The next item of business is a statement by Derek Mackay on the medium-term financial strategy. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement, so if anybody would like to ask a question, I would encourage you to press your request-to-sweet button now. I call on Derek Mackay. I am very pleased to set out the Scottish Government's first medium-term strategy. This budget marks the first step of the new budget process proposed by the Budget Process Review Group and agreed by the Parliament. It is also an important step in the development of the fiscal responsibility of both government and Parliament following the 2016 Scotland Act. We must remember that Scotland's public finances are set in the context of continuing UK Government austerity, Brexit uncertainty and an inhumane, hostile approach to immigration, all of which present unnecessary risks to our economy and our tax base. Despite increased powers over taxation, the block grant remains our single biggest source of funding and it continues to be cut. Between 2010-11 and 2019-20, our discretionary block grant for day-to-day spending is falling by £2.6 billion or 9 per cent in real terms. In 2019-20 alone, we expect real-terms cuts of £410 million. Let me be clear that the UK Government does not need to pursue this course. Austerity is a choice and it is one based on ideology, not on economic necessity. The chancellor is on course to overachieve his own fiscal deficit target, so the OBR confirmed in its economic and fiscal outlook in March 2018 that the chancellor has around £15 billion of fiscal headroom in 2020-21 alone. Rather than continuing his programme of cuts to public spending and tax cuts for the wealthiest, he should, as a minimum, invest the headroom available in vital public services and economic stimulus. In 2020-23, Scottish Government modelling suggests that the chancellor could provide additional investment in Scotland of around £5 billion, while still meeting his own UK Government targets on structural deficit and debt reduction. UK austerity is a choice and it is not one that Scotland has made. I continue to make the case to the chancellor. He should change course, end austerity and invest properly in public services. Leaving the EU is not in Scotland's interests either. It is also not Scotland's will. Uncertainty is currently leading to subdued growth and leaving the EU compounds that impact. The UK Government's proposed approach and immigration could see real GDP in Scotland 9.3 per cent lower by 2040, reducing tax revenues and threatening public services. In the face of the damaging role that the UK Government is playing in Scotland's economy, that strategy sets out alternatives and how the Scottish Government will deliver our ambitious programmes. The UK Government still has time to rethink its approach and austerity on Brexit and on migration. Indeed, it appears that this is a weak for Tory reflections. That strategy clearly lays out the consequences of UK choices imposed on Scotland and how alternatives would mean a fairer deal for Scotland. Against the backdrop of UK austerity and uncertainty, our decisions have sought to ensure that we manage our finances responsibly and provide people and businesses with certainty, including through our actions on taxation. Our approach to taxation is founded on the four key principles of certainty, convenience, efficiency and proportionality. Those principles have shaped our reforms to income tax and LBTT, which, taken together, will boost our spending power by almost £500 million a year by 2022-23. Our policy ensures value for money, for our taxpayers and certainty for our vital public services during the turbulent and uncertain times ahead. The Scottish Government will always be ambitious for Scotland no matter what is happening elsewhere, growing and supporting the economy is essential for financial stability and essential to providing the resources for our public services. Over the lifetime of this Parliament, we will invest more than £20 billion in infrastructure. The Scottish capital budget for 2018-19 is estimated to support around 40,000 jobs. We will bring superfast broadband to every home and business across Scotland by 2021 through the R100 programme. We will invest £1 billion to support city region deals for Glasgow, Aberdeen, Inverness, Edinburgh and the south-east of Scotland. Today, we have secured new deals for Stirling and Clackmannanshire, and we continue to work on the Tays cities deals, as well as other growth deals. The low-carbon infrastructure transition programme will fund large-scale projects to deliver Scotland's energy strategy. In this year, the economy jobs and fair work budget increased by £270 million, a 64 per cent increase, forming part of our total investment of over £2.4 billion in our enterprise and skills bodies. We are committed to making Scotland a great place to do business, providing the most attractive package of non-domestic rates in the UK, including measures specifically designed to boost investment and support sustainable economic growth, such as the growth accelerator. Alongside our economic focus, is our support for the social contract. We will