The next item of business is a debate on motion 15261, in the name of Ivan McKee and recognising the life sciences sector in Scotland. Can I invite those members to wish to speak in the debate to press the request-to-speak buttons now? I call on Ivan McKee to speak to and move the motion minister. Twelve minutes are thereabouts, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Next month marks the second anniversary of the publication of the life science strategy for Scotland. I am delighted to have life sciences included in my portfolio. Not only is the sector extremely important to trade, to investment and to innovation, it's also a key part of Scotland's economy. I'm glad to have secured this debate today and the opportunity to update the Parliament on progress in these key areas and more broadly across the sector. The life science sector strategy has been developed by the industry, working in collaboration with academia and government through the industry leadership group Life Sciences Scotland. The aim of the strategy is to grow the sector, to create the environment, to enable companies to access new markets and to make sure that Scotland remains a location of choice for business investment and research within the sector. The strategy is clear and focused. Its four strands cover innovation and commercialisation, leveraging our academic excellence and growing the entrepreneurial mindset within the sector, sustainable production, building manufacturing excellence and enabling reshoring, internationalisation, driving up inward investment and boosting exports and the business environment, in particular ensuring that the supply of skills and finance to the sector needs to grow and flourish. The evidence shows that the strategy is making a difference. Latest figures show that the sector turnover of almost £5.2 billion in 2016, a 39 per cent increase over five years and well-on cost hit the industry target of £8 billion by 2025. Gross value added for the sector was £2.4 billion in 2016 and a 27 per cent increase in a single year. The sector is the largest contributor to Scotland's business research and development investment, with 2017 birds reaching £293 million, almost a quarter of the total for the whole Scottish economy. The sector boasts an R&D spend of over £17,000 per job 36 times the Scottish average, and the life science sector exports were reported at £1.2 billion in 2016. They form a key part of our plans to ramp up Scotland's international trade through our export plan. The sector now has more than 700 companies employing almost 40,000 people. Many of those are high-value jobs, with median weekly full-time earnings in the sector of £723 in 2017, which is 32 per cent higher than the Scottish average. This is a sector with real growth opportunities. Recent data from Deloitte shows that global healthcare spending is projected to increase at an annual rate of 4.1 per cent over the period 2017-21. That is an increase from the previous rate of 1.3 per cent over the period 2012-16. Ageing and increasing populations, expansion of developing markets, advances in medical treatments and rising employment costs will all drive health spending growth. More than that, the sector has the opportunity to benefit the lives of millions of people through innovations that increase health and literally save lives. Life sciences covers much more than just human health, with Scotland being recognised internationally as a leading player in animal health, particularly in the fields of genetics, genomics, endemic diseases and parasitology. In an agritech, James Hutton is developing and commercialising new smart energy and LED light systems for the indoor growth of high-value crops. Scotland's historical place at the forefront of medical innovation is a matter of record. From the world-leading work of Joseph Lister, Alexander Fleming and Professor John McLeod through to Dolly the Sheep and the Bonnack Hand, there are countless examples of innovations in the academic excellence underpin our excellent life science sector. The research work of our universities continues to lead the sector globally. Dundee University has ranked the world's most influential pharmacutical research institute for 2016, according to state of innovation report by Clarevae Analytics. The University of Edinburgh is the only other UK institution in that top 10 list, which includes the likes of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of California, Berkeley. In Glasgow's home to the new 15.8 million artificial intelligence health research centre, the centre will support research not just in Glasgow but in Aberdeen, St Andrews and Edinburgh to enable joined-up academic and commercial technology development. Six of our eight innovation centres support the sector, including the stratified medicines innovation centre at Glasgow University, those covering sensor technology, digital health and biotechnology at Strathclyde, the agriculture innovation centre at Stirling University and the University of Edinburgh's data lab. Between 2009 and 2015, Scotland created 170 life science startups and 60 university spin-outs. Since my appointment, I have had the pleasure of visiting more than a dozen life science businesses across Scotland, large and small and covering the wide breadth of sub-sectors in the industry. From high-tech startups in the incubator at Dundee University to established manufacturing businesses in Inverness and those providing truly global clinical trial services from their base in Glasgow. Brexit is a key concern of many businesses and this is a subject that I shall return to in more detail in my closing remarks. Just this morning, I spent time with Ken Sutherland and his team at Canon Medical here in Edinburgh and I was hugely impressed with the work that they are doing in software development and artificial intelligence. One of the issues that I discussed with Canon was that of skills. The life science community employs a significant number of people in Scotland, creating high value and highly skilled employment opportunities for school leavers, graduates and experienced personnel from across Scotland and beyond. That is why the skills agenda is at the heart of our life science strategy, with skills investment plans and leadership masterclasses for the life and chemical sciences sectors. The availability of skills and talent has a huge influence over where businesses choose to locate Scotland. Indeed, I shall. Dean Lockhart, I thank the minister for giving way. He mentions the necessary skills for the sector. Does he agree with the Scottish Life Sciences Association that his Government's policy of making Scotland the highest-tax part of the UK will make it more difficult to recruit the necessary skills into the sector? I have to say that all the businesses that I have spoken to in the past six months, more than a dozen life sciences, have not been raised with me. The issues that concern them are the availability of skills and the damage that hard Brexit is going to do to that in this particular sector. That is something that I will come on to later. As a member full well knows, across the peace, Scotland is the fairest and the lowest for the vast majority of people tax part of the UK. Scotland is a highly skilled workforce, with the highest proportion of tertiary education graduates aged between 25 and 64 anywhere in the EU. We have a fantastic pipeline of highly qualified individuals who are job-ready for roles in the sector, and we are working hard to keep it that way. That is why we have committed to establishing a national retraining partnership, together with unions and business, and to publish a future skills action plan. Life science businesses are a key role to play in increasing Scotland's export, something that is a huge focus of mine. Our export plan, supported by a £20 million investment, over three years will be published this spring. The plan will identify key sectors and markets to focus our efforts and provide support both here in Scotland and in the market for businesses to position themselves to take advantage of international trade opportunities. Attracting foreign direct investment is equally important to the sector. Last September I visited Biocity and Newhouse to hear from a number of life sciences companies that continue to expand in Scotland, creating high-value jobs. It is vital that we continue to promote Scottish excellence globally in services, innovation, products and in people. SDI has been successfully delivering in this area for a number of years and we have seen the benefits of that work through record levels of inward investment, projects and jobs. In October, my colleague Mr Mackay launched the Invest in Scotland capital investment portfolio, which includes investable opportunities, including Biocwater in Edinburgh and the Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District in Renfrewshire. Through our innovation investment hubs and the global network of SDI officers, we are working to deliver compelling messages that promote Scotland as a place of choice for investment. In all six of my international trips, since taking up my role, I have included a focus on targeting more life science businesses than persuading them to come to Scotland. Investors bring high-value jobs and new business opportunities and, crucially, they develop our supply chains and reinforce our reputation as a fantastic place to invest in. Scotland's NHS is a key partner in the development of our life sciences sector, the opportunity for the NHS to use the sector to bring advanced technology and innovative processes to the table, for example, through the work of CivTech challenges, or to use the sector to operationalise innovative ideas from clinicians and others in the NHS, as done by Shell and through the health improvement partnerships, benefits both the sector and, importantly, improves patient care with the potential to reduce costs and waiting times. Those are relationships that I value highly and work alongside my colleagues, the Cabinet Secretary and the Minister for Health, to strengthen and develop, ensuring, of course, at all times to prioritise the needs of patients. Let me, as I draw to us, a conclusion comment on the amendments that were put forward by the Opposition parties. The Government will be accepting the Labour amendment. We are always keen to work with trade unions. We recognise the value and perspectives that they bring to all of our work on the economy, and that extends to our partnership work to grow and develop the life science sector. Creating high-value jobs is in everyone's interests. Turning to the Conservative amendment, I am keen and the industry is keen that the time that we have here today is focused on the sector. It is strengths and challenges, the work that has been done and the work that we still have to do. Collaborating with our partners and industry are excellent academic institutions and other stakeholders, including trade unions, to drive the sector forward. The assertion that the Scottish Government will receive an extra £2 billion is unsubstantiated and based on past performance and previous UK Government promises is somewhat detached from the reality. For that reason, we will not be supporting the Conservative amendment. This is a sector that has gone from strength to strength in recent years and has bold, ambitious and achievable plans for the future. The sector's strategy has been instrumental in focusing on efforts to deliver what has been achieved so far. We are only two years into the strategy and there has been real improvement in just that short period of time. As co-chair of Life Sciences Scotland, that is encouraging to see. I am excited for the sector's future and look forward to working with industry and others to further develop its potential. I move the motion in my name. I now call Dean Lockhart to speak to move amendment 15261.1, Mr Lockhart. