the
majority
of
the
committee
and
our
conservative
party
colleagues
on
the
uk
internal
market
bill.
This
is
disappointing,
given
that
the
other
eight
members
on
their
committee
have
agreed
that
the
bill
undermines
the
old
basis
of
devolution.
D
D
Mutual
recognition,
in
particular,
is
potentially
much
more
far-reaching
than
the
equivalent
eu
principle.
This
is
primarily
for
three
reasons.
First,
list
of
exclusions
on
public
interest
grounds
from
the
application
of
the
principle
are
much
narrower,
and
second,
uk
ministers
have
the
power
to
amend
that
list
without
any
requirement
to
seek
consent
or
consult
with
adult
devolved
governments.
D
Dr
emily
lydgate
from
the
university
of
sussex
told
us,
and
I
quote
the
core
of
any
approach
to
an
internal
market
that
is
as
integrated
as
the
uk's
has
to
be
harmonized,
rules
that
have
a
strong
consultative
process
underlying
them.
The
rules
cannot
simply
be
said
by
one
of
the
countries
saying
officer.
The
committee's
view
is
that
it's
unacceptable
that
the
uk
government
should
seek
to
effectively
impose
new
reservations
on
the
devolved
competencies
through
this
bill.
D
D
The
committee
also
considered
provisions
in
the
bill
to
reserve
state
aid.
The
committee
agrees
with
the
scottish
government
and
welsh
government.
That
stated
is
a
devolved
matter.
Any
future
legislation
on
subsidy
control
should
be
agreed
between
all
of
the
four
governments
and
legislators
across
the
uk
through
the
common
frameworks
process.
D
D
We
reiterate
the
findings
of
our
report
on
structural
funds,
both
brexit
in
particular
that
any
uk
wide
replacement
of
eu
structural
funding
should
replicate
some
of
the
aspects
of
the
current
structural
funds
approach.
We
consider
the
decision
taking
powers
that
the
scottish
government
currently
exercises
under
structural
funds
should
not
be
reduced
under
any
future
uk
approach
technology.
The
committee
previously
recommended
there's
an
onus
on
all
four
governments
and
legislators
across
the
uk
to
work
constructively
together
to
seek
a
solution
to
the
complex
and
challenging
issues
arising
from
leaving
the
eu
internal
market.
D
D
The
committee's
view
is
that
devolution
cannot
work
on
the
basis
of
a
westminster
government
imposing
its
view
on
how
the
uk
constitutional
arrangement
should
evolve
following
brexit.
The
committee
therefore
recommends
that
the
parliament
does
not
agree
consent
to
the
uk
internal
market
bill,
presiding
officer.
A
E
Thank
you
very
much
deputy
officer.
I
move
the
amendment
in
my
name.
There's
been
a
lot
of
noise
surrounding
the
uk
internal
market
proposals,
but
surely
the
priority
when
further
restrictions
have
just
been
announced
on
economic
activity
must
be
to
protect
the
550
000
jobs
and
livelihoods
and
the
60
of
trade
that
depend
on
barrier-free
access
to
the
uk
internal
market?
That's
certainly
the
view
of
key
stakeholders
such
as
the
cbi
and
the
nf
us
who
have
given
evidence.
E
On
the
other
side
of
this
debate,
I
do
recognize
that
our
legitimate
questions
over
how
these
proposals
might
work
in
practice,
but
too
much
focus
has
been
on
constitutional
scare
mongering
and
on
hypothetical
concerns.
Take,
for
example,
paragraph
13
of
the
lcm,
which
claims
that
the
bill
will
result
in
declining
standards.
E
What
what
the
cabinet
secretary
referred
to
as
the
race
to
the
bottom,
a
claim
utterly
devoid
of
any
factual
evidence,
because
the
inconvenient
truth
for
the
s
p
is
that
the
uk
government
has
introduced
higher
domestic
standards
than
the
eu
across
a
vast
range
of
areas.
Just
weeks
ago.
The
first
major,
let
me
make
progress
just
weeks
ago
in
the
first
major
free
trade
agreement
signed
following
brexit
the
economic
partnership
with
japan,
far
from
lowering
standards.
E
This
deal
goes
way
beyond
the
scope
of
the
eu,
japan
free
trade
agreement
and
has
increased
the
number
of
protected
geographical
indications
for
scottish
produce,
meaning
that
scottish
sabin
cheese,
oil
and
beef
will
now
have
much
higher
levels
of
protection
in
the
japanese
market
and
in
relation
to
the
s
p's
poster
child
for
lowering
standards.
The
proposed
free
trade
agreement
with
the
u.s
when
I
challenged
ivan
committee
to
give
real
examples
of
his
concerns
about
these
lower
standards.
E
His
response
was-
and
I
quote,
all
concerns
are
hypothetical,
so
there
we
have
it
presiding
officer,
a
long
history
as
well
as
very
recent
examples
of
high
standards
being
adopted
by
the
uk
government.
In
direct
contrast
and
in
contradiction
to
the
hypotheticals
we
have
heard
from
the
other
side,
the
memorandum
goes
on
to
claim
that
the
bill
will
undermine
the
powers
of
this
parliament
when
quite
the
opposite
is
true.
At
the
end
of
the
transition
period,
this
parliament
will
enjoy
more
than
100
new
additional
powers
coming
from
the
eu,
making
it
more
powerful
than
ever.
E
My
colleague
just
said
it's
a
power
search
absolutely,
but,
as
we
all
know,
the
s
p
wants
to
surrender
every
single
one
of
these
powers
back
to
the
eu
and
what
would
be
the
biggest
power
surrender
this
parliament
has
ever
seen
presidential.
The
motion
from
the
scottish
government
today
states
that
the
bill
will
reduce
and
constrain
the
competence
of
this
parliament
again
completely
untrue,
because
the
agreed
approach
of
all
four
nations
is
that
the
mutually
agreed
common
frameworks
will
regulate
the
vast
majority
of
the
additional
powers
coming
back
from
the
eu.
E
But
there
still
has
to
be
a
mechanism
in
place
to
deal
with
residual
elements
of
trade
which
will
sit
outside
of
those
agreed
common
frameworks,
and
that's
where
this
bill
comes
into
play
witnesses.
I
will
second
witnesses
such
as
professor
keating
have
recognized
the
need
for
such
a
fallback
mechanism.
He
gave
the
following
evidence:
the
common
frameworks
will
cover
most
issues,
but
if
something
arises
that
is
not
covered
by
the
frameworks.
E
There
should
be
a
mechanism
for
dealing
with
that
and
that's
the
fundamental
point,
presiding
officer,
that
the
internal
market
bill
will
only
apply
as
a
default
mechanism
to
a
residual
element
of
trade
that
falls
outside
agreed
common
frameworks.
On
that
basis.
To
say
that
this
bill
will
the
scottish
parliament
and
its
devolved
competence,
as
the
first
minister
has
repeatedly
said,
is
wholly
misleading.
E
E
Contrast
that
with
position
under
eu
law,
where
the
scottish
government
had
to
defend
this
divergent
approach
through
the
courts
presiding
after
in
his
opening
remarks,
the
cabinet
secretary
talked
about
the
united
kingdom
no
longer
being
a
partnership
of
equals.
But
the
real
test
of
any
partnership
is
how
a
partner
reacts
during
a
crisis,
and
we
have
seen
the
strength
of
the
uk
partnership
delivering
for
scotland
during
this
time
of
crisis.
16
billion
pounds
of
additional
support
as
part
of
the
uk
government's
covered
response.
E
The
uk
furlough
scheme
saving
over
900
000
jobs
in
scotland
and
this
bill
delivering
even
more
investment
to
scotland.