invest in our treasured NHS by adding £2 billion to the health resource budget over the course of this Parliament. We will protect local communities by maintaining the police resource budget in real terms each year, and we will ensure the best start in life through a transformative expansion of early learning and childcare, nearly doubling funded provision to 1,140 hours per year. We will tackle the attainment gap with £3.25 billion through the attainment Scotland fund. We will ensure that education is based on the ability to learn and not the ability to pay, maintaining free tuition for university students. We will deliver dignity and respect for all by shaping and funding a distinctly social security system in Scotland. Those commitments are at the heart of our social contract and at the heart of meeting the outcomes in the new performance framework. Our strategy sets out funding estimates needed to meet those commitments over the next five years. Today, the Scottish Fiscal Commission will publish new economic and fiscal forecasts, which suggest that economic growth will be lower in Scotland than in the UK over the next five years. However, when the effects of population growth are stripped out, Scottish growth is much closer to UK growth. That underlines the importance of this Parliament having greater control over immigration. The SFC has also produced updated tax forecasts, which show a more subdued outlook on income tax revenues, largely due to its assessment of recent wage growth and its conclusion that earnings will grow more slowly in the years ahead than they thought in December. As they describe it, that is their main evolution and judgment since their last forecast. The SFC also confirms that the costing of an income tax policy, which remains largely unchanged since the budget bill, is expected to raise more than £210 million in 2018-19. Our strategy shows that income tax is projected to contribute over £400 million a year in net additional revenues by 2022-23. Those forecasts are used in our strategy to create a central scenario of potential available funding and then go on to set out potential upper and lower scenarios based on that central estimate. That provides an indication of what funding might be available to the Scottish Government. By its nature, those scenarios and the forecast that underpin them contain a degree of uncertainty as new data becomes available, they are very likely to change. I have already set out a significant degree of that uncertainty that comes from the lack of clarity over the path that the UK Government intends to take on both austerity and on Brexit. When we set the 2019-20 budget, we will have a further set of economic and fiscal forecasts from the Scottish Fiscal Commission, updated block grant adjustments from the UK Government and the outcome of the UK autumn budget, all providing a more robust set of information on which we will make our budget decisions. Similarly, we do not currently have any resource budget allocation from the UK Government beyond 2019-20, and it is hoped that the UK spending review next year will offer sufficient future year budget information to allow the Scottish Government to develop multi-year budget allocations. The medium-term financial strategy does not provide detailed budget allocations at this stage. That will form part of our annual budget process, but on any scenario we have to operate within the fiscal framework and the UK funding policies. I have set out in that strategy our responsible approach to financial planning and fiscal rules, which will allow us to invest in the economy and protect essential public services. I hope that that strategy informs our responsible debate on budget choices in Scotland, and I commend it to the chamber. We now have around 20 minutes for questions, and we start with Murdoff Fraser to be followed by James Kelly. Murdoff Fraser. I thank the finance secretary for the advance sight of his statement and welcome his new initiative of the Scottish Government setting out its future plans for the public finances for parliamentary scrutiny. I also welcome the unexpected but very generous recognition by the finance secretary of the success of the chancellor of the Exchequer and the UK Government's policies in delivering more progress and deficit reduction than was previously predicted. It truly shows that the UK Government is in safe hands. Now, Presiding Officer, the contrast between the UK Government's progress and the dismal performance of the Scottish economy relative to the rest of the UK after 11 years of this Government could not be more stark. Last year our economy grew at half the rate of the rest of the UK and slower than every single EU country. We heard last week from the Scottish Government's officials that for the four quarters of 2017, the Scottish economy met the criteria for a Scotland-specific economic shock due to our underperformance relative to the rest of the United Kingdom. Today, the Scottish Fiscal Commission predicts that economic growth in Scotland will be lower than the UK average over each of the next five years. Despite all its protestations, the finance secretary cannot blame this