N women in the world. I welcome to the 33rd meeting in 2018 of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee. Can I ask you all to please make sure that your mobile phones are on silent? No, apologies have been received but Stuart Stevenson will have to leave during this committee session to attend another committee. The first agenda item is the South of Scotland enterprise bill. This evidence session is with the organisations with economic interests. I welcome Gary Clark, the Development Manager of the East of Scotland Federation of Small Businesses, Matt Lancashire, the director of policy and public affairs, Scottish Council for the Development and Industry, Margaret Simpson, Scottish Board of Social Enterprise Chamber and Norma Hart, chief executive officer, third sector, Dumfries and Galloway. You have probably all given evidence at committees before. Just to remind you, you don't have to touch any buttons on your speakers so it will be activated for you.  The pen has never flown out of my hands yet in the direction of the person if they don't stop and say, I hope that we can continue that. Welcome, and the first questions this morning from the committee come from, I think it is, who's that? Mike? This is a question for all the panel really. What are your aspirations for the economy of the south of Scotland? How should the area look in, let's say, a 10 to 20 years time, and what needs to be done for the area to reach its full potential? What's your vision for 10 to 20 years time? Who would like to start off with that? By the way, the other danger is, if you all look away, then I nominate somebody. Gary, why didn't you start with that? Yeah, I think, to some extent, our aspirations for the south of Scotland are pretty similar to that for the rest of Scotland, and we want businesses in the south to be supported as businesses in the rest of Scotland ought to be as well. However, we do have to recognise that the south of Scotland does have particular business and economic needs, which are different to other parts of Scotland. There's been a lot of comparison within, for example, between the prospect of a south of Scotland enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise. However, we would see quite radical differences between the north of the country and the south of the country. There are greater ties with other parts, so there is no central nexus like Inverness to anchor islands and islands enterprise. In the south, you've got the borders that are quite reliant on Edinburgh to some extent, and within 50 minutes, trend journey, or much of the borders is now anyway. In the south west, more remote, different challenges are there, for example, between places like Dumfries and Strunrar. For our point of view, we would want to look at the businesses in the south, and we'd want a new agency to be able to look at what those businesses need specifically and address the needs of those businesses, and not take a one-size-fits-all approach. That's the great advantage and opportunity that we have in the south of Scotland. We can look at the particular needs of businesses there, geographical sectoral, and address those in a way that fits with the businesses themselves. Matt, you want to come in on that? Just to follow on from Gary, as you'd expect. The aspiration for the south of Scotland is that we ensure that it grows over the next 10, 15, 20 years in terms of an inclusive, sustainable economy. Presently, we know that there is an issue with productivity across the south of Scotland. We know that there are many challenges, economic challenges to do with wages, to do with housing and other aspects that all drive economic development in the region itself. To overcome those challenges and find the opportunities within them as well, we need the agency to span across public, private and third sectors, in particular, to find those opportunities to drive it forward. The agency sells the aspiration that it can support a breadth of organisations, not just the private sector, not just the SMEs, not some of the large corporates in the area, but some of the social enterprises, the third sectors that all generate economic growth within a particular region, in particular areas as well. In 10, 15, 20 years time, we want to see the dial changed on productivity in the south of Scotland, because that is the key aspect. If the agency can support us achieving that, that will be a success in itself. We can bring that back into line with the rest of Scotland. If we can bring wages back into line with the rest of Scotland, we therefore have had a success and we have got economic inclusive growth that we can drive forward. Our aspiration is growth, and our aspiration is growth for all within the region. Margaret, you were nodding furiously at moments then. Do you want to add something to that? No, I totally agree with that. I am a great believer and we need to build the capacity of the region itself from the bottom up, and not just that. This is a great opportunity to make the whole of the borders more competitive with the rest of the country. We have fallen behind on wages and opportunities. Our young people leave and we need them to stay in the borders. We need to develop the skill base. Our sector generates £60 million in 1200 full-time equivalent jobs, yet the support that we get is minimal to be able to make the changes that we would love to see and create the wealth that we need for the borders. We should be looking at research and development, computer coding, theory, and bringing things in that will allow us to compete. We are only an hour away from Edinburgh, the same from the north of England. We need to make those connections better.  