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Scotland has a long and distinguished history in life sciences from, as the minister mentioned, Alexander Fleming discovering penicillin through to Sir James Black developing beta blockers. Scotland has led the world in the fields of medicine and biology. Today, Scotland has one of the most dynamic life science sectors in Europe, employing more than 37,000 people across 700 organisations. Turnover in the sector exceeds £4 billion, which contributes more than £2.4 billion of gross value to the Scottish economy. Today's debate is a good opportunity to recognise the efforts of everyone involved in the success of the sector and the collaboration involved. Minister, do you want to intervene? Please go ahead. You anticipated poise to pounce. Just to update the stats, the turnover for the sector is now more than £5 billion. Yes, Mr Lockhart. As I mentioned, it is a fast-moving sector, so that is good news. One of the key strengths of the sector is its diversity, comprising a wide range of multinationals, SMEs and start-ups spanning areas such as human healthcare, pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. However, it is important to recognise that it is not just a private sector that is driving progress in that area. Kitas has been the on-going partnership between industry, universities and charities, and the NHS has played and continues to play a critical role in the research and development and for delivering and pioneering new treatments and global advances in medicine. The critical role played by the NHS will be further strengthened by the announcement this week by the Prime Minister of the UK Government's long-term plan for the NHS, which will result in a £2 billion funding boost for the NHS here in Scotland. That is highlighted in our amendment today. The extra funding will not only support front-line services, but it can be used to finance significant additional R&D in life sciences to support the future success of the sector. I must say that I am slightly disappointed that the SNP will not be supporting our amendment to its motion today and that it is not recognising the benefits that will come to Scotland as a result of the UK Government's long-term plan. With its background, it is clear that Scotland has a strong foundation for future success in the sector. The Scottish Government's life science strategy is a welcome step in the right direction and it identifies a number of opportunities. However, the reality is that more needs to be done to realise the enormous potential and ambition within the sector. It is on admission that the Scottish Government failed to meet its original target, set in 2011, to double the turnover of the life sciences sector to £6.2 billion by 2020. The timetable for this target has been extended to 2025. I will give way to the minister. I will correct the member's numbers. The target originally was just over £3 billion in 2011 to increase that through the course of that plan, to, as the member correctly says, £6.5 billion by 2020. The number that we are at the moment is £5.2 billion. If we continue the 7 per cent annualised growth rate that we have seen over the past five years, we shall certainly exceed the original target of 2020, and it is almost £7 billion by 2020. The target for 2025 is actually £8.5 billion, and at the moment we are on target to exceed that as well. I thank the minister for that intervention. However, I believe that the original target set in 2011 will be for a target for 2020, which is £6.2 billion, and we are still quite away behind that. However, I recognise the progress that has been made and the contribution by everyone in the sector. Let me turn to some policy measures and actions that we think that the Scottish Government should be taking in addition to the life science strategy. The first is that the Scottish Government needs to actively engage in the UK industrial strategy and, in particular, the UK life science sector. Having spoken to a number of companies in the past couple of days, they recognise the real opportunities available in the UK life science market and under the UK sector deal. The UK has the largest biotech cluster in the world outside of the US. The UK market is the fastest growing in Europe. It is worth over £70 billion and it employs over 250,000 people across the UK. We are seeing significant investments coming through under the sector deal, £500 million of UK Government support for research and over £1 billion of new industry investment over the last couple of years. Funding under the UK sector deal includes the plan to increase total public sector R&D to £12.5 billion by 2021. That, for the voids of doubt, is a UK-wide investment. An investment of £85 million in the world-leading UK biobank and the sector deal recently delivered an investment of £13 million in the UK manufacturing centre, the medicines manufacturing centre, based in Rentresher. It is clear that there are significant opportunities under the UK sector deal, and that is why we would encourage the minister and the Scottish Government to do more to ensure that everyone involved in the life science sector here in Scotland can capitalise on the UK sector deal opportunities. The second area where the Scottish Government can take meaningful action is to help the sector to reduce the tax gap with the rest of the UK. I mentioned earlier that the Scottish Life Sciences Association has written to the First Minister to express its concerns about the policy of making Scotland the highest income tax part of the UK. The letter talks about the direct and indirect impact on recruitment, which will result from a situation where after tax remuneration of recruits from outside of Scotland is going to be lower than elsewhere in the UK. With stage 1 of the budget coming up in the chamber in the next few weeks, the minister should take the warnings from those within the sector and reverse the policy of increasing the tax gap between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Another area that the industry has expressed concerns about is the growing shortage of science teachers in primary and secondary schools. We need to ensure that children are getting the education that they need for a career in life science. It is clear that there is an increasing science skills gap emerging in schools, colleges and universities. Since 2008, the number of secondary school science teachers has declined by 15 per cent, and there are currently record vacancies for those slots. We need to address that under investment and the science skills gap. In his opening remarks, the minister referred to the impact of Brexit. We recognise the impact of potential nodial Brexit. There is one simple thing that the minister can do, and that is to encourage his colleagues in Westminster to support the Brexit deal that the Prime Minister has negotiated. That deal is supported by all major business organisations in Scotland for providing the stability and certainty for business by keeping the UK in the customs union until we agree the free trade agreement. That is why, in addressing his point about Brexit, I would ask the minister to encourage his colleagues in Westminster to support the Prime Minister's deal. To conclude, we have outlined a series of policy measures that the Scottish Government can take to further advance the life sciences sector in Scotland, all of them within the control of the Scottish National Party. I look forward to the minister's closing remarks to see what of the necessary actions and policy measures he will take to realise the potential and ambitions of this vital sector for Scotland. I move the amendment in my name. Thank you very much. When you take interventions, I will give you extra time because we have a little time in hand. I now call on Richard Leonard to speak to and move amendment 15261.2. Mr Leonard, please. I am pleased to open this debate on behalf of the Scottish Labour Party. There is little doubt about the vast economic contribution that the life sciences industry is making to the Scottish economy. Just this morning, Rhoda Grant and I visited the world-renowned Roslyn Institute, a world leader in life sciences research and development, and it reminded me of a number of important lessons. Firstly, it is and always should be the primary goal of public research and development to solve wider societal and technological problems, that it should be international in outlook, that it must be long-term and not just short-term in its horizons, and that it should never simply be reduced to commercialisation and the price of economics alone. At its best, the right combination of good science, the best brains, women as well as men in the STEM areas and innovative public investment can pave the way for wider social as well as economic benefit. However, what was also striking is just how enormous the potential is for continued significant economic and employment growth in life sciences in Scotland, that institutes such as the Roslyn Institute are giving a lead in this important scientific revolution of our age, that they are already creating valuable and innovative business spin-offs and so good quality jobs, but that also we need to get the design of the commercialisation pipeline right, that it cannot be left to chance or to the invisible hand of the market. However, we need a planned approach instead of a purely market-driven approach to economic development and that we need an industrial strategy led not just by a UK Government but by a Scottish Government with vision if we are to win the job benefits here and not to see the re-emergence of the all-too-familiar pattern of research here, development there and full production and commercial gain overseas. For Scotland, to continue to be able to compete on a global scale within this sector, particularly for smaller, medium-sized enterprises, it is absolutely essential that we have continued access to the expertise, the intelligence to people and the markets that have fuelled that rapid growth in Scotland over the last 20 years. In other words, failure to secure a trade deal with the EU could result in a risk to medicines and clinical trials, which in turn will have a negative impact on investment employment and will put at risk the ability of our universities to conduct pioneering research in Scotland, but it is not just research that is at risk. Also, potentially, public health and safety and the processes and practices that are currently under EU law protects consumers. For example, genetically modified food and plants currently need to pass safety checks before they are used in the European Union, a point that was reinforced in a ruling last year by the European Court of Justice on Synthetic Biology, or GMO20. That is important to consumers, which is why the practice of all those safety checks, authorisations, processes and labelling must be mirrored and continue post-Brexit. Our amendment to the Scottish Government motion highlights the important role for trade unions, both as part of future work across the life sciences sector but also as part of a wider industrial strategy. We must face up to the fact that some of the major corporations within the life science industry in Scotland have at times obstructed their workers simply in the pursuit of the fundamental human right of trade union membership and organisation. Best practice in industrial relations should be an absolute prerequisite for companies who wish to be considered for public contracts, any Government funding and that includes NHS funding. We have set out in our Scottish labour industrial strategy how we would drive up productivity, which includes investment in science research and collaboration in education and skills. We would do that by setting up new strategic sexual forums covering strategically important sectors, which would include life sciences. Such a forum will bring together private companies, universities, Government trade unions