on Brexit. It has not even happened yet. Those problems predate even the Brexit referendum vote. Let me ask two questions of the finance secretary. The Fiscal Commission has predicted a more subdued outlook on income tax revenues than it forecasted previously. What will the impact of that be on the block grant adjustment in each of the next five years? What does that mean for overall spending over this period, and what will the impact be on public services? Secondly, in rejecting austerity, as he says, will the finance secretary now reject the super austerity in Andrew Wilson's growth commission, which would cut public spending in Scotland by £27 billion over the next 10 years? On a point of consensus, because we might as well try and begin with that at least, I think that it is a helpful evolution of the Parliament's processes to publish such a document. Of course, it will be subject to extensive scrutiny, I am sure, at the Finance and Constitution Committee in due course. There is a lot in what Murdo Fraser has said. First of all, I would not take it as any comfort that the chancellor has fiscal headroom when all it will expose is that the Tories will continue with austerity for its own sake, rather than having fiscal listening to be able to invest in the public services of the United Kingdom and Scotland. My analysis shows that they could meet his own targets but unlock £60 billion worth of investment across the whole of the UK, and that would benefit Scotland to the tune of £5 billion. Why on earth would not the Scottish Conservatives support such an injection into Scotland's economy? It will be a matter of choice if they do not take that path that I have proposed in this strategy document. Let us reflect on the positives and the strengths of the Scottish economy, record high employment, record low unemployment and the SFC forecast that that trend will absolutely continue. In terms of 2016 economic growth, it was disappointing at 0.2 per cent. 2017 was a stronger year at 0.8 per cent. Contrary to what the Conservatives said about my tax plans, the reasons behind the subdued forecast from the SFC is about population and productivity. Who controls that? The UK, right wing, Brexit mad, Tory Government, who is trying to keep me in a fiscal straight jacket so that I cannot deliver the kind of economic growth that Scotland would wish to see. You see, the Tories are in denial once again, but your ministers in UK Government have admitted quite clearly that they have a responsibility towards Scotland's economy. When asked by Drw Henry MP to the Secretary of State, referring to this nation in terms of economic growth, does he accept that he has responsibility for growth in the economies of all the nations of the UK? Greg Clark, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, says, I do indeed. It is funny that the Tories in the Scottish Parliament say that the UK Government has no role in the economy of Scotland. Fundamentally, we have a sound basis in which to grow our economy. In terms of the question around impact on the Scottish budget, of course, the figures that were used for the Scottish budget are locked in. The forward look will depend on the final forecast, coming from the OBR, coming from the SFC by law, before the budget is actually decided by the end of the year and into next year. Of course, there are issues around methodology as well. Crucially, the UK Government cannot walk away from the ABC of the Scottish budget. A, austerity, B, Brexit, C, caps on immigration—that is what is subduing the Scottish economy. Indeed, as well, the Tories say that it is not. Maybe they should read the Scottish Fiscal Commission report when they see it. It is clear that, when they strip out the population effect of the analysis, Scotland's growth is much closer to UK growth. We have proposed a budget that invests massively in the economy, all opposed by the Scottish Conservatives. The only thing that the Tories spoke about in the budget was tax cuts for the richest and taking £500 million out of the public services of Scotland. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the tax divergence is having any negative effect on the economy. In fact, it is lavering in new investment for the public services of Scotland in the fashion that we clearly set out. Clearly, the Tory memo has not quite got to Murdo Fraser yet on their current tax position in terms of tax cuts for the richest. The UK Government has a choice here. The Scottish Conservatives have a choice here. They also asked about the growth commission. I tell you that austerity is the price of the union, not Scottish independence. I have been asked if I have read the growth commission. I was on the growth commission. I helped contribute to the 354-page report, and it is abundantly clear that the Tories have not read it. Maybe the Labour Party might show some ignorance on that as well. The growth commission, if it was followed, would show real-terms growth for our public services as opposed to the cuts that have been imposed on Scotland by the Conservatives, which will continue if they choose not to follow the path that I have most reasonably suggested this