I am just looking at the bill, because at the end of the day, we will end up with a bill. The bill describes the aims, and section 2 of section 5 gives a long list. What is missing from it—I wonder if you would like to comment particularly, Gary Clark—does not say anything about small and medium-sized enterprises. It specifically says that it is promoting commercial and industrial, and it says that it is supporting community organisations, but it does not say anything about what Matt referred to as social enterprises, and it does not say anything specific about small and medium-sized enterprises. Given the nature of the challenge in the south of Scotland, and I believe that the predominance of SMEs as an economic contributor, should the aims of the enterprise, as they expressed in the bill, be extended to cover those specific points? If only to balance the specific things that are mentioned. That is a fair point to make. If you look at the economy of the south of Scotland, the borders, for example, more than 50 per cent of the workforce in the borders are employed by small businesses. That is not the case in other parts of Scotland. You can move into the central belt, somewhere like Westloth, where only 25 per cent is small businesses, and the rest is made up of larger businesses. That is the point that I was making at the outset, in saying that we need to address the specific needs of the south of Scotland. Borders are very reliant on small businesses for employment. The Freeson Galloway, likewise, is the only area of Scotland that has seen a decrease in the number of businesses by about 2 per cent, according to the last round of figures. There are very specific challenges there. We need to look at the scale of businesses in those areas. We need to look at the sectoral approach of a new south of Scotland agency. The account-managed key sectors that SEs have are not necessarily what will drive the growth and productivity that we want to see in the south of Scotland. We would certainly welcome a focus on that, but it is important that we support all businesses there, but recognising the specifics and small businesses is a huge part of the local economy in the south. Noma, you wanted to come in. I did, yes. In answer to your question, the original question about the aspirations, I think that we would want to see a younger, wealthier, better-connected set of communities in the south of Scotland. Add to what has already been said, rather than repeat it, there are some important questions to ask around the towns and small communities across the south of Scotland, which are very fragile. It would be great to see them turning into thriving centres of small communities. If I were to be able to wave a magic wand, I would say that what we really need is to start thinking in an integrated way about our economy and not to think about businesses separately from social enterprises, communities and community-based organisations, and to start to think about place-based regeneration, which is very much where the bill is going. We in the third sector will certainly welcome that. Do you think that, having listened to your responses, Scottish Enterprise has not recognised in the way that you would like it to have done the strengths and assets of the south of Scotland? I do not want to put words in your mouth, but is it the case that you think that a new agency for the south of Scotland would be able to do a much better job than what Scottish Enterprise has been doing? Why? Norma, you seem to be happy to lead the charge on that one. I think that that is what is known as a leading question. I would not want to be directly critical of Scottish Enterprise. I do think that it has been constrained by its powers. One of the very positive things about the bill is that it brings in a new model based on Highlands and Islands Enterprise, which certainly we in the third sector welcome, because it is an opportunity to look at communities and regeneration of our economy and our area in a different way. The place-based approach is extremely welcome. I have a very adroit answer. If I may say so, who would like it, Matt? I think that we have to not look at them as competing at combative entities as such. For the south of Scotland agency, a new agency to work, it needs to work, with Scottish Enterprise to be more than the sum of its parts. The south of Scotland agency in itself, we obviously want it to succeed with the business base, the place making and all the stuff that we have just talked about just then, but we also want it to be able to connect to other opportunities that exist outward with the region. We talk about 3D printing and imaging, we talk about renewables, etc. That is only going to be achieved if the region connects beyond its boundaries into the north of England, into the central belt and internationally as well. The south of Scotland agency play a role in that, but of course so do Scottish Enterprise. There needs to be a link in terms of conversations around that, and rather than a combative relationship, it needs to be one of partnership and collaboration to move things forward, because both bring opportunities to the region. I think that that is absolutely right. It is not a case of Scottish Enterprise versus south of Scotland Enterprise. It is about what additionality South of Scotland Enterprise could bring to the equation. Scottish Enterprise nationally has a national focus and focuses in on the key sectors that drive the Scottish economy as a whole. If you are looking at the south of Scotland, we have sectors such as agriculture, forestry, tourism—obviously a key sector there as well—but there are sectors that are quite particular to that part of the country and which probably would benefit from greater local focus and greater local resources being brought to bear to support the businesses in those areas. We would certainly be looking for additionality. We would be looking for