and other stakeholders. In the end, it is only by working together that we will improve productivity, target procurement, direct investment, boost competitiveness, drive up skills and deliver apprenticeships and good jobs. We need to inspire the next generation of Scottish scientists, researchers and innovators. That means that we need to remove the barriers. Yes, I will take an intervention. Can Richard Leonard clarify what the difference between the forums that he is talking about and the current industrial leadership group? The difference between the forums that we have set out and the existing groups is that there would be much more involvement from trade unions who currently do not have a big role to play. Frankly, we would like to see a bigger role from the public sector in them. The strategy paper, which is a Government strategy paper, includes the foreword by the minister but also by the vice president of Glaxo Klein Beecham. We would like to see more of a public sector steer on the work of the forums. We also want to see barriers removed to young people, especially as I mentioned earlier on to young women and girls, to get them more involved in careers in the industry. Can I say that we need a strategic public sector intervention? In the sector above all others, we need to adopt the working assumption that the needs of all must count for more than the profits of the few. There must be a proper balance of interests between megacorporations and democratic accountability. We must also put in place a new model for innovation, which puts investment in long-term research and development before any spending boots to short-term share prices. If we do that, the Parliament will serve well the people that we are here elected to represent. I move the amendment in my name. Listening to Richard Leonard, you think that he was in favour of remaining in the European Union for all the credit that he was given to the European Union for the progress that we have made in this country. It is disappointing that that is not actually the Labour Party policy. I know that there is a growing group of people called Bob in this country, the board of Brexit. I am afraid that I am going to talk about Brexit this afternoon, despite the fact that the minister did not want to focus on it this afternoon for quite commendable reasons that he wants to focus on the sector, because the life sciences sector will be directly affected by it. That is evident from the sector briefings that we have received this afternoon in the debate. The motions and amendments do not refer to it, but I want to major on it this afternoon. The life sciences sector is deeply worried about what Brexit will do to their sector. Life sciences has been a major success story for Scotland. Others have talked about it quite significantly this afternoon. It is worth rehearsing some of the numbers. The financial value of the sector has risen, as the minister says, from £4 billion in 2015 to £5.2 billion in 2016, with a target of £8 billion by 2025. It is worth rehearsing some of the distinct advantages that we have in Scotland with the sector. The patient identification from cradle to grave, the strong collaboration across the NHS, academia, government and industry, globally competitive trial recruitment and start-up times, biobank and resource, unrivaled in Europe, globally recognised electronic health systems, home to the world's top medical schools focusing on translational medicine, phase 1, 2 and 3 clinical trials, post-market surveillance, biostatistics, regulatory compliance, data management and study monitoring. The fast performance turnaround times of three weeks for commercial projects and just under two weeks for non-commercial projects are quite remarkable, and it is no surprise therefore that there is so much interest in Scotland from the sector and that it is growing so much too. That is why we have the £56 million UK innovation centre in Renfrewshire, which will revolutionise how medicines are manufactured and speed up the process of bringing new drugs to market. The bio-cluster sites in Scotland include the Edinburgh bio-quarter, the bio-city, the drug discovery unit up in Dundee, the Inverness campus, the Queen Elizabeth University hospital. We have also got innovation centres covering stratified medicine, sensors, digital health, industrial biotechnology and agriculture. Why on earth are we doing anything to undermine the growing sector with Brexit? Brexit will undermine it, as we have seen from the briefings this afternoon. We have a global outward-looking sector that is connected to the rest of the world and to Europe, so why on earth are we pursuing a Brexit process that will undermine the sector? The life-sign sector relies on access to the best staff across Europe and across the world. It relies on the smooth and easy transfer of life-signs-related supplies and human biological specimens on people and materials, erecting any barriers between this country and Europe that will damage its prospects. The uncertainty alone, as we have already seen, is causing damage. It is causing hesitation in investment. It is causing workers to think about whether they want to come and work in this country. Of course, we are already working across the world and the globe in this sector, but that is in part because we are in the European Union and we are working in partnership. We have an outward-looking approach. Anything that undermines that will cause that sector to diminish. The best people who come to work here are in part because our country is in the European Union. Brexit has put a question mark in their minds about whether that is a location that will continue to grow and thrive. Take the Beatson in Glasgow. 70 per cent of its research assistants are non-UK citizens. Over 30 nationalities work there. Half of the graduate students and 45 per cent of the post-docs are from Europe. None. Not one single junior group leader is British. Not one of them is British. It is an international institution proudly housed in Glasgow because we are an outward-looking country that is in partnership with the European Union and is not deciding to pull up the drawbridge and do things by ourselves. We are a success because of all that. Why on earth are we putting any doubt in all those workers at the Beatson? Why are we putting any doubt in all the workers at all those centres that I have talked about, up in Inverness, up in Dundee, in the Queen Elizabeth University in Glasgow, in the Edinburgh bioquartar, the bio city? Why are we putting any doubt in their minds with Brexit? The IQ, VIA and the Q2 solutions briefing is quite blunt. They are Scotland's largest life sciences employer. In the event of a no-deal Brexit, the availability of investigational medicines and equipment used in our globally sponsored clinical trials could be disrupted. UK clinical research in the UK will be at a medium risk, it says. It is crucial that both tariff and non-tariff barriers are avoided. Of course, the mutual recognition between the UK and the European Medicines Agency is essential, but that is just one agreement that will be required. We will need to have a host of agreements right across the board. You look at it, it looks like we are trying to recreate the European Union. Why are we trying to recreate the European Union? It is of so much value. Why are we causing all this uncertainty? Why are we causing all this doubt in people's minds? Why on earth are we pursuing this Brexit? Let us support the life sciences sector, let us reject Brexit. Thank you very much. I will move to the open debate. I have a little time in hand for interventions. I call Ruth Maguire. We are followed by Gordon Lindhurst and Ms Weiguire, please. With more than 700 life sciences organisations employing more than 37,000 people in high-quality jobs, Scotland is one of the largest life science clusters in Europe. The importance of the sector to Scotland as a whole is clear. I welcome our SNP Government's continued commitment to grow the industry with the most recent programme for government setting out an ambitious package of measures to promote the life sciences sector's research institutions, its international reputation and potential for significant growth, with the creation of high-value jobs that go with that. The Fraser of Allander Institute report, the economic contribution of the pharmaceutical industry in Scotland, states that for every 100 full-time equivalent employees working in the wider pharmaceutical sector, an additional 240 jobs are supported elsewhere in the Scottish economy. The industry is also a key employer in towns and more rural communities outside of major cities. My Cunningham South constituency is home to two well-established companies, Merck and GSK, both of whom contribute to our local and national economy through the spending of wages and salaries, of course, but also through complex supply chains. Merck describes Scotland as a powerhouse for their business and the Irvine site as a key contributor to its Scottish success. The company's Scottish sites, with over 680 employees, supply the global pharmaceutical industry, biotechnology companies, research institutes and academic centres of the world, with tools, chemicals, regents and testing services to make scientific breakthrough possible. The Irvine site has been there since 1976 and manufactures critical components for some of the world's highest-profile treatments. Those are shipped to vaccine and pharmaceutical companies across the world. There are over 170 highly-skilled employees who produce liquid and powder cell culture media and regents used in biomedical research and production globally. The Irvine site has expanded recently and there has been investment in the area. My last visit there was to the life sciences cell culture media plant and I was accompanied by students from Irvine Royal Academy and staff from across Merck's Scottish sites. We were there to see the performance materials smart house. The smart house is a 24-square-metre pod, featuring cutting-edge new technologies that have been created by the Merck life sciences experts. It included everything from organic solar cells on the outside windows, which generate electricity. Intelligent lighting systems are made from LED products that alter automatically when natural light changes and the television is so thin that it can be curved without breaking. It was enormous and many of us were coveting it as it would have been ideal for watching the football on with friends around. Merck says that the smart house was created to help everyone to understand how the life sciences industry will change the way we live in the coming decades. For me, though, the real value was in seeing how it could engage with people, and particularly the young people who were with me around science and technology. It is important that young men and women know that there are challenging, exciting and interesting opportunities for them for work in our local community and that there are different routes into those jobs—university, college and modern apprenticeships. Another significant employer in my constituency is GSK, with its two Scottish sites in Irvine and Montrose that employ more than 1,000 people and are critical to the medicine supply chain. Investment in our young people is also something that they state as a priority. They illustrate that through their apprenticeships, stem ambassador work with local schools and the sponsorship of bodyworks at the Glasgow Science Centre. In August, I took part in apprentice for the day and had the chance to spend time at the plant in Irvine with some of the young people. During my visit, I had the pleasure to meet Shannon, who had just started to train as an apprentice, and Matthew had recently completed his training and now works cool time for the firm. Shannon noted that she had always wanted to do something practical on leaving school and that her apprenticeship was