afternoon. I appreciate that the minister wanted to lay out quite a lot of the detail that is argued there. There is quite a bit of room that is available this afternoon, but perhaps not that much room if we can make some progress through the questions. James Kelly, to be followed by Patrick Harvie. I thank the cabinet secretary for his advance copy of the first speech that he made this afternoon. Last week, we had the SNP cuts commission. Today, we have Derek Mackay's cuts forecast. The SNP continued to pile the agony and the pain on to Scotland's communities. The announcement today will give no comfort to patients waiting for hospital appointments, to parents where schools do not have enough teachers, to passengers stuck at railway stations waiting for trains that do not turn up. Those SNP plans are timid, contrasted with Labour's bold proposals that would invest in public services and grow the economy. When is he going to get off the fence and start taxing millionaires at a higher rate instead of hammering Scotland's communities? I apologise for going on at length. I just had so much to say. I could go on, but quite simply, if James Kelly wants more time, he will certainly have it before I appear before committee, the strategy sets out the fiscal plans for Scotland. Yes, it does set out the challenges that we face as well thanks to Tory austerity, but what it does is propose alternatives to that path. I would have thought that even the Labour Party could welcome unlocking billions of pounds for Scotland's public services. In relation to tax, the tax measures that I have deployed are intended to accrue more money for Scotland's public services, not the Labour reckless, incompetent alternative budget, which it would have meant less money for Scotland's public services. If you want to talk about the NHS education, police, fire, local government or any part of public expenditure in Scotland, read the document and read how we will put our commitments into action in the face of Tory adversity, but it does not need to be that way. That is the case that I am making as finance secretary. Patrick Harvie, to be followed by Willie Rennie. I am also grateful for the enormous copy of the documents. Nobody would expect this document, this five-year strategy, to lay out specific, precise commitments, budget line by budget line for each of those years. For many subject areas in broad brushstrokes, there is a range of scenarios set out for health, social security, police, higher education attainment and so on. No such scenarios are given for local government. I have read the document, as Mr Mackay asks James Kelly to do. I think that we have all read the document already. It does not set out those scenarios for what will happen to local government spending. Is that because local government is in line for deeper cuts to come over those five years? Will the Scottish Government give us a nice, big, long speech now about how we should be decentralising economic and fiscal power, giving councils the ability to make meaningful economic choices that are right for their own local circumstances? Local tax reform has to be part of that response. I think that it is important to say that, first of all, I have reached my threshold of long speeches. Quite simply, what the financial strategy is intended to do is to set out our commitments. All those commitments are clearly in the manifesto or have been developed over the course of our time in government since the last Scottish Parliament election. We could debate the investment in local government. The last two-year budgets are case in point, showing real-terms increases for local government in the current financial year. The forward outlook expresses the key priorities of the Scottish Government, the policy commitments that we have made. Of course, local government does feature within that. A simple answer to the question, does that in any way represent any prospect of severe cuts to local government? No, it does not, but what it sets out is how the proportion of the budget that is aligned to our key commitments expands over the course of the next few years. Clearly, we are trying to address the problem of austerity at source here, hence the direction of choices to the Conservative party. Yes, this Parliament will have choices to make, and I look forward to the budget discussions with all the political parties in the chamber. Yes, I am open to further discussion on local taxation, which is totally in line with everything that I have said before. Willie Rennie to be followed by Ivan McKee. I thank the minister for an advanced sight of his statement. Those forecasts are not just subdued, they are grim. The minister failed to answer the question from Murdo Fraser about the precise cost of the downgrade from the Scottish Fiscal Commission. What is that figure? Secondly, will the minister take advantage of the £600 million of emergency UK borrowing if the GDP figures on 24 June are as poor as last year? First of all, I think that it is very clear that we should all clarify that the forecast will not project us ever meeting the criteria over this period. On the forecast that is being released, we will