But
let
me
ask
the
cabinet
secretary:
what
has
his
contribution
been
during
this
period
of
crisis
spending,
time
and
money
on
an
unwanted
second
referendum,
walking
away
from
negotiations
on
the
internal
market
and
interfering
with
the
brexit
negotiations?
E
E
On
this
very
issue,
let
me
quote
what
mr
russell
told
the
committee
last
week
there's
and
I
quote
directly:
there
is
nothing
unlawful
about
the
house
of
commons
preparing
a
bill.
It
should
never
have
come
to
the
house,
but
that
is
not
the
same
as
it
being
illegal
for
once.
I
agree
with
the
cabinet
secretary
and.
E
G
Thank
you,
presiding
officer
and
open
this
debate
for
labour
today.
I
want
to
make
clear
that
we
will
not
give
consent
to
the
united
kingdom
internal
market
bill
and,
let
me
be
clear,
we
will
not
give
support
to
any
measures
that
reduce
and
constrain
the
competence
of
the
scottish
parliament
as
a
political
party.
Labour
is
committed
to
devolution
and
for
the
avoidance
of
doubt,
this
bill
is
a
full-on
attack
on
the
existence
of
the
existing
devolution
settlement.
G
H
G
Certainly
demonstrates
that
the
greatest
threat,
the
greatest
threat
to
united
kingdom,
is
boris
johnson
and
his
clapping
tories,
who
sit
behind
him
and
then,
as
a
as
an
added
arrogance.
This
bill
breaches
international
law,
a
fact
that
was
readily
admitted
by
the
northern
ireland
secretary
in
the
house
of
commons,
and
the
bill
is
now
under
legal
proceedings
from
the
eu
due
to
that
breach.
G
Frankly,
this
whole
thing
is
a
disgrace
and
will
have
massive
repercussions
for
the
uk's
international
reputation,
which
has
already
been
suffering
over
the
last
few
years
of
this
conservative
government
and
its
failures,
however
presiding.
However
presiding
officer
is
not
just
that
the
internal
market
bill
breaks
international
law
or
that
it
drives
a
coach
in
horses
through
devolution.
G
It
paves
the
way,
in
my
view,
for
private
companies
and
multinational
companies
to
force
their
way
into
key
public
services
in
scotland.
This
bill
will
lead
to
a
race
to
the
bottom
in
so
many
areas
of
our
daily
life.
The
overwhelming
evidence
from
across
the
world
is
that
in
this
day
and
age,
we
must
have
more
regulation,
not
less.
The
idea
that
everything
should
be
left
to
the
market
is
not
only
an
outdated
idea.
G
It
is
a
dangerous
idea
whose
time
has
come
and
gone
so
it
seems
incredible
to
be
plowed
on
regardless,
with
this
bill
and
with
the
tory
brexit
plan,
we
have
supported
the
scottish
government
to
make
the
case
for
the
brexit
extension,
which
is
absolutely
necessary
at
this
time.
Interest
rates
are
at
rock
bottom,
and
the
chancellor
of
the
exchequer
has
never
borrowed
so
much
with
public
debt.
Now
more
than
a
hundred
percent
of
the
size
of
our
economy.
This,
on
top
of
massive
increases
in
unemployment
to
covered
and
worrying
forecasts
for
further
unemployment
to
come.
G
The
pandemic
has
wrecked
our
economy,
but
the
economic
cost
of
a
no
deal
brexit
could
be
two
or
three
times
as
bad
as
the
impact
of
covert
according
to
the
london
school
of
economics.
Surely
anyone
looking
at
this
presiding
officer
would
say
it's
absurd
to
continue
down
this
path
and
that
we
need
to
think
again.
That
would
be
anyone,
but
johnson
and
johnson's
stories.
I
say
think
again.
A
H
Mr
hardy,
thank
you
presiding
officer.
This
has
been
an
extraordinary
process,
leading
to
an
extraordinary
bell
which
poses
an
extraordinary
threat
to
us
all.
The
process
cut
right
through
the
discussion
of
common
frameworks
and
began
with
a
consultation,
a
short
consultation
which
could
not
have
been
more
perfectly
timed
to
coincide
with
the
parliamentary
recesses
in
scotland,
wales
and
northern
ireland.
It
involved
a
refusal
of
the
secretary
of
state
responsible
for
the
bill
to
come
and
give
evidence
it
included
no
draft
bill
for
consultation
and
includes
a
clear
threat
to
legislate
without
consent
of
this
parliament.
H
As
far
as
I
understand,
the
scottish
and
welsh
governments
were
still
asking
to
see
the
bill
during
a
meeting
of
the
joint
ministerial
committee
when
a
photo
of
the
press
release
announcing
its
publication
was
leaked
on
twitter.
This
could
not
be
more
shambolic,
but
the
substance
of
the
bill
poses
an
extraordinary
threat
as
well
the
the
direct
assault
on
this
parliament's
democracy.
This
democratic
authority
comes
from
the
political
party
which
opposed
the
creation
of
this
parliament
in
the
first
place.
This
is
not
an
insurance
policy.
H
It's
a
wrecking
ball
where
mutual
respect
genuinely
exists
between
the
jurisdictions
cooperation
is
possible,
even
when
political
parties
with
very
different
politics
are
in
power.
The
last
20
years
shows
us
that,
but
this
shocking
power
grab
is
what
makes
cooperation
impossible.
There
is
no
incentive
at
all
for
the
uk
government
to
negotiate
or
compromise
if
it
has
already
taken
the
decision
to
ignore
and
overrule
scotland,
wales,
northern
ireland
and
even
international
law.
That's
why
I'm
pleased
to
say
that
over
6
000
people
have
signed
up
to
support
the
scottish
green
party's
campaign
against
this
bill.
H
H
It's
apparent
from
the
likes
of
liz
trust
and
the
speech
that
she
gave
at
the
free
market.
Extremist
lobby
group
the
cato
institute
a
couple
of
years
back
complaining
of
the
thicket
of
regulations
and
welcoming
their
race
to
the
bottom
agenda,
on
food,
on
safety,
on
public
services,
public
health
and
on
environmental
protection.
H
Liz
truss's
attitude
to
these
issues
she's
far
from
alone
in
the
uk
government,
in
sharing
this
agenda
with
a
right-wing
anti-environment,
anti-social
climate
change,
denying
outfit
like
the
cato
institute,
they've
just
appointed
tony
abbott,
for
goodness
sake
to
the
uk
board
of
trade.
Another
example:
someone
who's
worked
with
nigel
lawson's,
dishonest
climate
denial
lobby
group,
someone
who's
denied
this
basic
science
for
years
and
called
it
a
cult.
The
uk
is
willing.
The
uk
government
is
willing
to
bring
people
like
that
into
government.
H
H
I
do
agree
with
the
s
t
uc's
comment,
which
I
quoted
to
mr
rowley,
that
if
the
uk
government
makes
good
on
its
threat
to
legislate
to
pass
this
bill
in
defiance
of
a
refusal
to
consent
to
it
by
this
parliament,
it
will
make
the
case
for
a
second
independence
referendum
unanswerable,
because
this
bill
does
one
thing
very
clearly.
It
exposes
the
reality
of
the
choice
scotland
faces
and
in
the
context
of
the
current
uk
government,
that
choice
is
between
direct
rule
and
independence.
H
A
I
Thank
you,
deputy
president
officer,
and
this
legislation
emerged
from
a
hurried
white
paper
in
the
summer
and
has
been
blasted
through
westminster
at
high
speed.
The
bill
exists
to
smooth
a
trade
deal
with
the
united
states
of
america.
It
gives
uk
ministers
the
power
to
sweep
away
objections
from
devolved
administrations
on
matters
like
food
safety
and
environmental
safety.
I
Those
very
same
ministers
are
rushing
through
this
legislation
at
breakneck
timetable
and
a
strong
arm
guillotine,
and
they
don't
even
blush.