the south of Scotland Enterprise agency to link very closely with SE, to link very closely with existing services, whether that is business gateway or SDS. John, do you want to bring in one or two of the points that you want to bring in? Good morning, panel. I know that you are all being very diplomatic and not wanting to be critical of Scottish Enterprise. I represent a Highlands and Islands constituency, and Highlands and Islands Enterprise has been critical of their performance. They have given many organisations more than the sum that Scottish Enterprise has allocated to business headquarters in the south of Scotland. In the last two years, Scottish Enterprise we are told that between £3 million and £5 million are very modest sums. Scottish Enterprise also gave £2 million to Lockheed Martin, the most profitable arms company in the world just a matter of two years ago. I appreciate that you do not want to comment on that, but it is important that that is on the record. If we are talking about start-up rates, surely that must impact on the level of start-up rates or the dearth of start-ups. Margaret, would you like to comment? I am sorry, but I am going to criticise slightly. We do not see very much of Scottish Enterprise in my sector. Most of the firms that are small organisations are under five employees, so to the threshold that they need to be the account managed, they do not hit those targets when they need the investment. That is what I would like to see moving forward, much more flexible and support at that level, so that we can really develop the skills and get places for our young people and indeed our older people. Yesterday, we just heard that unemployment is back up by 11 per cent in the borders for our young people again, so we do not want more of the same. I really do hope that that is the innovation that I hope it will be moving forward. I will hold it to account. I am sorry, but I am going to say that. I am sorry, but I am going to say that. I am going to comment on that, particularly on the level of start-ups. I want to add more on the start-up point, but Scottish Enterprise, such as many central belt-based agencies in Scotland, does not have the grip on and an understanding on rural issues that we at the local level have. For example, in Dumfries and Galloway, you are probably aware, Pinnies recently closed in Annan creating 450 job losses. That is the equivalent in Glasgow of losing 4,000 jobs. To draw that out a little bit further, the place-based approach is so important because it allows agencies like myself, like Scottish Enterprise and hopefully this new enterprise agency, to look at a community and consider the loss of small numbers of jobs here and there and to see them as a collective group at a whole, and to be able to respond to those job losses in a strategic way. To do that, you have to have local understanding and a grasp of what is happening with very small micro-businesses and small businesses. Otherwise, you are just painting over the cracks, that is what I am saying. I will keep this brief. Obviously, there needs to be support for business start-ups in the south of Scotland. Arguments can be made back and forth until now, it has not been enough. I am not going to comment on that, but I think that we have to look beyond. I do not know that the figures are right in front of me, so everyone fare of me to comment on that. I cannot see the official figures myself and look at that. In terms of business start-up, most important needs to be given, but we need to look beyond that about scale-up. That is how you keep people in an area. That is how you support investment in housing. That is how you support investment in transport links, because people are attracted to the area, because they see businesses scale up, that they see them draw people from far-returners back to south of Scotland, back into the area, people with a skill base that is different to the current skill base. One of the biggest critical issues is that south of Scotland needs to focus on its demography in terms of its ageing population, but also the population by 2030 is suggested to be reduced by 5 per cent. How do we attract people back into south of Scotland? How does the new agency support that? Business start-up is one route that scale-up offers more jobs, more investment, and more people potentially returning to the area. Our focus needs to be two-fold, not just business start-up. Perhaps, before Gary Anster's first point there, can you pick up on the point that Matt made about attracting the retention of young people, because that is a key factor? Absolutely, it is. It is not all down to Scottish Enterprise, because its business gateway is responsible for supporting a lot of the start-ups in the south of Scotland. However, it is not entirely within their gift to increase the start-up rate. We know that the start-up rate in south of Scotland has increased by about 2 per cent, whereas in the rest of Scotland it has been about 10 per cent, so it is running far behind the rest of the country. Rural areas generally have had that sort of level, and it is to do with demographics and population, as Matt has said. We need to do more to anchor young people in particular in the south, to create the opportunities for them to start-up their own businesses or to work in local businesses. It is a big challenge ahead, but it involves a great many agencies, such as Business Gateway, Skills Development Scotland, the colleges and councils. There are a lot of players involved in trying to push that forward. Do any other panel members want to comment on the retention of young people in those specifics? Clearly, one of the biggest challenges that we face, despite the very good school results that we get from the local education system, the good quality results and the