not hit the criteria and we will not be in such a scenario, so that revenue support will not be available in terms of the GDP growth. On the number right now, the reason why I pointed out the complexity of the fiscal framework in the situation is that the point at which we determine the budget, of course later in the year, will be determined by the latest OBR forecasts, the SFC forecasts at that point in time, the block grant adjustment. I hear a Liberal Democrat member say, just give us a figure. He clearly does not understand the fiscal framework and the complexity of the situation. All matters that are taken into account will be taken into account as we approach the budget. The methodology will clearly be subject to scrutiny. The analysis that the SFC provides will be subject to scrutiny and all the drivers behind it. OBR will already have to revisit its figures, because the out-turn is already diverted from the forecast. I am expressing that we will do it in a prudent way, in accordance with the timescales in the fiscal framework, and I will return to the chamber in that regard. In terms of a reason to act, there are absolutely reasons to act on the economy of Scotland and make the necessary investments. In a list of interventions that we are making to grow our economy, and I hope that I have the support of the chamber in doing that, because, yes, that raises the prospect of difficult years ahead. If we do not grow the economy in the fashion that is required, that is why productivity, participation and population are all central to our strategy. We need the further levers to optimise our position in that regard. Ivan McKee to be followed by Adam Tronkins. The block grant remains the single biggest contributing factor to the Scottish budget, and that strategy shows that it will continue to be under severe pressure for years to come. The cabinet secretary has made it clear that UK austerity is a choice, not a necessity. How much more money would be available to the Scottish budget if the UK abandons its austerity obsession? Even keeping within the chancellor's own targets, I have been able to express in the strategy and the outlook that, if he used the fiscal headroom at his disposal right now, as a minimum, that would generate an extra £60 billion of additional investment over the five-year period to 2022-23 compared to current UK budget plans. What does that mean for Scotland? £5 billion of extra investment. The document goes much further than a range of other funding disputes that we have with UK Government, but that is a minimum, could be transformational in terms of the public services and investment in economic stimulation of Scotland. Adam Tronkins is followed by Ruth Maguire. Thank you for telling us. The fiscal commission today predicts a much more subdued outlook on income tax revenues than they forecast only three months ago, such that by 2022, according to the figures that the Government has just published, that will lead to a £400 million shortfall. Does that not rather underscore the cabinet secretary's folly in maxing out the Scottish Government's credit card in the first year that it was available to him? I have it from the party that says, in every other debate, raise less, because it has tax cuts for the rich, but spend more in every single debate. The current position of the Conservative party also now appears to be spend less on capital. It is true to say that I fully utilised the powers of the borrowing powers, but it is to help to invest in the infrastructure of our economy to build houses, to invest in digital to ensure that we can keep people in employment and prepare for the future in housing, transport and infrastructure on childcare on all of those things. That is the economic stimulus that comes hand in hand with capital investment. We will stay within our own fiscal rules in that regard, and we will borrow responsibly and we will use in a fair and prudent way the powers that we have at our disposal. Surely, even the Conservatives would support that approach. Ruth Maguire to be followed by Neil Bibby. Can I ask the cabinet secretary how much additional money will be raised as a result of his tax policies over the period of the medium-term financial strategy? If he agrees that we should continue to prioritise our health service rather than tax cuts for the rich? I agree with that proposition, and I think that I have a new convert in Ruth Davidson as well, if she believes what she is saying. Based on the central scenario that was presented in the medium-term financial strategy, Scottish Taxes will raise almost £2 billion more than the associated block grant adjustments over the MTFS period, which for clarity is 2016-17 to 2022-23. Neil Bibby, to be followed by Bruce Crawford. To improve public finances, we need to improve economic growth. The SNP's big idea is the growth commission. Mr Mackay said himself that he was a member of that commission for clarity. Does he agree with all the recommendations and full contents of the report? Of course, I am in a curious position. I have been chair of the party, finance secretary and on the growth commission. Let us just say that not only was I part