I
was
very
interested
in
the
expert
witnesses
at
the
committee,
professor
dugan
wrote
in
his
submission
that
many
trade
systems
that
rely
on
mutual
recognition
also
incorporate
multiple
safeguards
into
its
application.
I
There
are
none
in
this
bill.
Professor
keating
has
pointed
out
in
his
evidence,
most
systems
with
internal
markets
would
be
federal
with
each
of
the
different
administrations
having
a
say,
but
this
bill
gives
power
to
one
secretary
of
state.
I
would
prefer
joint
ministerial
committees
to
be
up
and
running
with
a
dispute
resolution
process
to
keep
the
internal
market
moving
with
the
frameworks
agreed
by
all
four
administrations,
then
the
detailed
implementation
can
be
left
to
the
individual
administrations
safe
in
the
knowledge
that
the
fundamentals
of
the
internal
market
are
protected.
I
My
colleague
on
the
committee
beatrice
wisher
asked
about
fire
safety
standards.
She
pointed
out
that
peter
drummond,
from
the
royal
incorporation
of
architects,
said
that
scotland's
most
robust
fire
safety
regulations
could
fall
foul
of
the
bill.
If
we
wanted
to
change
or
toughen
its
existing
standards,
the
bill
would
appear
to
come
into
force
against
it.
Now.
I
In
response,
the
uk
government
said
we
will
continue
to
be
able
to
set
our
own
regulations,
but,
as
the
expert
witness
professor
dugan
pointed
out,
technically
speaking,
the
uk
government
is
correct,
but
only
if
we
totally
ignore
the
bill
that
we
are
talking
about.
So
you
would
have
thought
there'd,
be
a
pretty
high,
ranking
official
official
office
holder
of
the
boris
johnson
fan
club.
To
think
that
this
is
an
honest
piece
of
legislation.
I
However,
it
does
seem
that
we
might
have
a
number
of
those
individuals
in
the
chamber
today
and
that's
before
we
get
to
the
brazen
admission
that
this
bill
will
break
international
law
so
much
for
the
party
of
law
and
order.
But
yet
the
scottish
conservatives
still
stand
by
this
bill.
This
bill
is
unnecessary.
I
A
J
Thank
you
president.
I
will
not
vote
for
this
parliament
to
consent
to
the
uk
government's
internal
market
bill
and
I
have
a
number
of
reasons
for
that
position.
The
bill,
first
of
all
by
the
uk
government's
own
admission
breaks
international
law.
It
may
do
so
in
a
specific
and
limited
way,
but
it
is
state-sponsored
law-breaking
and,
as
such,
it
further
chips
away
at
trust
and
respect
and
represents
a
full-scale
assault
on
devolution
and
the
powers
of
this
parliament.
J
Is
it
any
wonder?
The
latest
scottish
social
attitude
survey
released
last
week
shows
that
just
fifteen
percent
of
those
asked
trust
the
uk
government
to
work
in
scotland's
interest
and
that
president
office
was
before
it
was
revealed
that
the
uk
government
is
specifically
deliberately
and
disgracefully
keeping
secret
from
the
scottish
government
and
this
parliament
consideration
of
a
number
of
crucial
measures
that
will
directly
affect
evolved
competencies.
J
The
respect
agenda
indeed
seems
like
a
long
time
ago,
and
a
word
of
concern
that
we
hear
about
that
from
the
tories
in
this
chamber.
The
internal
market
bill
will
lead,
in
my
view,
to
our
race
to
the
bottom,
in
regulations
in
areas
such
as
health
protection,
animal
welfare
or
housing
and
environmental
standards.
J
Now,
in
1997,
the
people
of
scotland
voted
overwhelmingly
nearly
75
percent
in
support
of
a
parliament
for
scotland,
a
parliament
reconvened
after
300
years.
It
was
tasked
with
setting
priorities
for
scotland,
a
parliament.
That's
allowed
us
to
take
a
different
path
from
the
uk
in
so
many
issues
such
as
free
prescriptions,
no
tuition
fees
for
students,
something
lambasted
by
tourism,
this
chamber
for
years,
but
apparently
they
now
support
it.
Minimum
pricing
for
alcohol
and
a
fairer,
more
just
social
security
system.
J
Now
we
know
the
tories
never
fully
got
behind
evolution,
but
those
in
this
parliament,
as
well
as
members
from
all
other
parties,
have
a
duty
to
defend
the
revolution
settlement
and
acknowledge
the
level
of
contempt
that
this
bill
shows
the
scottish
parliament
and
the
other
devolved
nations
of
the
uk.
It
also
demonstrates
to
me
the
tories
in
this
parliament
have
no
expectation,
no
serious
expectation
of
ever
exercising
power
in
scotland
if
they
did
so,
they
wouldn't
be
so
happy
to
cheer
the
removal
of
powers
from
this
devolved
parliament.
J
No,
I
want.
I
don't
have
time
instead
to
talk.
Well,
you
never
give
away
to
anybody
either
yourself.
Instead,
the
tories
in
this
parliament
have
fallen
into
line
behind
boris.
They
now
support
brexit,
despite
62
percent
of
voters
in
scotland,
opposing
it
just
like
it
was
revealed
last
week
that
they
danced
to
london's
tune
when
they
were
told
by
a
westminster
mp
to
support
scrapping
the
hate
crime
bill,
putting
political
point
scoring
above
engaging
constructively
to
better
the
lives
of
the
people
of
scotland.
J
J
Now
I
acknowledge
presiding
off,
there's
little
hope
of
a
different
outcome
on
this
issue,
but
what
there
is
is
an
opportunity
for
the
tories
in
this
parliament
to
stand
up,
find
a
spine
and
say
enough
is
enough:
the
uk's
five
living
former
prime
ministers,
john
major
tony
blair,
gordon
brown,
david
carmen
and
theresa,
may
have
all
spoken
out
against
this
bill.
Will
the
scottish
story
speak
out
against
this
bill?
I
think
we
know
the
answer
to
that.
J
After
years,
ignoring
scotland's
interest
and
its
clear
democratic
wishes,
it
should
come
as
no
surprise
to
the
tories
that
the
number
of
scots
backing
independence
is
now
at
record
levels.
Indeed,
when
the
power
removal,
the
rule
of
person,
this
pump
was
first
posed.
The
snp
my
party
put
on
seven
thousand
members
virtually
overnight.
Such
was
the
outrage
at
the
proposal
back
over
two
years
ago.
K
Thank
you,
deputy
presiding
officer
with
all
the
hysterical
language
we've
just
been
hearing
about
what
this
bill
is
about.
I
think
we
need
to
focus
on
what
really
matters
here,
and
that
is
the
importance
of
the
uk
internal
market
to
scottish
business,
and
we
know,
according
to
the
fraser
of
allender
institute,
who,
I
think,
might
know
a
little
bit
more
about
this
than
the
ferret
over
half
a
million
jobs
in
scotland
are
supported
by
demand
for
our
goods
and
services
from
the
rest
of
the
uk.
K
60
of
scotland's
trade
is
with
the
rest
of
the
uk,
worth
over
50
billion
pounds
a
year
to
the
scottish
economy,
and
we
know
that
trade
to
the
rest
of
the
uk
is
worth
three
times
as
much
as
trade
to
the
eu
single
market,
and
against
that
backdrop,
it's
no
wonder.
They've
been
calls
from
those
involved
in
business
and
trade
for
legislation
to
ensure
that
the
uk
internal
market
works
seamlessly
in
a
post-brexit
environment.
The
cbi
have
said
reserving
the
integrity
of
the
single
market,
the
economic
glue
binding.
K
Our
four
nations
is
essential
to
guard
against
any
additional
costs
or
barriers
to
doing
business
between
different
parts
of
the
uk.
The
scottish
retail
consortium
have
said
that
scotland
benefits
enormously
from
the
uk
internal
market.