providing her with the perfect opportunity to learn a range of skills within the trade. Matthew added that the chance to experience different roles in the organisation through his apprenticeship had helped to make him work ready on completion. More recently, I was honoured to present GSK Apprentice of the Year award that Irvine's site has apprentices across four key disciplines, engineering, manufacturing, AHS adviser and supply chain. The overall winner was Rachel MacGivan, an engineering apprentice, who was awarded first place by her peers and leaders for her proactive approach, impressive analytical and practical skills, completing an SPQ ahead of schedule with excellent grades and contributing positively to the site as a whole. Rachel undoubtedly has a great career ahead of her in engineering. In closing, I would just say that the life sciences sector is important for the Ayrshire economy. There are opportunities there for our young people. It is important to Scotland's economy. I welcome the Scottish Government's continued investment in this important sector. I look forward to continued success for Scotland as a powerhouse for life sciences. The life sciences sector is an area in which the reputation of Scotland and the UK spans the globe. That is much down to the famous sheep dolly, cloned at the University of Edinburgh's Roslyn Institute. Twenty years on, and the Lothian region that I represent goes from strength to strength in the field of life sciences, benefiting, among other initiatives, from the UK and Scottish Governments working together on the Edinburgh and South East City region deal. Bringing investment to projects such as the Roslyn Institute to bring together life scientists, clinicians and data scientists to develop innovative and financially sustainable models of health and social care that improve lives. It is not just our universities that make the Lothian region such an important place for this sector. I met earlier today with the director of ICFIA, Scotland's biggest life sciences employer. They are a global data human sciences company with a laboratory in Livingstone that processes 4 million biological samples from clinical trials across the world each year. Investment at that laboratory will also allow pharmaceutical and biotech companies from around the world to understand better how genes affect people's health and risk of disease so that personalised medicines can be created. The company decided to base some operations in Livingstone because of the rich life sciences ecosystem that exists here. Indeed, the UK health and life sciences sector, as we have heard, is the fastest growing in Europe, and it is important that Governments work together across the UK to maintain and grow that reputation, as well as attracting inward investment from across the world. Scotland can benefit from initiatives such as the life sciences sector deals as part of the industrial strategy, which are fundamental to supporting the sector, boosting R&D funding to £12.5 billion by 2021 and 2022, as well as funding from the industrial strategy challenge fund and Scottish Enterprise that will be used for one of the new UK medicines manufacturing innovation centres to be based in Renfrewshire. I will take the minister's intervention. Ivan McKee Thanks for taking the intervention. Just to check if Gordon Lindhurst, the business that you visited today, is the same business that produced this document highlighting in graphic detail the extreme damage that Brexit is going to do to the sector. It is the same business, but what is said in that document is quite new and fairly carefully worded. I think that, like other businesses and other people involved in the sector, they would be surprised that the minister and the Scottish Government would not support the amendment that was put forward by Dean Lockhart encouraging the Scottish Government and the UK Government to look towards a positive working relationship together. Turning back to what I was talking about, that centre will support small and multinational companies to manufacture medicines for a global market that is said to be worth around £98 billion. Of course, the interesting point raised by the minister, one should bear in mind that we export more in terms of products provided to the EU than the EU does to us. It is the interests of both the European Union and the United Kingdom to come to agreements in terms of looking to the future and going forward post-Brexit. That is really what we on these benches want to do. We want to work towards a positive future. Fundamental to the sector and to the stakeholders involved in it is, of course, their relationship with the NHS and the opportunities that can be provided for improving care pathways and patient services as a result. The UK Government has invested in the long-term future of the NHS with consequent benefits for the Scottish Government's budget, and that is a welcome step that will be a benefit to the life sciences sector and the health of our nation. As I have said, building and maintaining those relationships is not just important within the domestic market but internationally too. As the life sciences strategy for Scotland highlights, with already such a good international reputation as its foundation, Scottish companies and organisations can utilise the networks that they already have, and they are worldwide. They are not simply restricted to that small part of the world that we are in in the EU, and organisations can utilise the networks that they already have to further develop their international mindset. The Government has a role to play here, helping and encouraging the sector to think global, as well as promoting the life sciences sector in Scotland as summer to invest through the likes of Scottish Development International. However, as we reach out to other parts of the world, we must ensure that the investment opportunities that are available to us already are being used to their fullest extent, and that is something that the economy committee found is not always being the case. The specific item that I would refer to is the issue of the investment of up to £10 million from Scottish Enterprise within a wider £200 billion package. The committee found that only £500,000 of that money had been spent by Scottish Enterprise by the end of October 2018. The Scottish Investment Bank director Kerry Sharp noted recently that the life sciences sector is an excellent fit for the programme in an attempt to encourage businesses to come forward. While it is disappointing that such efforts have been slow to get going, I hope that the life sciences sector can now fully benefit from these investment opportunities, and I would hope that the minister would equally encourage them to do so. Deputy Presiding Officer, in conclusion, the life sciences sector in Scotland is one that we can be proud of, but there is much more that we can do. Of the cross-party group on life sciences, I am pleased to participate in this afternoon's debate and heartened to hear about the progress that has already been made towards meeting ambitious targets set out in the 2017 life sciences strategy for Scotland 2025 vision to build in the existing strength of its vital and highly productive sector of our economy. The life sciences sector is not really mean to the impact of Brexit and the process has put both access to medicines and workforce planning at risk. It is therefore more essential, never that we continue this Government's proactive approach to growth. Scotland is a long and illustrious history of invention, discovery and innovation in the field of medicine, and today's modern life sciences sector reflects that tradition. The excellent work of the Life Sciences Scotland industrial leadership group, which has played a crucial role in strengthening collaboration between industry, academia and the public sector, has been supported by the reconvening of the cross-party group on life sciences. The CPG has, since November 2017, taken a proactive role in creating a forum for the sector to share its ambitions with the Parliament and foster better working relationships with colleagues across the sector. I thank both Ivan McKee and his ministerial predecessor, Paul Wheelhouse, for attending and supporting the group since its inception, and also members who have participated in the group, such as Graham Simpson and Tom Mason. A little over a year, we have been successful in achieving our aim of identifying and discussing policy areas of particular relevance to Scottish life sciences, particularly those that support the delivery of the 2017 strategy. A specific focus has been looking at how to ensure Scotland's workforce has a skillset required to deliver the strategy, and there has been much discussion on how to positively address the challenge of bringing more women into the life sciences sector. The impact of those efforts has been tangible. Last March, as a direct result of concerns raised during CPG discussions, that not enough is being done to showcase Scotland as a destination for global pharmaceutical company investors, the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, the Medicines Trade Body, arranged a series of three international webinars. Those looked at Scotland's joined-up network of life science departments in our universities, opportunities to test ideas in medicines manufacturing through the forthcoming medicines manufacturing innovation centre, which is currently under development in Renfisher, and the unique data opportunities for Scotland when looking at the outcomes for patients from different treatments and clinical pathways. That has raised Scotland's profile as a destination for investment, supporting the attract element of the strategy's anchor build and attract mission outlined in the strategy. Of course, the strategy can only be effective if it takes a holistic and well-rounded view, and that has been reflected in the breadth of discussions that have taken place at meetings of the cross-party group, topics that have ranged from collaborations in life sciences to the economic impact of the sector, to women in STEM, to waste to the single national formulary, to diagnostics and beyond. The most recent meeting of the group focused on data because, as the strategy highlights, Scotland has an invaluable resource for the data-driven approach to healthcare of the future, with all patients in NHS Scotland having a unique identifier and electronic health record. The publication of Scotland's digital health and care strategy in April 2018 and the most recent report from the data-scoping task force were largely welcomed, in particular the aims of capturing medicines used for patients in all clinical settings and including medicines indications in all prescribing systems. As convener, I let the Government know of the desire to see commitments in the delivery of this strategy to joining up data silos and acknowledge the link between income to the NHS from properly governed access to anonymised cohort-level data and the wider Scottish economy. The group is also seeking an update on the Government's response to the report of the data-scoping task force that, in September, called on the NHS in Scotland to take forward the Montgomery recommendations on medicines, by capturing medicines used for patients in all clinical settings, creating a national laboratory data resource, improving recording of patient outcomes and creating a Scottish medicines intelligence unit, which perhaps the cabinet secretary touched on in closing. As we approach the two-year anniversary of the publication of the life sciences strategy, there is much to celebrate. Sector turnover has already increased from £4 billion in 2015 to £5.2 billion in 2000, and we are on track to make our target to double sector turnover to £8.5 billion by 2025. That is good news for the Scottish economy, as the sector directly supports over 5,130 jobs, and every 100 of those jobs supports an additional 240 elsewhere in our economy, as Ruth Maguire pointed out. In addition, the jobs that are created by this growth sector tend to be high value, with the median weekly full-time earnings standing at £723 in 2017, up 6.2 per cent on the year before, which was the largest increase in earnings among all the growth sectors in which compares favourably with the Scottish average wage. Not only has this Government been proactive in fostering the right business environment for the life sciences sector to thrive, but it has also directly supported innovative and growing companies through its enterprise agencies. Just this week, Glasgow-based collagen solutions was awarded a grant of £1.54 million, which will cover more than a third of collagen's expected R&D costs over the next four years. Supporting businesses such as collagen solutions, a leader in the development and manufacturing of biomaterials, and regenerative medicines for the enhancement and extension of human life is key to fulfilling the targets laid out in our ambitious strategy. If members wish to engage with leaders of growing life sciences companies to further discuss this Parliament's role in realising the sector's potential, I would like to extend an invitation to attend the event that I will host on Wednesday, 30 January, jointly involving the Scottish Enterprise and the Life and Chemical Sciences Industry Leadership Group. I am confident that, by continuing its collaboration with industry, academia and the NHS, the Government will overcome sectoral challenges and the uncertainty of Brexit to develop a life sciences sector that is sustainable, innovative and competitive. Iain Gray, followed by Shona Robison. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I think that we all agree on the importance of life sciences to Scotland. It's historical importance and we've heard of many examples of that from James Black to Dolly the Sheep and of course Alexander Fleming and the invention of Penicillin, although Mr Lockhart missed a trick. I think he's not pointing out that he did have to go to St Mary's in Paddington to work there, from which he was where he did discover Penicillin. We've also heard quite correctly about the potential that this sector has. The numbers demonstrate that. The minister has given us the correct number of £5.2 billion, I think, turnover now in the life science sector. Some 40,000 people employed in as many as 800 different organisations and enterprises, so that is very significant. Indeed, it's particularly significant for myself as the MSP for East Lothian, because the chief economist briefing on the life of the Scottish Government's chief economist, chief economic advisers briefing on the life science centre points out that East Lothian has the greatest density of employment in the life science sector of any local authority area. In Scotland, some 3.2 per cent of total employment in this sector, so I have a particular local interest in that. We should not fool ourselves. The competition in growing this industry is huge. I remember as many as 17 years ago when I was enterprise minister on a visit to Sweden going to Uppsala and finding there a university, an ancient university, 15th century university, the oldest in Scandinavia, with a strong history also in the life sciences. Carl Linnaeus, for example, was a professor there when he did his work. What took me aback was finding that in Uppsala, the whole city seemed to be not much more than an extension of the university and its attempt to build and grow a life science cluster, which included its own internationally renowned commercialisation model. It was clear to me then that there are many places in the world that are competing for the laurels in life sciences that we hope to achieve here in Scotland. That is not something that is going to happen by accident, as happened to Alexander Fleming when he discovered penicillin. It is something that will require a concerted effort. The strategy is necessary and welcome, as is the leadership of the industry leadership group. Our effort has to be even stronger, even more national, if we are to achieve that leading role internationally that we crave. Not so long ago, at a life science sector conference, Pete Downs, the recently retired principal of Dundee University—a key player in academia in life sciences, said this. One third of business enterprise research and development spending in Scotland is in life sciences, but the biggest threat to its continuing growth is parochialism, driven by internal competition for limited resources. To remain competitive, the sector must operate as a Scotland-wide cluster with the confidence to build relationships nationally. Indeed, Dave Tudor, co-chair of the industry leadership group, in the same conference, gave the current level of collaboration across the Scottish life science community only five marks out of ten. Richard Leonard is right to argue for a more planned and strategic approach, broadening the strategic leadership of our approach to life sciences in order to achieve the growth that we all want to see. That means having the right investment pipeline. The minister talked about touch by onyx. Back in those days, when I was enterprise minister, I was the minister who awarded touch by onyx a smart funding award way back in 2002, and they have gone from strength to strength. However, they are now owned by Ucer, an Icelandic company, which says to me that perhaps the pipeline for supporting companies as they grow may need some work. It also means having the right people at every level and at every discipline. Key skills in the life science sector as it grows are cutting-edge lab techniques, and data handling and artificial intelligence. Both of those have been mentioned in speeches today. We have to be sure that we have the people with those skills coming through in order to see this sector grow. That means going right back into our schools and ensuring that enough young people are pursuing studies and careers in STEM. We have real problems there. We have not just a fall in the number of science teachers but also science technicians who are so necessary for the practical science that leads to those lab techniques. In recent years, we have seen a 25 per cent drop in computer science teachers, exactly the teachers who need to be teaching those young people for the sectors of big data and artificial intelligence. However, if we are to pool Scotland together around a national goal or challenge to build this sector and to be a world-leading nation in life sciences, I would argue that perhaps we should think about a different kind of focus, something that seizes the imagination rather more than the minister's seven per cent annualised growth for the strategy. We should be looking at something such as MS, a disease in which Scotland has a particular problem, and trying to commit ourselves over a reasonable period of time to support those who are finding a cure for that disease, or MND, another disease in which Scotland has some very significant research taking place. Let's try and ensure that the life science sector doesn't just grow but seizes the imagination and mobilise not just those involved in the sector but the whole of Scotland so that we look forward to innovations, the equivalent of penicillin or dolly the sheep, rather than always just looking back and being pleased about what we have done in the past. As we have already heard in the debate, Scotland has seen the highest number of life science start-ups per capita in the UK and the sector. It is estimated to employ in Scotland just under 40,000 people and it accounts for 55 per cent of total university funding, so there is a lot to celebrate. Investment in research and development shows that it is a key growth industry and has been identified by the Scottish Government quite rightly as part of its economic strategy and recognition of its high growth potential and capacity to boost productivity. Dundee is, of course, one of the leading locations for life sciences, with around 20 per cent of Scotland's life science companies based in and around the city. Employment in life science companies rose from 700 to 900 between 2009 and 2017 in Dundee city. An increase of 28.6 per cent compared to an increase at Scottish level for the same period of 22.3 per cent. Companies already based in the city are expanding their existing operations, which will have a positive knock-on effect for employment in the city for other businesses and industry. For example, the continued growth in Dundee in life sciences and, in addition to the opening of the VNA, the city has seen a resurgence in the hospitality industry with a wide variety of hospitality outlets opening. The city offers a wide range of expertise from all over the world over 60 countries, in fact, with international academics and leading life science companies working closely, turning research into drug discoveries and environmental biotechnology into commercial enterprises, advancing therapies and making precision medicines targeted to the individual patient. There are currently around 20 core life science enterprises with a similar number of supporting organisations and, of course, the internationally renowned University of Dundee, University of Abertau and close by the James Hutton Institute. The total turnover of life science enterprises in Dundee city rose from £62.7 million in 2008 to £94.6 million in 2017, an increase of 51 per cent compared with a Scottish-level increase of 15 per cent over the same period. The gross value added or the measure of the value of goods and services provided for life science enterprise in Dundee rose from £28.4 million in 2008 to £51.3 million in 2016, representing an increase of 81 per cent. However, the employment figures from the life science enterprise do not include the large input from institutions, including the universities of Dundee, Abertau or the James Hutton Institute, which, of course, employ a great number of scientists in the city. It is estimated that the academic and support staff and research student numbers at the University of Dundee alone has increased by an average of 5 per cent each year since 2001, and the university has confirmed that it currently has 685 substantive staff. One of their leading professors of life sciences, Professor Mike Ferguson, received a knighthood in the new year's honours list. Of course, Professor Ferguson is one of the UK's most eminent life scientists and helped to build the drug discovery unit in the university's school of life sciences, which has attracted over £75 million of investment. As the minister said earlier, the University of Dundee itself has world-class modern laboratory and technological facilities, and according to the QS World University rankings, in biological sciences, Dundee was placed in the top five in the UK and eighth in Europe in 2017. The State of Innovation report by Clarivate Analytics ranked Dundee as the most influential scientific research institution in the world for pharmaceuticals for the period 2006 to 2016. Dundee's continued success as one of the key locations in the life science industry is the close relationship between the city's universities, private companies and NHS Tayside. One example of the working relationship is, of course, the establishment of the academic health science partnership in Tayside between NHS Tayside and the University of Dundee. It acts as a single point of contact for collaborations, strategic partnerships and to identify support and develop new relationships, facilitate knowledge exchange and opportunities with both industry and major research funders. However, it is vital that, in order to maintain Dundee's position as one of the leading life science hubs, ensuring highly skilled, highly high-waged employment into the city is continued investment. I am delighted that, as part of the Tay City Steel, £25 million of investment to grow the Tayside