of it, I have read it, which is more than I can say for most opposition members. The important point here is that ultimately the commission's trajectory shows that we could deliver real-terms growth for the public sector as well. The Gels figures right now are a reflection of the current constitutional arrangements, not what we could do with independence. Here is a wee secret. I support Scottish independence because I know what it could unlock for Scotland's economy, for our people and for our democracy. You know what? Short of having that, this Government will clearly do the best that we can with the tools at our disposal. However, what I have tried to outline clearly in the Scottish Fiscal Commission, a substantial and exhaustive evidence in that regard, will show how many of the barriers to our economic potential are actually in the hands of the UK Government that are totally undermining our economy through the ABC, austerity, Brexit and cap and migration. I think that it does lend weight to the argument that we should have independence, but no matter what, this Scottish Government, elected at the last election, will do the best that we can to protect Scotland, mitigate the impact of Westminster decisions and try to move Scotland forward. Bruce Crawford, to be followed by Alexander Burnett. I am pleased about today, because it marks the day of the agreement between the Finance and Constitution Committee and the production of a medium-term financial strategy, which is a good advance for Parliament. In the meantime, cabinet secretary, the medium-term financial strategy rightly outlines a range of scenarios for Scotland's finances, but does the cabinet secretary agree with me that we are far more likely to achieve the higher end of those forecasts if Scotland is not dragged out against her will of the European single market and customs union? What are his views on the impact on the economy of lower migration as a result of the European Union leaving the EU? I agree with all that. I have put in the range of scenarios, because I am quite sure that, if I had not Bruce Crawford, the committee would have asked me to put in a range of scenarios, but they are only those scenarios. They all tell a story about the choices that we have and the UK Government has as well. The negative impact that Brexit will have on Scotland's elite UK Government papers has indicated what we have been saying in terms of the impact, potentially, on Scotland's economy across a range of sectors. An interesting figure that has been vindicated is that, if we are outside the European single market or we are not secured free trade agreement, we could see Scotland's GDP around £12.7 billion lower by 2030 than it would be under continued EU membership. That is equivalent to a loss of £2,300 per head each year for every person in Scotland. Alexander Burnett, to be followed by John Mason. Can the cabinet secretary confirm that the move to operate business rates by CPI instead of RPI is permanent and not just for the 2018-2019 financial year? It is this Government in Scotland that has delivered that change and the Tories voted against it when they did not support the budget when they presented it to the Scottish Parliament. I will approach each budget year to year if the Conservatives want to engage constructively with me in a budget, and that is a Tory ask, then I have some clarity. That is a wee bit more attractive to continue with the decision that I have made to move the poundage uplift from RPI to CPI. If that is an ask from the Conservatives, I thank them for that clarity. Each budget is taken year to year, but I certainly want to ensure that we continue to have the most competitive package of business rates anywhere in the United Kingdom. John Mason, to be followed by Jackie Baillie. The EU funding in various ways has made a significant contribution to the Scottish economy. Has the cabinet secretary had any guidance or confirmation from the UK Government about the future of the equivalent of EU funding, for example, for universities, for agriculture, for structural funds? It is very mixed and some of my colleagues are engaged in other discussions in relation to the future beyond Brexit and transition phase, but it is very little and it is still uncertain as the UK Government negotiates horrendously badly with the European Union. I do not have any long-term certainty, and that is a problem because it creates uncertainty for farmers, for educational institutions, for research, for other schemes that have benefited handsomly from EU-derived funding. If we are not careful here, if we do not get security over the package, the totality of resources to Scotland, we may well be witnessing daylight robbery by the Chancellor into Scotland's resources in terms of what we should be entitled to in terms of the flow-through of money coming back from the European Union. We need a bit more than a slogan on the side of a bus and something a bit more substantial on the forward look for the fiscal guarantees for Scotland in that regard. Jackie Baillie, to be followed by Stuart McMillan. Presiding Officer, the Scottish Fiscal Commission's updated forecasts I think make