The
national
farmers
union
of
scotland
has
said
it
is
vital
for
the
agricultural
industry,
oil
and
gas
uk
have
said
that
regulatory
barriers
will
harm
their
sector
and
quality
meat.
Scotland
have
said
they
want
frictionless
trade
in
the
uk
to
be
maintained
as
far
as
possible.
K
On
holyrood
with
the
eu
continuity
bill,
a
bill
which
will
hand
extensive
powers
to
scottish
ministers
to
introduce
new
laws
in
scotland
without
detailed
parliamentary
scrutiny
in
order
to
keep
pace
with
eu
laws
laws
made
by
a
third
party
where
we
have
had
no
say
in
their
development.
Under
the
snp's
plans,
we
will
become
a
rule
taker
where
we
will
not
be
a
rule
maker
and
it
is
little
wonder:
we've
had
so
much
opposition
from
stakeholders
to
what
they
are
proposing
and
we
should
never
forget
presiding
officer
in
relation
to
all
the
powers.
K
The
snp
are
complaining
about
in
this
bill.
They
want
to
hand
every
single
one
of
them
straight
back
to
the
eu.
So
obsessed.
Are
they
with
eu
membership?
They
would
rather
damage
our
businesses
and
the
scottish
economy
by
aligning
with
the
eu
in
preference
to
lining
with
the
uk
when
that
uk
market
is
worth
three
times
college
business,
what
the
eu
market
is
worth
and
yet
for
reasons
of
their
narrow
ideological
obsession.
They
will
damage
the
scottish
economy
by
threatening
our
ability
to
trade
with
the
uk,
and
we
should
not
accept
for
a
moment
either.
K
The
nonsense
is
being
stated
that
this
bill
would
lead
to
a
lowering
of
standards.
Already
the
uk,
as
dean
lockhart
said,
has
exceptionally
high
standards
when
it
comes
to
the
protection
of
consumers
and
workers
higher
standards
than
the
eu
as
a
whole,
whether
it
comes
to
animal
welfare
or
the
environment
or
workers
rights.
We
are
far
ahead
of
what
the
eu
offers.
K
We
will
no
longer
have
eu
structure
funds
and
the
uk
government
has
agreed
that
these
will
be
replaced
with
direct
uk
investment
in
scotland
in
exactly
the
same
way
as
we've
seen
from
the
eu
in
the
past,
and
yet
strangely
snp
politicians
seem
to
object
to
this
extra
money
to
extra
resources
coming
for
their
constituents
for
infrastructure
projects
for
cultural
projects
for
community
initiatives.
They're
happy
to
accept
this
money
when
it
comes
from
the
eu
but
they're
so
blinkered
and
prejudiced
against
the
uk.
I
M
Hey
thank
you
presiding
officer.
As
we
have
heard,
the
uk's
bill
would
impose
a
series
of
rules
on
trade
within
the
uk
following
the
end
of
the
transition
period
with
the
eu
on
31st
december
and
a
likely
cliff
edge,
break
brexit,
a
situation
of
course
that
we
in
scotland
did
not
vote
for,
but
as
as,
of
course,
on
brexit.
Just
as
on
everything
else.
Our
views
are
ignored
and
our
votes
simply
disregarded
by
the
uk,
and
I
don't
know
why.
The
tory
front
ventures
are
smirking.
M
The
rules
to
be
imposed
by
the
uk
government
would
mean,
for
example,
that
stated.
Powers
concerning
devolved
areas
would
be
taken
away
to
london
that
london
would
take
control
of
key
devolved
spending
parts
and
that
there
would
be
inevitably
a
race
to
the
bottom
in
terms
of,
for
example,
food
and
environmental
standards.
M
Among
england,
scotland,
wales
and
northern
ireland.
The
sheer
market
size
of
england
means
that
market
forces
will
lead
english
standards
to
be
prevalent
there.
We
have
it
presiding
officer,
an
internal
market
of
jonah
and
the
whale
with
none
of
the
protections
we
currently
benefit
from.
As
being
part
of
the
eu
single
market
of
500
million
people
presiding
officer,
the
uk
tory
government
ask
us
to
trust
them.
Not
to
change
the
status
quo
and
to
trust
them
to
consult
with
us,
even
though
there
is
no
requirement
in
the
bill
to
do
so.
M
This
is
the
same
uk
tory
government,
which
has
such
regard
for
our
scottish
government
and
scottish
parliament
that
it
scrapped
the
uk
budget
statement
by
twitter,
the
same
uk
tory
government
that
hid
important
information
about
possible
food
shortages
and
its
stated
park
grab
from
the
scottish
government.
The
same
uk
tory
government
that
proposes
to
break
international
law
and
renege
on
commitments
given
under
treaty
to
our
international
partners.
Presiding
officer.
This
bill
represents
an
unprecedented
attack
on
devolution.
M
The
people
of
scotland
joined
together
to
ensure
that
we
saw
our
scottish
parliament
reconvened
in
1999
and
no
uk
tory
government
is
going
to
rewrite
our
history.
In
conclusion,
presiding
officer,
I
would
say
to
the
tories
that
we
see
you
the
people
of
scotland,
see
you,
for
there
is
no
respect
agenda
in
this
union.
There
is
no
trust
in
this
union
and
we
are
certainly
not
feeling
much
love
anymore,
presiding
officer.
M
Rather,
there
is
an
increasingly
hostile
environment
for
scotland
in
the
union,
as
the
stu
st
uc
has
said
about
the
bill,
and
I
would
quote:
should
the
uk
government
proceed
with
the
bill
against
the
wishes
of
the
scottish
parliament?
It
makes
the
case
for
a
second
independence
referendum
on
ansible.
M
L
Thank
you,
deputy
presiding
officer.
I
rise
to
speak
in
favor
of
the
government's
motion,
the
lcm,
and
also
rejecting
the
conservative
amendment.
I
think
there
are
two
central
issues
that
need
to
be
addressed
in
terms
of
assessing
the
uk
internal
market
bill.
It's
the
allocation
of
powers
and
the
settlement
of
disputes
in
relation
to
powers
once
the
brexit
process
is
complete.
L
L
In
addition
to
that,
the
setting
up
of
the
office
of
the
internal
market
would
allow
the
uk
government
the
basis
to
impose
rules
and
regulations
on
other
parts
of
the
united
kingdom.
That's
simply
unfair
and
it
doesn't
work
as
a
fair
process.
I
think
the
other
point
is
that
this
legislation
doesn't
offer
an
effective
disputes
process.
L
Clearly,
when
powers
have
been
discussed,
there
will
be
disputes
and
there
needs
to
be
an
arbitration
process.
There
can't
be
a
veto
from
either
the
uk
government
or
the
scottish
government,
and
there
needs
to
be
a
process.
That's
worked
with
all
four
forward
evolved
nations
to
ensure
that
there
can
be
a
consensual
approach,
and
that's
that
that's
going
to
be
part
of
the
solution
in
terms
of
those
who
have
sought
to
bring
the
independence
referendum
into
this.
L
L
We
heard
douglas
ross
the
other
day
saying
that
he
felt
that
some
of
his
colleagues
in
england
didn't
understand
scotland
and
didn't
understand
the
strength,
the
strength
of
the
the
issues
that
were
at
stake.
Well,
if
the
conservatives
at
the
close
of
decision
time
tonight,
press
their
buttons
and
support
this
legislation
and
try
and
support
the
lcm
that,
in
effect,
is
helping
to
feed
the
fuels
of
the
fire
of
those.
In
this
debate,
who
have
argued
for
a
second
independence
referendum
and
summon
up
deputy
presiding
officer,
it's
important
that
we
protect
the
devolution
process.
N
Thank
you,
presiding
officer
in
this
parliament.