people who get them leave the area for higher education and other job opportunities. It creates a skills gap with those who remain, who are not necessarily trained up for the jobs that there are in the region, so addressing that skills gap for the new agency and all the other agencies that can make a contribution, such as Skills Development Scotland and the local colleges. The other thing that is interesting to ask is why do so many stay, because they do not all leave. Some young people do stay. In my view, something is changing in the region over the last five or ten years. There is a new energy and a bit of it. There are some green shoots that you might call them. There are some local organisations that you may have heard of the stove in Dumfries, which is doing some very interesting things with young people, getting them involved in town centre development, putting an emphasis on art and culture and creative activities, to encourage them to express themselves and be engaged with what is happening in their own lives. There is a lot more that we could do, not just about education but about creating the kind of place that young people want to live in. You have probably heard about millennials. We talk a lot about millennials in my office, because apparently they are very different to baby boomers. I make no comment around the table on who might be a baby boomer, but managers tend to be baby boomers, and young people coming into the workplace tend to be millennials. The key difference that I am told is that baby boomers do not really have an interest in work-life balance. The middle generation X is interested in work-life balance, and it is the millennial, the youngest group that is coming into the workplace that is interested in life work balance. They want to put as much attention on the quality of their life around work as they do on work. I think that we have a fabulous environment to offer young people. If we can pull together some of the strengths around the natural environment, the art and culture of the area, and the job opportunities that we can get more to stay. John, can I bring in Maureen? She has got a supplementary answer. Thank you very much. Maureen. Clearly, there has been a huge increase in the number of apprenticeships across Scotland. Do you have the figures for the south of Scotland, and are they keeping up with the trends in other parts of Scotland? Margaret, would you like to— I sit on the local skills board. We are putting a concerted effort in the problem again. The bigger firms can take on the apprentices, but the smaller one and two-man businesses are really struggling. What we have been looking at is shared apprentices making opportunities available there, working with the college to make sure that the opportunities in the college fit with what the needs are of the businesses. We work very closely with the Chamber of Commerce. They are a member of our chamber, which I find amusing, but they are excellent. Over the past couple of years, we have been able to tap into leader funding. We have managed to get 75 young people who would never have managed on their own—well, they might have, but their chances would have been from the private areas back into full-time employment. That has been something that we have been very proud of and we would like to do more of it, but there is more to be done on apprenticeships because the transport issues are another problem in our area.  We may move on to the next question, which is from the deputy convener, Gail Ross. We have spoken quite a lot about Scottish Enterprise and various people have mentioned the two local authorities, colleges, skills development Scotland. I just want to drill down into those organisations a little bit more and get your experiences and perceptions of the current level of business and skills support that those organisations offer and how they work together. You mentioned the Chamber of Commerce. What role do you see for Scottish Enterprise going forward in working with the new enterprise agency? Who would like to start off on that? Everyone is looking away. That is dangerous. No, Margaret, you sort of looked at me, so I will let you start off and then I will give everyone a chance on that one. I do think that, again, it has to be not more of the same. We really need this new enterprise agency to actually work with the place, with the communities and get down there and work with the chambers of commerce, with the third set, making sure that businesses are engaged, because at the moment they are quite disenfranchised, a lot of them. Through community planning, we need to make links in that way as well. Skills Development Scotland has been a brilliant ally of ours for the last three years. We have worked very closely with them. It was a shame when they cut the 50 per cent that we could get for access into training, mind you, but that is another story. Those are small things, but in a rural area where things are hard, we have so many part-time jobs and jobs that do not offer real progression. Anything that can be added to that brings real value, and that is what we want to see as a real chance for our communities. Matt, do you want to... I think that the local forward to skills development Scotland and the colleges and the universities that are down there, as well as the University of West of Scotland, and Harriet Water in the Borders too, all did tremendous work in trying to drive economic development, economic growth. If you look at the regional skills, that SDS is doing in the South of Scotland and elsewhere in Scotland, it is all very positive. Likewise to local authorities, local economic development teams, trying to drive forward the areas that they wish in the colleges and universities, trying to support research and development as well as a skill base for