for very difficult reading. Subduding from tax revenues meaning cuts to public services and I know that the cabinet secretary was not keen to give us a figure, let me suggest that it is in the order of a cut of £1.6 billion. We also see GDP revised down overall and a poor performance extended to 2023, so a bad set of GDP figures revised to be even worse than they were before. It is clear that Scotland's economy faces a grim outlook and this Government's failure to grow the economy will hit our public services. So let me ask the cabinet secretary when will his government stop being complacent, drop the referendum chat and instead focus on growing our economy? I say again in relation to Jackie Baillie, austerity is the price of the union not independence. We are making a very clear case on why more powers enhance the economic and social prospects of the people of Scotland. However, let us move back a stage from the glorious day when we have independence. Let us stick to the here and now and what is the Government doing right now. We are investing a record amount in city deals. We are investing an increase in the economy jobs and fair work portfolio. There is a 70 per cent increase in investment in business R&D. We are delivering a new national manufacturing institute for Scotland. We are proposing to take superfast broadband to every part of Scotland. We are investing record sums on infrastructure that is now opposed by the Conservatives. We are creating the Scottish National Investment Bank. We are building a new building Scotland fund. We have got the most competitive package of business rates anywhere in the United Kingdom. However, of course, we want to be able to do more. Surely Jackie Baillie would support us in that regard. What the Scottish National Investment Bank has said is that our view of the Scottish economy has not fundamentally changed since December. The outlook for subdued growth in Scotland over the next five years—their drivers of that are modest, population and productivity growth. Why on earth would Jackie Baillie not support us in having more tools to tackle that which the Scottish National Investment Bank has identified? Population growth and productivity growth—come on, Jackie Baillie, you know better than that. Two more brief questions, if you can. Stuart McMillan, followed by Dean Lockhart. Stuart McMillan. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. The Cabinet Secretary has outlined that the UK Government's net migration target could cost the economy some £10 billion in the long run, but can he outline the positive contribution that has been made to Scotland's economy and Scotland's public finances from immigration? Of course, as the First Minister has expressed, there are net contributors to Scotland's economy, as well as all the other benefits that immigration brings to our country. However, on average, each additional EU worker coming to Scotland adds £34,400 to GDP, and that is £10,400 towards Government revenue per head. I welcome net contributors to Scotland's economy. Dean Lockhart Thank you. Based on today's numbers, the Scottish economy is now projected to underperform the rest of the UK for 14 of the 15 years of the Scottish National Party Government well before Brexit. Is that what Derek Mackay means by being ambitious for Scotland? I have news for Dean Lockhart. The UK economy is also underperforming in relation to the rest of the EU and comparable nations. I really think that Dean Lockhart should get onside with the UK Government and try to ensure that we get a better deal for Scotland. I look forward to the scrutiny of this strategy to see why it is the Conservative opposer efforts to grow the economy, why it is the opposer efforts to grow our population, to see why it is that they want to put barriers in the way of further enhancing the rate of productivity and economic growth. I think that the Tories will have some explanation to do on why they would choose a different path to what I am proposing, which could unlock even on the Chancellor's own targets £5 billion for Scotland, as well as a whole host of interventions. We have outlined an ambitious programme for Scotland that tackles both economic and social issues in the face of Tory Westminster incompetence. It is about time that the Tories back to the Scottish Government in having the powers and the ability to get out of the fiscal straitjacket to be able to deliver for the people of Scotland. Surely the Tories, if they believe in economic growth, will help to give us the tools to do that job. That concludes our ministerial statement. We have run slightly over time, but I wanted to get everybody in there. We are going to move on to the next item of business, which is a debate on housing. Before the debate begins, however, I am required to decide whether any provision of the bill relates to a protected subject matter. That is whether or not it modifies the electoral system or franchise for the Scottish parliamentary elections. In the case of this bill, in my view, no provision of the housing amendment Scotland bill relates to a protected subject matter. Therefore, it does not require a supermajority at stage 3.