Members
have
worked
hard
for
two
decades
deliberately
deliberating
and
legislating
on,
devolved
matters,
naturally
leading
to
significant
policy
divergence
between
scotland
and
the
rest
of
the
uk.
What
the
uk
internal
market
bill
makes
clear
is
that
uk
touring
ministers
are
no
longer
prepared
to
accept
divergence
as
an
integral
part
of
devolution,
which
this
bill
seeks
to
rain
in
treating
policy
differences
between
administrations
as
a
spurious
barrier
to
trade,
a
problem
to
be
solved.
N
Of
course,
as
we
leave
the
eu,
there
is
a
need
for
coordination
and
collaboration
between
governments
and
parliaments
across
these
islands.
We
must
work
with
colleagues
across
the
uk
to
create
a
system
which
minimises
trade
barriers
and
respects
the
authority
and
legitimacy
of
each
parliament
assembly.
This
is
not
the
bill's
aim.
There
is
no
provision
whatsoever
to
involve
evolved
administrations
in
any
meaningful
way
in
the
development
and
governance
of
the
uk's
internal
market.
N
The
bill
states
that
the
secretary
of
state
must,
and
I
quote,
consult
the
scottish
ministers,
the
welsh
ministers
and
the
department
for
the
economy
in
northern
ireland.
It's
not
clear
how
this
consultation
process
will
work
in
practice,
but
ultimately
the
bill
ensures
that
westminster
will
oversee
evolution
of
the
uk's
internal
market.
Any
measures
deemed
to
impact
the
internal
market
will
have
to
be
approved
by
uk
ministers
and
any
significant
policy
changed
by
this
parliament
will
then
have
to
be
given
the
green
light
by
westminster.
N
This
spell
represents
a
rolling
back
of
devolution's
core
principle
that
this
parliament
has
competence
to
legislate
on
all
devolved
matters.
If
we
take
the
example
of
minimum
unit
pricing,
if
revised,
we
would
be
able
to
enforce
it
only
for
scottish
products
due
to
mutual
recognition
and
non-discrimination.
N
We
could
not
act
against
cheap
english
alcohol
imports
on
paper,
we'll
still
have
legislative
powers
and
practice.
What
would
be
the
point?
People
would
simply
buy
cheaper
imported
alcohol,
disadvantaging
scottish
producers
and
failing
to
achieve
the
public
interest
objective
of
minimum
unit
pricing.
All
four
uk
nations
will
have
to
accept
goods
at
the
standard
set
in
one
country,
making
it
difficult
to
envisage
any
scenario
that
doesn't
result
in
a
race
to
the
bottom.
N
This
will
be
particularly
worrying
when,
coupled
with
reports
of
low
regulation,
trade
deals
where
scotland
normally
competes
on
quality,
if
forced
to
accept
cheap
low
quality
products
in
the
name
of
market
integrity,
it
will
have
a
hugely
negative
impact
on
scottish
agriculture
when
governments
work
together
is
required
to
balance
needs
and
interests.
The
uk
government
makes
no
compromise
with
this
bill
or
any
attempt
to
create
a
sense
of
confidence
and
mutual
trust
amongst
all
partners.
N
There
has
been
no
attempt
to
even
create
the
illusion
that
legislation
is
being
adapted
to
consider
the
devolved
administrations
by
the
uk
government's
own
admission.
This
bill
also
breaks
international
law
and
allows
uk
ministers
to
prevent
the
application
of
and
unilaterally
reinterpret
and
disapply
parts
of
the
northern
ireland
protocol.
Despite
legal
obligations
to
enact
the
protocol
under
both
international
and
domestic
uk
law,
international
response
is
rightly
hostile.
The
eu's
launched
a
legal
action
against
the
uk
for
failing
to
meet
its
withdrawal
agreement
obligations.
N
The
bill
also
risks
future
trade
deals.
Speaker
of
america's
house
of
representatives,
nancy
pelosi
declared
there
is
absolutely
no
chance
of
a
uk
us
trade
deal
passing
through
congress.
If
the
uk
violence
violates
an
international
treaty
and
undermines
the
good
friday
agreement,
the
bill,
scope
and
ambiguity
is
deeply
worrying
at
the
culture,
tourism,
europe
and
external
affairs
committee,
professor
michael
keaton,
said
he,
and
I
quote
cannot
see
why
we
should
give
all
these
powers
to
uk
ministers
when
we
don't
know
how
they
will
be
used.
N
Presiding
officer,
giving
consent
to
this
bill
would
place
power
and
trust
in
the
hands
of
uk
ministers
to
acting
good
faith
and
in
the
best
interest
of
the
people
of
scotland.
It's
utterly
laughable.
The
bill
by
its
very
nature,
is
an
example
of
the
tory
government's
proclivity
for
acting
in
bad
faith.
They
are
prepared
to
break
international
law,
renege
on
the
good
friday
agreement
and
undermine
devolution.
N
C
Thank
you.
In
august,
when
this
chamber
last
debated
the
uk
internal
market
bill,
all
the
political
parties
in
the
chamber
agreed
that
when
we
leave
the
transition
period
at
the
end
of
this
year,
thereby
losing
the
checks
which
the
eu
internal
market
previously
bought
to
domestic
law.
The
exercise
of
devolved
competence
could,
for
the
first
time,
threaten
the
integrity
of
the
uk
internal
market.
C
Adam
tomkins
was
right,
and
that
is
precisely
why
we
need
a
uk
internal
market
bill,
because
let
us
not
forget,
as
murder
fraser
quite
rightly
pointed
out,
that
scotland
trades
one
and
a
half
times
as
much
with
the
rest
of
the
uk
as
it
does
with
the
whole
of
the
eu
and
the
rest
of
the
world
put
together.
It
is
worth
nearly
four
times
as
much
to
scots
as
the
eu
single
market
is
so.
C
That
is
why
there
was
general
agreement
back
in
august
across
all
the
political
parties
in
this
chamber
that
it
is
not
in
anyone's
interest,
whether
you're
a
unionist
or
a
nationalist,
to
erect
new
barriers
to
trade
between
scotland
and
the
rest
of
the
uk
in
a
minute
and
the
presiding
officer,
I
think,
will
accept
an
intervention.
Yes.
H
I'm
I'm
grateful.
Surely
liz
smith
accepts
that
it's
not
only
the
interests
of
those
commercial
operators,
those
businesses
that
should
be
taken
into
account,
but
the
wider
public
interest
in
terms
of
health,
social
public
services,
safety
and
so
on,
and
that
it's
for
this
parliament
to
decide
whether
divergence
is
politically
acceptable
in
the
context.
C
But
that
is
not
now.
I
won't
if
you
don't
mind,
but
that
does
not
deal
with
the
other
key
issue,
which
is
to
ensure
that
enough
is
being
done,
and
perhaps
this
answers,
mr
harvey's
point
to
protect
the
need
for
legitimate
policy
differences
with
the
devolved
nations
and
the
effective
working
of
the
doctrine
of
proportionality,
proportionality,
which
allows
for
that
necessary
divergence.
C
C
The
manner
of
sale
or
pricing
regulations
could
be
undermined
for
issues
like
plastic
bags
or
minimum
unit
alcohol,
and
it
was
true
that
there
wasn't
enough
clarity
about
that
on
that
issue,
which
is
why,
on
the
29th
of
september,
the
uk
government
put
in
place
technical
amendments
to
ensure
that
all
parts
of
the
uk
have
the
freedom
to
regulate
for
pricing
and
manner
of
sale
policies
and
to
ensure
that
that
is
beyond
doubts.
When
it
comes
to
the
course
now.
C
There
was
an
acceptance
that
the
common
frameworks
on
their
own
are
not
enough
because
they
are
not
legally
binding
and
there
is
a
need
to
ensure
that
that
there
is
that
legal,
binding
nature,
and
I
think
mr
russell
might
have
changed
his
mind
just
a
little
bit
on
that
in
the
intervening
two
years.