the area. I think that the beauty of the new agency is that it connects all that, and I think that that is what the region and area of the South of Scotland has missed over that period, is that focal point of an agency like Hyne. I do not want to compare the South to Highlands and Islands, I know that they are different in terms of make-up, but it does do that. It pulls together the sum of its parts and the sum of its assets that we have in the South of Scotland. Every one that we have missed from there is business, and that is the critical element of that. We can talk about SDS, local authorities and X, Y and Z, but if we do not have the business base working with the new agency, it will not work and it will not move forward, because it will be agency speaking to agencies but not speaking to businesses about what they need to drive it forward. Part of that needs to be a clear, consistent business voice that does not just represent the region but represents it out with the region too. Norma, would you like to come in on that? I think that Margaret made a very important point that I would want to emphasise, which is that we cannot have more of the same. That is particularly in response to your question. I think that if we were going to be honest about the role of Scottish Enterprise and the two local authorities in that area, we would have to ask the question why, after decades of working at this, have their strategies not worked? In many respects, given that more young people are leaving, that it is very difficult to recruit to particularly middle-level jobs, middle managers and not so much at the beginning of a career but into the middle, it is very difficult to get people of quality and experience in the south of Scotland. I would be suggesting some hard questions asked, but if I could add on to that again, particularly in relation to the third sector, I would be looking to the new agency for some innovative ideas on how to use the third sector to encourage young people and not just not only young people, some older people as well, to retrain and to take advantage of the career opportunities that there are in the third sector using modern apprenticeships. I think that the sharing idea is a really good one. Along with using Community Jobs Scotland, getting graduate career paths through the third sector, we could be looking at lots of different ways of encouraging those. Just before I ask Gary for his comment, I was reading through your evidence, Gary, and something really sort of clicked out at me, which was, and I quote, evidence gathered during the Enterprise and Skills review, highlighted that businesses accessing support services often felt that a particular product was being pushed at them rather than assistance that would address their specific circumstances. You obviously feel that that is an issue. Do you feel that the bill will give the new enterprise agency the ability to develop specific products for specific businesses? How do you see that being developed? Do you feel that there should be a disclosed plan annually to allow that to be shown what they are doing? That is quite a complex question, but you have raised it, so I am assuming that you are ready for it. The bill itself is very wide in general in terms of its nature, so I suppose that to that extent it gives the enterprise agency the power to do those kinds of things. To link that to probably the previous two questions as well, the enterprise agency needs not to duplicate stuff that is already happening, it needs to enhance it, it needs to look at the demographics of businesses and people in the area and to come back to the skills question that Maureen Watt raised, it needs to recognise that there are so many self-employed people in the borders and in Freeson Galloway who are currently prevented from taking on an apprentice, so could we do something about that to make sure that there are more opportunities for apprenticeships there? The rules and the finances currently there prevent people from taking on older apprentices to the same extent that they are able to take on younger apprentices, so is there something that we can do there with the likes of SDS to help to enhance the availability of older age 25 plus apprenticeships to allow people to retrain in these ways? Those are the kinds of opportunities that we would like to see the enterprise agency bring to the table. Yes, the bill is sufficiently wide to allow that to happen. Should there be annualised business plans? Yes, there should be a business plan, they need to set out a clear direction in terms of where they are going, they need to, as Matt has said, engage properly with the local business community to enable that to happen and it is probably not sufficient just to rely on a board to do that, they need greater connectivity into the heart of small businesses right across the borders and Freeson Galloway to enable them to get that kind of intelligence which would lead them to provide the services that businesses need. That comes back to the question that you raised about our submission, which is that we have certainly, when we have been looking at the enterprise and skills review, when we have been looking at the review of business gateway conducted by another committee in this Parliament, a lot of the feedback that we get coming back is, well, I am getting offered support but it is not exactly what I need or it is not what I need right now. How do we ensure that a new agency can help businesses receive the support that they need when they need it, not maybe support that they do not need at the wrong time or support that they do need at the wrong time or support that they do not need at the right time? How do we get the support that they need to them in time? There are big challenges in how we do that because the delivery