biomedical cluster was announced late last year. That investment will help to maintain the continued success of Dundee and the surrounding areas as an attractive world-leading centre of excellence. I saw after biomedical location in the UK creating jobs and boosting the local economy. However, with less than two months remaining, the industry remains unclear exactly how Brexit will affect legal and regulatory requirements for the life science industry in the UK and Europe, and they are expressing huge concerns about that uncertainty. Dundee has proven itself as a leading hub for life sciences, but with deep concerns from researchers and industry leaders as to how Brexit will affect research collaborations, development and the ability of companies in the UK to continue working with their continental partners, the UK Government urgently needs to provide that much-needed clarity to the life science sector for Dundee's sake and Scotland's sake. That needs to happen now. Bill Bowman, followed by Maureen Watt. I welcome the opportunity to speak in this Scottish Government debate recognising the life sciences sector in Scotland. The life sciences sector can be defined as including human health, biology and biotechnology and animal health. Scotland's life sciences community is one of the largest in Europe. Scotland is home to over 700 companies specialising in life sciences and is a global centre of research and development in key sectors, including digital healthcare, animal bioscience, regenerative medicine, industrial biotechnology, medical technology and pharmaceutical science. Scotland's formidable legacy in life sciences includes, as we have already heard, Sir Alexander Fleming's discovery of penicill in the location mentioned by Ian Gray. Ian Donald was utilisation of ultrasound for obstetrics and the Ruslan Institute's cloning of Dolly the Sheep, the world's first cloned mammal from an adult sheep cell. The latest sector figures that I had show that the sector employs over 37,000 people across some 700 organisations, which add about £2.4 billion to the Scottish economy. Scotland is already a leading global life sciences cluster, and in the past few years Scotland has seen many positive developments. Scotland also has the highest number of life science startups per capita in the UK, while life sciences account for about 55 per cent of total Scottish university research funding. We also have the largest concentration of animal health and agriculture researchers in Europe. In the UK, Scotland is second only to London in terms of life sciences companies receiving venture finance. The new 2017 Life Sciences Strategy for Scotland 2025 vision aims to grow the industrial turnover of life sciences sector to about £8 billion, while also making Scotland the location of choice for the life sciences community. The strategy themes of this vision are innovation, commercialisation, sustainable production, internationalisation and business environment. Life sciences is a key sector to the Scottish economy, and we are one of the largest and fastest growing life sciences communities in Europe. The sector is particularly important to the region that I represent, the north-east of Scotland, as it accounts for a large part of the north-east Scotland's economy, with more than 2,500 people employed within its companies and research base. The region accounts for more than one-fifth of employment in Scottish life sciences research and development, and Aberdeen has one of the highest concentrations of life scientists in the UK outside of Cambridge. For example, Aberdeen's health campus is Europe's largest integrated medical research and teaching location and provides a collaborative environment for clinical, commercial and academic researchers. There are numerous examples of the north-east, and in particular Dundee being leading areas in life sciences. A key regulator of cell growth and survival called PKB protein kinase B is the focus of numerous anti-cancer drug clinical trials. The role of this protein and how it works was uncovered by researchers at Dundee University and has stimulated pharmaceutical companies to undertake drug development campaigns, focused on PKB as a target molecule. Moreover, this research led several life sciences companies to generate research tools to accelerate academic and industry research in this area. Another success in the life sciences sector originating from Dundee University was the pioneer automated drug design methodologies developed by researchers at the university, which led to the spin-out of Ex-Scientia Ltd, a leading British drugs design company in 2012. The company provides technologies to enhance the efficacy and efficiency of drug discovery for the pharmaceutical industry using artificial intelligence. As the life science sector continues to grow, the role of leadership within it has come increasingly to the fore. Research has isolated five critical leadership areas that they believe will be the battleground of the corporate life science future. One of those adaptive mindsets can be shown through the University of Dundee's collaboration with the Boringer Ingelheim organisation, a global research-driven pharmaceutical company, to provide free access of protac compounds used to fight disease cells on public markets. I believe that the Scottish Government recognises the important role that life sciences sector plays in improving Scotland's economic performance and its potential for growth. However, there is more that can be done. The only way to grow the life science industry in Scotland is to create a business-friendly environment that will attract both talent and inward investment. I would encourage closer ties between the bioscience industry and Scotland's universities to provide the necessary skills-base in business and science for the sector to continue to prosper, which is duly supported by the Scottish Government. The last of the open debate contributions is from Morine Watt. I am pleased to be taking part in this debate today on such an important part of the Scottish economy. I recall as a Government minister in 2007 that there was much debate about how Scottish Enterprise was going to concentrate its efforts on particular sectors of the economy to help growth in the economy overall. There was some criticism of that, but we have seen the benefits despite the severe impacts of the banking crisis, the UK now in its second decade of austerity, an economic choice by the Westminster Government, and more recently the next choice of the shambolic Westminster Government of Brexit, the choices made back then whereby the Scottish Government was correct. It is to the SNP Government's credit that the Scottish economy is performing so well in the face of such adverse events. We should never forget the significance of that, since I have been alarmed wrong enough to remember that, when there have been recessions in the past, Scotland has ended up being very badly hit, as it used to say when England gets a cold, Scotland gets the flu. Those opponents of devolution and further devolution of powers would be well to remember that. Amongst all those external economic shocks to the Scottish economy, there has also been the most recent downturn in the oil and gas industry, which has probably been longer and deeper than any previous ones. That has led to leaders in the north-east across business, local councils, higher and further education and the health sectors, to come together to see what can be done to encourage growth in other sectors, such as food and drink and life sciences, and the opportunity that the north-east was set up. The north-east has always had a very big footprint in the life sciences sector through the Raut Institute and the James Hutton Institute, which used to be the Macaulay, and its importance in many fields is well documented. In order to build on that, on 21 November last year, the biotherapeutics hub for innovation was launched in Aberdeen, specifically to drive health innovation and life sciences company growth. It is a £40 million project that is set to deliver an innovation hub to double the number of life sciences companies in the north-east of Scotland and support the national ambitions of the sector to collaborate, innovate and commercialise the next generation of therapies and healthcare solutions. The hub will be a focal point for the sector's ambition of growth, and £20 million of capital funding is already secured through the Aberdeen city deal. Opportunity north-east itself has committed an additional £3.6 million over seven years to operate the hub and deliver the bespoke support activity that is designed to create one of the most dynamic environments and to create and grow life sciences businesses. It will, hopefully, brexit permitting be a catalyst for international collaboration and investment. It will be located on the Forrester Hill health campus, a 69,000-square-foot new-build facility that will include accommodation for spin-outs, start-ups and established businesses, collaboration space and shared facilities for events, small conferences and networking. Sector-specific support programmes in the hub will include incubation, acceleration, mentoring, commercialisation and growth planning. Of course, the Forrester Hill campus is already one of, as Bill Bowman said, Europe's largest integrated clinical research, teaching and commercial health sites. The project, with a delivery date of 2020, will only add to its importance and influence of that campus, making sure that the targets that the minister has already mentioned are met. I am grateful to Sir Ian Wood, chair of Opportunity north-east, for his role in this and also to Professor Stephen Logan, as chair of the One Life Sciences Sector Board, who has driven this. His has, of course, just completed his term as chair of NHS Grampian recently, and we should thank him for all that he did in that role. In fact, I am very grateful for what he did in that role. Of the hub, he says that it will realise the opportunity to collaborate and innovate to bring forward the next generation of medical therapies and products. Our target is to double the size of the company base by 2027. That is a transformational project of national significance that supports the regional economic role of diversification and will contribute to the national ambitions of life sciences as a driver of health and wealth. His words are not mine. The principal and vice-chancellor of Aberdeen University, Professor Boyne, in welcoming the launch of the hub, said that bringing academics, clinicians and industry together on to one site on the Forrester Hill health campus is good news for patients and it will speed up the transition of research from bench to bedside and improve the diagnosis, management and treatment of disease. Of course, Aberdeen University already has an excellent track record of producing pioneering spin-outs tackling serious health concerns that include antibiotic resistance, autoimmune disease and gut health and Alzheimer's disease. Indeed, in December, the Rout announced a new Aberdeen-led study to look at the gut health of people with Alzheimer's to see if diet can play a role in managing the behavioural and psychological systems of the disease. There is increasing evidence that the gut microbiotica has a key link between specific nutrients and brain function. The study will recruit participants from local care homes and, if successful, the study could act as the first step towards establishing a link between diet and behaviour and possibly lead to future research, looking at teasing out the complex relationship between diet, gut, microbiotica and challenging behaviour and Alzheimer's disease. As the minister said with an ageing population, that is precisely what our life sciences sector can be doing to grow. While I was enjoying the first part of Ian Gray's speech, he cannot be helping a glass half-empty guy. At the last member's debate on MND