So
I'll
finish
on
that
point,
deputy
presiding
officer,
this
bill
is
needed
to
protect
the
economy
and
to
protect
the
social
interests
of
scotland,
and
that
is
why
I
will
obviously
be
supporting
the
amendment
in
the
name
of
dean,
lockett.
A
O
O
O
O
At
the
very
least,
it
means
that
negotiations
and
common
frameworks
would
become
increasingly
one-sided,
as
we
would
be
negotiating
with
a
gun
to
our
heads,
and
any
failure
to
agree
would
lead
to
the
fallback
position
of
the
uk
government,
making
all
the
decisions,
and
even
if
there
was
a
less
formal
common
framework
agreed
on
a
particular
topic.
Any
organization
going
to
court
against
the
scottish
government,
as
the
scottish
whiskey
association,
did
previously
could
appeal
to
this
bill
as
overriding
the
common
frameworks.
O
O
O
So
I
asked
michael
gove
about
this
when
he
appeared
at
committee.
Firstly,
he
ignored
the
question
and
answered
a
different
one.
He
said
that
there
would
be
no
interference
in
scottish
education.
However,
that
was
not
the
question.
What
I
had
asked
was
whether
scotland
could
be
forced
to
accept
any
teacher
from
the
rest
of
the
uk.
O
But
that
does
not
mean
that
future
ministers
in
future
uk
governments
will
be
either
as
nice
or
as
trustworthy.
And,
of
course
it
is
not
just
the
uk
government's
intentions
which
matter
here
with
minimum
unit
pricing
for
alcohol.
It
was
the
whiskey
industry
that
went
to
court.
So
once
this
law
is
in
place,
any
business
or
organization
can
use
it
against
scotland,
presiding
officer.
We
want
free
trade
with
the
uk.
We
have
free
trade
with
the
uk
and,
of
course
the
uk
is
our
largest
market,
and
we
want
to
maintain
that.
O
However,
this
parliament
was
set
up
for
a
reason.
That
reason
was
that
the
centralized
uk
state
with
all
decisions
made
in
london
was
not
working.
If
it
is
the
conservatives
intention
to
reverse
the
devolution
process,
they
have
the
power
to
do
that.
However,
I
would
warn
them
that
it
will
come
back
to
haunt
them.
Thank
you.
P
Presiding
officer,
the
internal
market
bill
may
prove
to
be
the
death
knell
of
devolution.
It
provides
a
means
for
uk
ministers
to
employ
direct
power
to
intervene
and
divorce
matters
without
the
consent
of
the
scottish
parliament
and
allows
for
the
use
of
indirect
power
to
undermine
the
laws
of
this
parliament.
An
example
of
direct
power
can
be
found
in
part
six
of
the
bill,
which
would
allow
uk
ministers
to
bypass
this
parliament
to
spend
in
devolved
areas
such
as
health,
education,
justice,
housing,
transport,
culture
and
sport,
presiding
officer.
P
It
is
a
role
of
this
parliament
and
local
authorities
to
decide
spending
in
devolved
areas.
If
part
six
is
intended
as
a
vehicle
to
deliver
a
replacement
to
eu
structural
funds,
it
falls
short
of
what
is
required
and
should
be
amended
or
removed.
A
better
model
would
be
for
any
replacement
funds
to
be
included
within
the
block
grant.
That
would
maximise
a
democratic
oversight
and
allow
all
the
members
of
this
parliament
to
play
a
role
in
shaping
how
these
funds
should
be
utilized.
P
What
we
have
in
the
bill,
however,
is
an
arbitrary
system
where
funding
could
be
decided
on
the
whim
of
a
uk
minister
or
even
solely
for
perceived
political
gain.
That
would
be
a
recipe
for
confusion
and
contradiction
in
public
spending.
I
also
fear
it
would
be
the
thin
end
of
the
wedge.
I
don't
say
that
lightly.
I
am
not
one
for
engaging
in
conspiracy
theories
or
scare
stories,
but
is
it
unreasonable
to
suspect
that
it
is
the
worst
of
motives
that
underlies
so
much
of
what
this
uk
government
seeks
to
do?
P
A
government
led
by
a
man
who
orchestrated
the
unlawful
proroguing
of
parliament,
a
government
that
introduces
the
very
bill
that
we
are
debating
which,
by
their
own
admission,
would
breach
international
law.
A
government
that
was
revealed
only
yesterday
is
deliberately
withholding
important
information
on
brexit
from
the
devolved
administrations.
P
The
effect
of
this
measure
is
that
goods
or
services
originating
in
one
part
of
the
uk
must
be
accepted
in
all
parts
of
the
uk,
irrespective
of
differences
in
regulatory
standards.
This
potentially
would
allow
one
part
of
the
uk
to
contain
to
gain
a
competitive
advantage
through
deregulation,
given
the
size
of
its
population
economy
and
political
power
relative
to
other
parts
of
the
uk,
english
regulations
would
ultimately
have
to
be
acquiesced
to
by
the
other
nations
across
a
range
of
areas.
P
P
Although
the
cliche
says
that
power
always
corrupts
what
is
seldom
said
is
that
power
always
reveals
when
a
man
is
climbing
trying
to
persuade
others
to
give
him
power
consummate
is
necessary,
but,
as
a
man
obtains
more
power,
camouflage
becomes
less
necessary,
presiding
officer,
the
mask
has
slipped:
there
is
no
partnership
of
equals,
and
this
certainly
does
not
feel
like
a
family
of
nations.
The
uk
government
is
seeking
to
use
raw
power
to
roll
back
devolution.
A
Q
Thank
you,
presiding
officer
throughout
the
divisive
and
disempowering
brexit
process.
Scottish
labor
has
taken
a
very
keen
interest
in
development,
about
which
we
have
become
increasingly
alarmed.
This
particularly
do
not
exclusively
by
any
means
relates
to
the
development
of
the
post-eu
arrangements
for
trade
and
for
our
precious
environment
and
the
grave-threated
evolution.
Q
Q
When
I
was
speaking
on
the
17th
of
august
in
the
debate
I
expressed
incredulity
at
the
lack
of
respect
for
the
devolved
settlement
by
the
uk
tory
government.
At
that
time
I
stated
that
the
white
paper
proposals
were
beholden
to
capital
and
had
no
loyalty
to
place
collaboration
or
subsidiarity
and
risked
undermining
any
partnership
between
local
community-owned,
local
businesses
and
trade
unions.
How
naive
of
me
to
hope
against
hope
that
in
the
uk
tory
government
there
could
be
someone
listening
to
the
concerns
about
threatening
the
very
pollution
settlement
itself.
Q
Unfortunately,
optimistic
of
me
to
envisage
that
someone
in
the
uk
tory
government
might
wake
up
and
realize
how
seriously
wrong
they
had
got
it.
The
finance
and
constitution
committee
was
indeed
correct
to
call
for
a
much
longer
transparent
and
inclusive
debate
on
the
proposals,
but
in
the
white
paper.
The
wider
debate
included
blunt
comments
from
ex-prime
minister
john
major,
and
I
quote
this
has
wide-ranging
ramifications.
Q
It
will
not
only
make
negotiations
with
eu
more
difficult,
but
also
any
trade
negotiations
with
other
nations,
including
the
united
states.
Once
trust
is
undermined,
distrust
becomes
prevalent,
however,
no
one
in
the
uk
tory
government
was
listening
to
him
and
they
certainly
weren't
listening
to
us
in
our
scottish
parliament.
Now
we
have
a
draft
bill
uk
bill
to
consider
and
the
only
option
is
to
say
a
clear
and
resounding.
No.