agencies across the south of Scotland do not have a huge number of staff looking at business gateway, for example. Presumably, the new agency will be sufficiently staffed to do that, but then there are questions over. We have talked about the difficulty in recruiting. How do we recruit to staff this new agency? There are huge opportunities there for local people out to stay in the area or come back to the area, but there are big challenges in bringing that agency together in terms of staff as well. We are going to move on to the next question, which is Jeremy Green. Good morning, panel. I feel that maybe I should have asked this question at the very beginning, but I would like to take a step back and ask some more fundamental questions around the creation of the agency. First of all, why does the panel think, given that there already is an enterprise agency that covers Scotland outside of Highlands and Islands, that there is a dedicated need for a south of Scotland enterprise agency? What is going wrong with how things are currently delivered? What is the problem that we are trying to address by the creation of the new agency? I have suggested that the economy of the south of Scotland is different to the bulk of the rest of Scotland. It is different to the central belt of Scotland. It is different to Fife, Tayside or the north-east of Scotland. It is a very different area. It is different even from parts of Ayrshire, Lanarkshire as well. It is a very rural economy. It is very reliant on small businesses and it is self-employed in a way that a lot of those central belt areas are not. I mentioned the example earlier of West Lothian. Relatively rural but central belt, only 25 per cent of the employment comes from small businesses, about 50 per cent of employment from big businesses. In the borders, for example, that is different, and it is pretty much the case across the south. Even the differential between that and the north of Scotland is that it does not have that economic boom that has been in Vanessa over the past few years. It has done relatively well, but the rest of the Highlands may have struggled to keep pace with it but have that as a nexus in the centre of islands and islands. The south of Scotland does not really have that. Its economy is very different. The borders are quite reliant on Edinburgh, and there is greater connectivity now into Edinburgh. Hopefully, better connectivity is coming to the south of the border as well, either Newcastle or Carlyle, through the borderlands inclusive growth deal. Dumfries and Galloway, big towns at opposite ends of a very big council area. Dumfries, to some extent looking north, to some extent looking south. Sternar, quite a distance away from Dumfries, may be more in common with the southern part of Ayrshire, certainly closer to it in terms of time. However, it is a very different part of the economy. It is very reliant on agriculture, and it is certainly Dumfries and Galloway on forestry. Big industries are there that we cannot probably put enough focus on at a national level. Scottish enterprises had a historically fairly small footprint in the south. Two or three hundred may be maximum interventions there in any one year. That is not a lot compared to the rest of the country. We would argue that this new agency gives us an opportunity to recognise those differences, to celebrate those differences and try to make sure that the south of Scotland gets the best possible advantage, and that businesses in the south of Scotland get the best possible advantage from Government support. Just to add to what Gary said, Dumfries and Galloway has a very contained economy. We know that from the impact of foot and mouth disease in 2001, when, although the direct impact was on agriculture, virtually every aspect of the economy was affected by the loss and the impact on the farming community. It affected tourism, the secondary service sector that agriculture buys into, and the whole economy felt as if it were imploding, and it took several years to recover from it. There is an interconnectedness about the economy that is particular to the south of Scotland that is not the case in other parts of Scotland, with the exception of Highlands and Islands. The other point that I would make about the nature of the economy and how it is different is that the deprivation in Dumfries and Galloway is very difficult to identify. We know that 80 per cent of the people who live in formally defined deprivation do not live in the top 15 per cent SIMD areas, where we keep targeting our resources. I have said that Scottish Enterprise has done the same. It is not to say that those areas, such as in Pernistell and over in Stronard, are not in need, but there is a lot of need that does not appear in those top 15 per cent. We have to find ways of being more adept at identifying need and then targeting it. That is what a south of Scotland agency, I hope, would be able to take a leadership role in enabling and facilitating. I might ask Jamie to ask his next question so that you could answer that. I am keen to hear everyone's view. Maybe we could keep the answers succinct so that I can get through some of the questions. I guess that this follows on from my original point about why there should be a dedicated agency. You will be aware that there is some debate around what constitutes the south. Obviously, the Government has gone down the road of choosing the two local authorities, which it feels make up the south. One could argue that anything south of the central belt is the south, certainly from a parliamentary point of view, the south region incorporates other areas. What makes you think that that agency is focused on Dumfries and Galloway and the Borders, whilst it is clear that there is a need for it? What will that do for those surrounding