research, Kezia Dugdale was praising the research of MND in Scotland and she said, if I can remember correctly— Can I excuse both of you? We are way over time here, so if you could come to conclusions— Okay, can I just—for Ian Gray's benefit, she said that if our cure was to be found, it would be either in Scotland, Australia or Israel. I think that this has been a very useful debate in highlighting what is growing on in Scotland's life sciences sector. We now move to the closing speeches. I am glad to see that everyone is back in the chamber, courtesy of Mrs Watt being allowed to talk on for a while. I call Rhoda Grant for around six minutes, please. I think that this debate highlights the potential of the life sciences sector. Scotland is a world leader, and as Richard Leonard said, we visited the Roslyn Institute this morning. They are world leaders in agriculture, aquaculture and animal health. Not only are they world leaders in this, but they also spend time inspiring young people and encouraging businesses to grow around their area of expertise. Ian Gray spoke about the contribution life sciences that make to the Scottish economy £5.2 billion and that 40,000 people employed. Imagine that, with the right strategy, we could grow that by bringing research and development to market by Scottish companies. Something that we need to do more to encourage and to create the conditions for that to happen. It will not happen by accident. We need a strategy to do that. To grow the sector, we need to start by inspiring a new generation of scientists, removing the barriers that told them back. Ruth Maguire talked about having different routes into the sector from college as well as from schools. We need to encourage more girls into STEM subjects. Some years ago, I first visited the Roslyn Institute when they were being awarded the Athena Swan award, recognising their commitment to women's career development. Something that came across very strongly again this morning. We also saw this morning their commitment to young people. They had well-equipped labs for schools to come in, not only Scottish schools but schools throughout Europe and the rest of the world, when the interest of young people in STEM subjects. Dean Lockhart and Ian Gray also mentioned one of the issues with regard to encouraging young people into STEM subjects. That was the lack of science teachers or teachers within STEM subjects. You cannot have young people enthused if there are not the teachers in place to do that. We need science teachers, we need lab technicians and we also need computer science teachers, things that were mentioned in the debate if we are to encourage young people to get involved. We also need a strategy. Richard Leonard said in his speech that Scottish Labour would set up strategic sectoral forums covering strategically important sectors. That, of course, would include life sciences. That would bring together employers, Government, the public sector, trade unions and indeed other stakeholders. They could work together to improve the productivity within the area, making sure that we invest, we are competitive and we have the skills to deliver the industry. That would also feed into an industrial strategy that recognises the worth of life sciences to the Scottish economy and brings those developments to market, keeping that benefit within Scotland. Ian Gray talked about collaboration and that not working properly within Scotland. I think that that would be a job for those strategic sectoral forums or indeed life sciences Scotland. Surely they have a role in bringing together what is good in Scotland and making sure that they work together. Our amendment to the motion talks about trade union involvement. The people who staff the life sciences industries and businesses need to be involved in driving that forward, because they have the knowledge to do that. Richard Leonard made the point that some of those businesses do not have a good record in trade union recognition. That is something that we need to change. We need to make sure that public funding, both for research and development and for contracts, needs to address that. We need to drive up standards and trade union involvement using those tools that are at our disposal. Jonah Robeson spoke about NHS Tayside and its work with Dundee University. If I could just mention one part of this, a constituent of mine has been campaigning for magnetic resonance guided focused ultrasing, something that both those organisations are working together to try and bring to Scotland. I have been in contact with the Scottish Government, and I hope that the minister maybe looks at this again, because they seem unable to help. I think that that would be a huge step forward for Scotland, because the only place that is available at the moment is in London. I think that it is important that we bring this technology to Scotland. We have to work with other parts of the UK, as Stephen Lockhart said. It is clear that funding and collaboration UK-wide is very important in the sector, but we also have to make sure that we do not fall behind as well. We need to continue to work together to be a world leader in life sciences. Indeed, when we spoke with the Roslyn Institute this morning, they talked about a lot of their funding coming from the Biotechnical and Biological Science Research Council, which is a UK-wide organisation, and they work very closely with them. Indeed, they work very closely with other institutes throughout the UK, and they see that partnership as incredibly important to their future. Ian Gray talked about research and investment, and how we should be looking for the cures for things such as MS and MND. I sincerely hope that that is something that we will continue to aspire to do. Life sciences is an important part of our economy, and we need to make sure that we develop the sector. We also need to make sure that we capitalise on the research and development and make sure that Scottish companies are at the forefront of bringing this innovation to market. If we had an industrial strategy and if the Scottish Government were to develop such a strategy, surely life sciences would be at the very heart of that, allowing those opportunities and that growth to happen within our industry. Graham Simpson, for around seven minutes, please. Thanks very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. It has been an interesting debate. The life sciences sector is important to Scotland and the rest of the UK, and that has been demonstrated this afternoon. I want to close for the Conservatives by saying a bit about my own interests in the sector, highlighting some of the contributions in the debate and finally asking some questions of the Government. The life sciences sector is an important contributor to Scotland's economy, as we have heard. It provides more than 37,000 jobs across more than 700 life sciences organisations. That sentence comes from the Government's own life sciences strategy, and it is good that there is one. My own interests in the sector are personal. One of my daughters gained a master's degree in biochemistry at Glasgow and is now doing a PhD at Cambridge, which is specifically a project to do with Parkinson's disease. Do not intervene on me here, because that is as much as I know or understand about it. Despite my scientific shortcomings, I am somehow the vice convener of Parliament's CPG on life sciences. We have met through that group some fascinating people doing amazing work, and I have seen first-hand the impact that the sector has on our job market and the economy. We have a lot to be proud of in our life sciences sector. In my region, in central Scotland, we have the Scottish University's Environmental Research Centre in East Kilbride—you will know it well, Presiding Officer—which used to house a nuclear reactor. There is some great work going on there in conjunction with our higher education sector, but it is largely unsung, not known about. There is the hub of research and innovation at Biocity in North Lanarkshire, funded through City Deal. One of the stand-out small companies based there is Coontech, and I find this company really exciting. Through their research, passion and dedication to creating food packaging from marine life byproducts, shells, I hope that we will see their compostable food packaging in supermarkets soon. Not only could this product reduce plastic waste, but it can also increase the shelf life of fresh food and reduce food waste. It is really positive. Coontech is headed by Dr Kate Murray-Green. I mention that because one of the biggest mountains that the sector needs to climb is attracting more female talent. We need to inspire females at a young age and show them that, much like politics, science is not the male-dominated sector that it used to be and should not be. Dr Barbara Blaney at Biocity works hard to bring local schools into the site. Seeing important and successful scientists in this environment will, I hope, work to encourage the growth of female graduates. We also need to attract talent from children from disadvantaged backgrounds. The group is underrepresented in the sector. Iain Gray. Perhaps the member will give me the opportunity to correct Maureen Watt's misunderstanding of the point that I made at the end of my speech. What we should be doing is articulating the potential for things such as finding a cure for MS or MND, work that is already on-going rather than simply talking about economic growth, exactly to inspire those young women who we need to see enter this industry. Graham Simpson. I have to say to Mr Gray that I found his earlier contribution quite upbeat. One way to support some aspiring young scientists would be to increase life sciences apprenticeships. On a recent visit to New College Lanarkshire, I was told that there are only 62 life sciences apprentices across the whole of Scotland—62. That is clearly not good enough. Apprenticeships are a fantastic way to train up the next generation of scientists. We need to build on current networks between academia and industry to increase this number. One of my questions to the Government is what can be done about this. If the minister does not have an answer today, I urge him not to make one up but to go away and think it through. There have been some excellent contributions to the debate today. Let me just fly through them. Dean Lockhart spoke about the need for UK collaboration. He also mentioned the skills gap. Richard Leonard spoke of a need for a trade deal with the EU and called for more joint working. Willie Rennie mentioned somebody called Bob, who was a board of Brexit, and then banged on about Brexit. Ruth Maguire spoke about the jobs in her constituency and mentioned a smart house that she had visited. I have also got a smart house in East Kilbride at South Lanarkshire College. Gordon Lindhurst spoke about Governments working together. Kenny Gibson, who used to work in the sector, spoke about the work of the CPEG that I mentioned and also skills in getting women into science, which I have already touched on. The upbeat Ian Gray spoke about international competition and the lack of science teachers. Shona Robison and Bill Bowman both mentioned the life sciences sector in Dundee, which is doing really well. Maureen Watt appeared to forget which debate she was in before she did get on to life sciences and talked about the northeast. So why is the sector so successful? We have got over 700 companies operating here and the highest number of life sciences start-ups per capita in the UK. Those companies support over 37,000 jobs in the sector. I am going to stick to time, Presiding Officer, because I know that you like that, so I will chop a whole bit out. I did take an intervention from Mr Gray. The life sciences strategy sets an ambition to grow the sector by 7 per cent per year to reach turnover of £8 billion by 2025. Is that ambitious enough? Forecasts annual increases of 