Q
Twenty
years
ago,
this
sunday
donald
dewa,
our
first
first
prize
prime
first
minister,
passed
away
the
determination
of
him,
and
so
many
others
from
political
parties
and
civic
society
to
have
a
scottish
parliament
must
not
be
threatened
undermined
by
this
bill
or
anything
else,
and
I
acknowledge
the
cabinet
secretary's
recognition
of
his
part
here
in
scotland.
Much
of
the
law
and
certainty
of
our
policies
on
environment,
food
standards,
health
and
more
is
established
here
in
this
parliament
and
has
been
helped
in
its
shaping
by
the
eu
laws
and
directives.
Q
We
will
not
be
forced
on
in
a
race
to
the
bottom
here
in
scotland.
The
stucs
concerns
mainly
relate
to
state
aid,
market
access,
commitment
and
intergovernmental
arrangements.
Their
briefing
highlights
that
the
internal
market
bill
reserves
state
aid
to
westminster,
despite
this
not
being
reserved
in
the
scotland
act
and
it
states.
I
will
quote
briefly
in
terms
of
time
that
we
have
here
in
scotland
the
ability
to
affect
financial
support
to
workplaces
threatened
with
closure,
to
take
state
utilities
back
into
public
ownership
and
much
more
so.
Q
This
darkly
highlights
the
totally
unacceptable
arrangements
that
this
bill
would
lead
to.
As
we
struggle
with
coded,
as
alex
rowley
stressed
with
such
economic
uncertainty,
it
is
further
devolution
that
is
required
to
build
back
a
better
scotland
and
james
kelly
stressed
the
lack
of
a
dispute
resolution
arrangement
in
the
bill.
Q
Further,
the
uk
bill
is
not
about
seamless
trade,
as
stated
in
the
purpose
of
the
bill.
The
the
common
frameworks
would
do
that
in
a
way
that
is
apparent
if
the
uk
government
had
acted
with
more
alacrity
on
this,
and
it
is
still
possible
to
shape
these
frameworks.
It
is
not
too
late
to
have
future
arrangements
through
agreement,
and
I
want
to
turn
finally
to
the
concerns
raised
in
relation
to
the
irish
peace
process.
By
this
bill,
john
major
and
tony
blair
wrote
in
the
sunday
times
last
month.
Q
There
are
sadly
many
more
reasons
outlined
by
members
across
most
of
the
chamber
today,
and
thus
scottish
labor
rejects
the
tory
amendment,
and
it
also
makes
it
quite
clear,
as
we
have
through
alex
rowley
and
james
kelly
and
myself,
that
scottish
labour
supports
the
scottish
government
motion.
We
will
not
support
an
lcn
for
this
very
dis,
respectful
and
dangerous
bill.
Thank
you.
R
R
R
In
fact,
as
my
colleague
dean
lockhart
pointed
out,
we
heard
from
alec
rowley
who
gets
more
cheers
from
the
snp
benches
than
he
does
the
labour
ones
these
days
he
claims
the
bill,
breaks
international
law,
untrue,
incorrect
and
ill-informed,
as
ever
a
point
made
further
by
a
number
of
snp
members
as
well
as,
of
course,
patrick
harvey
who
claimed
members,
including
myself,
opposed
the
scottish
parliament.
I
did
not.
R
Businesses
need
certainty
that
commerce
will
carry
on
as
usual
across
the
united
kingdom.
Now
we
have
left
the
eu.
The
uk
internal
market
bill
provides
that
certainty
that
products
made
in
one
part
of
the
united
kingdom
will
not
face
additional
barriers
to
market
in
another
part
of
the
uk
and
that
consumers
in
one
part
of
the
uk
are
not
disadvantaged
by
limiting
access
to
goods
and
services.
R
Not
only
is
that
plain
common
sense,
it
is
what
we
have
done
for
centuries.
The
uk
internal
market
bill
brings
the
process
into
the
21st
century
to
work
with
devolution
as
long
as
they
do
not
discriminate
against
goods
and
services.
From
elsewhere
in
the
uk,
devolved
government
will
be
able
to
set
their
own
rules
and
standards
which
are
then
recognized
across
the
entire
uk.
R
The
snp
had
to
take
the
eu
to
court
to
get
their
alcohol
minimum
pricing
scheme
through
under
the
uk
internal
market
bill.
They
could
introduce
that
scheme
without
court
action.
Liz
smith
eloquently
articulated
how
the
doctrine
of
proportionality
would
allow
divergence
and
enhance
devolution
I'll
give
way
to
patrick
harvey.
H
Patrick
harvey,
I
I
mean
I
recognize
the
extent
to
which
the
members
making
real
efforts
to
do
the
mental
gymnastics
necessary
to
justify
this
bill
he's
making
a
good
effort
at
it.
But
does
he
at
least
acknowledge
the
substantial
amount
of
evidence
that
didn't
come
from
politicians
didn't
come
from
pro-independence
activists
came
from
independent
witnesses
telling
us
that
this
bill
will
leave
more
uncertainty
and
will
leave
major
decisions
in
the
hands
not
of
democratic
parliaments
here
at
westminster,
but
in
the
hands
of
the
courts.
R
R
And
that's
why
we
require
cooperation
across
business
groups
such
as
what
the
cbi
have
been
calling
for,
and
the
conservatives
stand
ready
to
work
with
the
scottish
government
on
this
bill.
I
would
urge
the
snp
to
at
least
keep
their
minds
open
to
cooperation,
even
if
their
natural
instinct
is
not
to
and
I'll
come
to
that
in
a
moment.
For
example,
it
would've
been
welcome
today
to
hear
the
snp
discuss
how
best
to
use
the
new
powers
from
the
uk
internal
market
bill
to
take.
R
R
That
is
why
it's
so
disappointing
today
to
see
another
ill-tempered
debate
with
nationalist
politicians,
more
interested
in
senseless
uk
bashing
than
properly
considering
this
legislation.
They
take
every
opportunity
to
undermine
and
oppose
the
uk.
Even
when
that
risks,
thousands
of
scottish
got
jobs.
Why
else
would
they.
A
R
A
B
Presiding
officer,
thank
you.
Can
I
make
three
introductory
points
which
are
factually
based
so
that
mr
golding
can
have
those
facts
on
the
record
one.
There
is
no
threat
from
any
of
the
devolved
administrations
or
governments
or
parliaments
to
the
continuation
of
seamless
unfettered
trade
within
the
uk.
There
is
no
such
threat.
Notory
has
been
able
to
point
to
such
a
threat.
There
is
no
intention
of
such
a
threat,
so
let's
make
that
clear.
Secondly,
you
do
not
have
to
be
in
the
same
constitutional
structure
to
trade
with
your
largest
customer.
B
If
you
did,
the
uk
would
not
be
leaving
the
eu.
That
is
simply
reality,
and
thirdly,
this
bill
is
illegal.
It
contains
breaches
of
international
law.
It
would
therefore
be
against
the
ministerial
code
for
any
minister
in
this
chamber
to
support
this
bill.
Now.
I
I
have
to
say
that
I
no
thank
you.
No
thank
you.
I
I
have
the
sound
of
your
voice
in
my
ears
enough
this
afternoon.
I
I
really
I
couldn't
take
any
more
of
it.
I'm
sorry.
Even
I
have
a
limit
to
that
sort
of
suffering.
B
I
have
to
say
to
you
that
I
have
a
lot
of
time
for
some
conservative
members,
not
many,
I
have
to
say,
and
I'm
going
to
again
embarrass
liz
smith,
because
I
have
a
lot
of
time
for
this
smith.
She
was
my
shadow
when
I
was
education
secretary.
She
regularly
called
for
my
resignation,
but
I
got
over
it.
I
have
to
say,
and-
and
therefore
I
want
to
reflect-
I
want
to
reflect
on
something
that
she
said
about
the
change
over
the
last
few
years.
Now
she
said
it.
B
Badmouthing
europe
essentially
painting
europe
as
the
devil
incarnate,
because
that's
what
we've
heard
and
that's
what
we
hear
again
and
again
also
a
huge
attack
on
devolution,
an
attack
on
the
powers
of
this
parliament,
not
about
making
sure
that
scotland
could
continue
to
be
in
the
single
market
in
the
customs
union,
but
in
actual
fact
that
our
powers
should
be
diminished
and
consider
no.
No.
Thank
you.
No!
No!
No!
No!
There's
one
thing
worse
than
mr
golding's
voice.
B
A
B
A
C
A
B
There
is
no
doubt
about
that,
but
there's
been
a
huge
attack
in
devolution
and
the
tories
have
been
isolated
this
afternoon
as
extreme
brexiteers,
all
of
them
all
of
them
have
been
isolated
as
extreme
brexiteers,
who
not
only
admit
the
breach
of
international
law
but
revel
in
the
breach
of
international
law
and
the
most.
The
saddest
thing
of
all
of
this
is
the
refusal
to
listen
to
any
and
all
opinion
that
has
been
expressed
on
this
matter.
B
Mr
mr
lockhart
heard
from
the
committee
before
he
spoke,
which
made
it
clear
and
I
think
bruce
crawford's
final
words
were
that
devolution
cannot
work.
If
the
uk
government
imposes
its
view
on
the
devolved
nations,
he
made
that
clear
they
had
from
labor
alec
riley,
saying
think
again.
They
heard
from
patrick
harvey
who
talked
about
the
decision-making
of
the
uk
government.
They
heard
from
the
lib
dems-
and
I
rarely
if
ever
can
actually
not
criticize
a
word
of
willy
renny's
speech.
B
I
I
enjoy
criticizing
words
of
whether
he
really
speeches
and
on
this
occasion
I
can't
which
will
put
him
in
deep
trouble
with
mr
rumbles,
but
he
has
my
approbation
for
actually
doing
that.
Then
we
heard
from
the
royal
incorporation
of
architects
of
scotland,
the
gtc,
the
nfus,
the
scdi
all
dismissed,
and
indeed
the
nfus
in
a
very
sinister
move
were
misquoted
on
what
they
said,
because
they
were
clear.
B
This
is
deeply
wrong,
because
this
goes
well
beyond
what
should
be
happening,
and
we
heard
that
in
the
rather
nervous
laughter
on
the
tory
benches.
During
the
opening
speeches
it
was
they
were
giggling
like
school
children
when
they'd
heard
a
naughty
word,
but
I
couldn't
actually
work
out
what
the
naughty
word
was
was
the
naughty
word.
Scotland
was
a
naughty
word
democracy
or
was
the
naughty
word
devolution,
because
on
each
of
those
occasions
they
were
giggling
away.
At
those
words,
I
want
to
conclude,
I
want
to
conclude
presiding
officer
by
making
something
very
clear.
B
There
is
no
doubt
there
is
no
doubt
whatsoever
from
the
evidence
that
the
committees
have
heard,
there's
no
doubt
from
the
bill
itself.
This
is
a
major
attack
on
devolution.
It
is
illegal
and
if
it
is
supported
today
by
the
tories,
they
are
aiding
and
abetting
a
hostile
westminster
government
in
undermining
this
parliament.
There
are
no
ifs.
There
are
no
buts
on
this.
B
They
are
also
voting
for
something
that
is
against
international
law
and
they
will
know
it,
and
this
afternoon
there
were
three
solicitors
who
sat
on
the
tory
benches,
who
sat
through
this,
and
not
one
of
them
referred
to
the
legal
issues
in
this
bill.
That
is
shocking.
I
had
go
back
those
four
years
because,
four
years
ago,
just
after
the
brexit
referendum,
there
was
a
view
in
this
chamber
that
we
could
find
a
way
forward
for
scotland
that
preserved
something
of
the
valuable
things
we
have
from
the
eu.
B
And
now
we
have
a
host
of
ranting
brexiteers
who
are
about
who
are
about
mr
simpson
lofts,
a
host
of
ranting
brexiteers,
who
are
unfortunately
undermining
this
parliament
and
the
democracy
of
scotland.
It
will
not
stand,
it
will
not
stand
tom
arthur
made
that
point,
and
I
make
it
again.
This
is
wrong.
It
should
not
happen.
We
should
refuse
permission
and
we
should
continue
to
oppose
this.
No
matter
what.
A
A
F
S
Thank
you
very
much.
Colleagues.
Our
next
item
of
business
is
consideration
of
business
motion
double
to
964.
In
the
name
of
graham
day,
on
behalf
of
the
department
to
bureau,
setting
out
a
business
program,
could
I
call
in
the
minister
to
move
this
motion?
Thank
you
very
much.
No
member
has
indicated
they
wish
to
speak
of
the
motion.
The
question
therefore,
is
that
motion
double
to
964
be
agreed
are
well
agreed.
Yes,
we
are
agreed.
Thank
you.
S
The
next
item
is
consideration
of
eight
parliament
tribute
emotions
again.
Could
I
call
on
mr
d
and
behave
the
bureau
to
move
motions,
double
two:
nine
six,
five
on
committee
meeting
times
double
to
nine
double
six
and
double
two:
nine:
six,
seven
on
designation
of
lead
committee
and
double
two:
nine,
six,
eight
double
two:
nine,
six,
nine
double
two,
nine,
seven,
one,
two,
seven
on
approval
of
ssis.
S
Thank
you
very
much.
Those
questions
will
be
put
at
decision
time
and
we
come
to
decision
time
now.
The
first
question
is
that
amendment
double
295.1,
in
the
name
of
dean
lockhart,
which
seeks
to
amend,
motion
double
two:
nine
double
five
in
the
name
of
michael
russell,
on
legislative
consent
to
the
internal
market
bill
be
agreed.
Are
we
all
agreed
we're
not
agreed
we're
going
to
move
to
a
vote
and
we're
just
gonna
have
a
short
suspension
to
allow
members,
both
in
the
chamber
and
online
to
access
the
voting.
App
there'll
be
a
short.
S
Up,
thank
you,
colleagues.
We
are
now
broadcasting
again
and
parliament
is
resumed,
so
we're
moving
straight
to
the
question.
The
question
is
that
amendment
double
two
nine
double
five
point,
one
in
the
name
of
dean
lockhart,
which
seeks
to
amend,
motion
double
two:
nine
double
five
in
the
name
of
mike
russell
on
legislative
consent
to
the
internal
market
will
be
agreed
and
members
to
cast
their
votes.
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
S
S
S
S
The
next
question
is
that
motion
double
two
nine
double
five
in
the
name
of
michael
russell
as
amended.
Sorry,
not
as
amended
it's
unamended.
It
is,
it
is
unamended.
It
is
the
motion.
It
is.
The
motion
in
the
name
of
michael
russell,
on
legislative
consent
to
the
internal
market
will
be
agreed,
are
well
agreed,
not
agreed.
Members
may
vote
now
on
the
motion
in
the
name
of
michael.
S
S
F
F
S
S
S
S
That's
good.
The
question
is
that
motions
double
two
nine,
six,
five,
two
double
two:
nine,
six,
nine
and
double
two
nine
seven,
one,
two
double
two
nine
seven,
three
in
the
name
of
graham
d
on
behalf
of
the
parliamentary
bureau,
be
agreed
are
well
agreed.
We
are
agreed.
Thank
you
very
much,
and
that
concludes
decision
time.
We're
going
to
move
shortly
to
members
business.
Can
I
encourage
members
just
to
be
very
careful,
leaving
the
chamber
to
observe
social
distancing
and,
in
particular
outside
in
the
one-way
system
in
the
corridors?