6 per cent in R&D spending by the pharmaceutical industry on its own could meet that target. That is a question for the Government. It costs staggering sums to bring a new medicine to market, but medicines keep people out of hospital. Is the Government serious about NHS Scotland being a partner in delivering that strategy? Where can we scrutinise the figures that illustrate the life sciences target is on target? Do NHS boards still have a network of innovation champions? What metrics are being used to allow the NHS to demonstrate its working? I apologise for going over time, Presiding Officer, and I will sit down. Apologies are always welcome. Ivan McKee, to close the debate. Around nine minutes we will see as nicely to decision time, please, minister. Thank you, Presiding Officer. It has been a very informative, interesting and at times entertaining debate. Apologies in advance if I do not touch on everyone's contribution. There was quite a number of areas to touch on. I will try to focus on the most critical. First, I want to clear up some issues about the Scottish Government's attitude to the UK Government and its co-operation in the sector. It is clear to say in further echo that we are very keen to work with the UK Government on securing funding. The industry leadership group recognises the huge value of the funding that is available in this strategy. I continue to advise organisations to put together collaborations and apply for money. We have clearly been successful in terms of the money that has come forward for the MMIC, significant money into James Hutton, and I care that I mentioned it earlier. There are many others. I have met Ian Campbellhead of Innovate UK on two separate occasions in my brief six months in office. On both those occasions, the conversation centre is large around the life science sector and what Scotland could get from UK Government opportunities in that sector. On first name terms, my UK Government counterpart Lord Henley, Oliver, and we have met several times to talk about co-operation. Oliver was the most recent ILG meeting that was held here. We do that not least because it is our money. Scotland pays our taxes and goes to Westminster, and the UK Government uses that money to fund all manner of things, including the industrial strategy. It is only right and fair that we should get our fair share of that, and we continue to push that. Graham Simpson I am encouraged to hear that. I wonder whether the minister and his friend Oliver might like to come along together to the CPG on life sciences at some point. Ivan McKee Oliver, you need to ask Oliver that question, but there is one important point here. I have written to the UK Government twice now to ask for Scottish representation on both the UK Life Sciences Council and the Life Sciences Industrial Strategy Implementation Board. That has not happened yet, so if the member is able to add some weight to that appeal, that would be hugely beneficial and I appreciate them doing that. I turn to the contribution from the Labour bench. That is the strategy, and I will keep talking about what we need a strategy. We have a strategy. I think that constructive comments on what else could be in the strategy would be very welcome, but I will continue to par it. We need a strategy when there is one line in front of us that is not essentially very helpful. The key point about the strategy and the two things that Richard Leonard said were wrong with it was that it did not include the trade unions, and I take that point on board. I shall take up that as an action going forward. I had a picture of Dave Tudor in it, and I am sure that Dave's left dialogy to do something else, so he can take his picture out. I do not know if that will make you happy. Then you can sign up to the strategy that has been developed. The bottom-up by the sector, which is far more effective than the Government sitting in an ivory tower and pushing something down on to the sector. That is why it works. That is why it is robust, and that is why it is delivering results. Richard Leonard. I am not calling for the displacement of industry. I am calling for a broader approach, which includes the trade unions, but which is Government-led. In the end, individual companies will represent individual company interests. There needs to be a broader view led by Government. I think that he misunderstands the purpose of ILG. It is led by a huge role to play in that agencies are all there, and it works in collaboration with industry, because industry has, across all sectors, at the parts of the sector, including small companies, big companies and if he is here at one of the meetings, he would understand the way that that collaboration works very, very strongly, including the NHS, universities and many other very relevant stakeholders. Moving on, some very interesting points from Graham Simpson. Gender balance, I take on board, and that is something that we continue to push for. Apprenticeships, I shall go and investigate that. I will be very surprised by that number, given the tens of thousands of apprenticeships that the Government is supporting. However, I shall go and look at that and get back to you. In regard to the NHS, that is something that I have commented on and will comment on again, because I think that that relationship is absolutely key and central to driving the sector forward. Iain Gray's contribution is extremely thoughtful and helpful. I recognise that there are cities out there that I visited recently, and I visited others, where life sciences is very core to what they are doing. We should learn from them, watch them and do our very best. It is great to hear Pete Downs talking about collaboration universities, because of their nature. It can often be more competitive than collaborative, but Pete, from my conversations with him and with yourself, clearly understands, as do many others, that universities working together with other stakeholders is the way forward. In terms of the start-ups, there have been 170 start-ups in the sector over the six-year period of 2015. On top of that, there are 60 university spin-outs, so we are continuing to fill the pipeline. Perhaps we can do better, but we are continuing to push that with some results. Iain Gray is making more that the pipeline has to support medium-sized companies as they grow big, as an alternative to selling out to overseas investors. There is always a balance between bringing in foreign direct investment, which is usually critical to the economy, and growing the businesses as fast as we can through other investment. It is available, but I take the point on board. Moving on to the points that Willie Rennie made, which are hugely important. I said that I would come back to Brexit and to communicate the sector's concerns about impending developments around Brexit. Although businesses across many sectors are concerned about the damage that Brexit will do, the life science sector stands to be particularly impacted. As well as exacerbating skill shortages, disrupting complex international supply chains, the risk of relative divergences is a particular concern to the life science sector. The close relationship between the sector and academia means that the risk to research funds, to co-operation and free-flow of academic talent will also significantly harm the sector. Life sciences businesses, I can tell you, never miss an opportunity to remind me of the damage that Brexit will do to their ability to trade. Yesterday, I met Merck and he expressed concerns about the risk to their supply chain going forward. On my visit to canon medical this morning, I found out that more than 30 per cent of the firm's employees working on artificial intelligence are EU nationals. They are highly skilled, highly mobile and critical to the business success in Scotland, but they are hugely concerned about their future. In the opening, I highlighted the long history that Scotland has in life sciences, our long-standing and on-going global academic excellence in medical research and technology, the breadth and range of our life science businesses and the ambitious plans that the sector has for growth in turnover and in exports going forward. In November, I had the privilege of speaking in the largest ever Scottish life science conference in Scotland, a community of hundreds of companies, academics and NHS representatives got together to consider the future of the sector and celebrate what has been achieved through the development of a strong life science community in Scotland. Life science is one of the many sectors where Scotland demonstrates true global excellence and the potential to continue to excel. The challenges facing the sector that I have covered, those in our control, including skills and investment, have detailed the work that this Government is doing to support the sector, and those like the mistake that is Brexit where we have to do our best to mitigate the misguided policies of others. I have made clear our determination, working with my colleagues, the cabinet secretary and minister for health, to ensure that the contribution that our Scottish NHS can play to develop the sector is maximised, taking all due care and attention, to ensure that patient care is paramount and data protection is sacrosanct. The two-way street that enables our NHS to access the best technology and innovations to apply them to the benefit of patients, driving up safely and driving down waiting times and cost. The ability of the sector to take the best innovations of our clinicians and other health service workers and to commercialise and apply them globally, benefiting Scotland's economy and jobs, our public sector finances and patients, not just in Scotland, roundabout the world. Because the life science sector is more than just another industrial sector in Scotland's range of world-class industries, the work that businesses do is truly life saving, literally saving lives through innovation, healthier and wealthier. That is what makes it such a key part of Scotland's economic strategy. We are proud to be standing on the shoulders of giants, lister, flaming and, of course, dolly the sheep. I am proud to be working with an excellent team in the industry leadership group and across the wider sector. I shall continue to work with them to drive forward plans to grow the sector, to maximise its potential, to contribute to Scotland's economy and wider society. That concludes our debate on recognising the life sciences sector. The next item is consideration of business motion 15280, in the name of Graham Day, on behalf of the bureau, setting out a business programme. I call on Graham Day to move the motion. Thank you very much. No one wishes to speak against the motion. Therefore, the question is that motion 15280 be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. Thank you. We turn now to decision time. The first question today is that amendment 15261.1, in the name of Dean Lockhart, which seeks to amend motion 15261, in the name of Ivan McKee, on recognising the life sciences sector in Scotland, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are not agreed. We will move to our division. Members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on amendment 15261.1, in the name of Dean Lockhart, is yes, 29, no, 92. There were no abstentions and the motion is therefore not agreed. The next question is that amendment 15261.2, in the name of Richard Leonard, who seeks to amend the motion in the name of Ivan McKee, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. The final question is that motion 15261, in the name of Ivan McKee, as amended, on recognising the life sciences sector in Scotland, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. That concludes decision time. We will move now to members' business, in the name of Gordon MacDonald, on the Rotary Club of Curly Valerio Recycling PCs. We will just take a few moments for members to change seats.