areas that fall between the gap of existing agency and no new agency? What is so different about Kelso or Selkirk that is so different from Maybol or Doray and North Ayrshire, where they have similar economic problems? Thanks for that one. How do you find any place? How do you find place? I think that is what you are getting to. Place could be local to a swans village, it could be local to a city, it could be a region in itself. Defined boundaries are hard to mention and secure. I think that what we have done via the south of Scotland enterprise agency is to say that there are two local authorities right next to the border, that is the south. How that has been comes in the criteria that has achieved that, I am unsure of and I cannot comment, that is probably more to the politicians and the policy makers that have suggested that that is the case. I cannot give you a definitive answer as to why that is the south or not. Going back to the first question, and I will keep this succinct and brief as well, the agency is that recognition of those unique challenges and opportunities and we should not forget that bit of the south of Scotland in terms of where we are trying to drive forward. We have spent a lot of time focusing on the negatives of the south of Scotland but there are some tremendous positives around some of the new industries that are created there and creative industries, textiles and renewables that we need to latch on to. That place making approach allows us to achieve that, probably easier than a wider more national agency that might not be as nimble and as effective in our jobs to get into these things but they still offer the opportunity, Scottish Enterprise, because they link you into those bigger opportunities that exist as well out with the region. As I said earlier, the south of Scotland agency is working in its own autonomous way but with a link into Scottish Enterprise to drive over aspects of its economic needs is the way in shape things should go forward and I think that's what the bill is aimed at, trying to achieve and move forward. I think I'll stop there because you asked us to sinkness and brevity, so thank you. Margaret, do you want to add anything brief to that? I just think that the borders, well for me I can only speak for that. I came from Midlothian and it was much more a mining area so they had a much more community in there. The borders still is, if you go to Hoik and you come out of it, they'll say it's a day out of Hoik as a day wasted, so you're up against that kind of mentality at times. I would like to see the whole of South of Scotland involved in it, it wouldn't worry me one bit, but I'd like to see us all get tapped into what I see as a real innovation and opportunity. But if you walk down the streets in our small towns at the moment, most of the shops are closing so we really need to find a way of getting this back to a level that probably were when the mills were going but have gone completely. Just give some hope. We've got so many families now that are third and fourth generation that have never worked and I think that speaks volumes. I don't know if it answers your question properly but I think that Ayrshire and that they still had the could tap into regeneration from the coal fields and things. We haven't had that to the degree that we would need to get us back to a level playing field with the rest of Scotland. I think that that's a very good point, but I think that the point that people are making is that the council areas that are joining the two that have been chosen to participate in the agency and will ultimately benefit from the activities of that agency will be precluded from activities including financial intervention. There is just a wider question as to what will those neighbouring towns, which are very similar in nature and culturally and economically, be looking across the border into neighbouring councillors and wondering why they are not getting the same level of support. Again, it's not a criticism of the new agency, it's just an observation. I totally agree with you and I would be shouting out for the same for them as well, to be honest. Jamie, I fear that that may be a question that the minister needs to pick up on when he comes in to give evidence, and I'm sure that it will be relayed back to him. Can we move on to the next question, which is from Peter Chapman. Peter. Thank you, convener, and good morning, folks. My question is about the process leading up to the legislation. Do you feel that you and your organisation that you represent and other businesses and third sector organisations were sufficiently involved in the consultation process, leading up to the planning stages and where we've got to with the bill? Do you think that the consultation was correct, wide enough and has been reflected in what you see in the bill? The answer could be a simple yes. If the answer is no, don't hold back. I'm going to let Matt Start and then Margaret Matt. Yes, it's a simple answer. I'll very quickly add to that. In terms of it, it wasn't just sending out a consultation that you write into. I think there was about 50 or 60 meetings at Russell Groups and Robdicks and did around various different towns and villages in the south of Scotland, which is magnificent. I believe there was high turnout at them all, and I believe there was a lot of feedback, shall we say, about the opportunities that are part of the SOSEP aims of focus going forward, we hope. I thought that it was a fantastic consultation exercise. I fear that the next answer might not be the same. Margaret. If I go so far to say that we're having our first real meeting with SOSEP in January to see where we sit and fit within it, the local authority, Rob Dixon, has always been a great ally, but on this side of it, I feel that we could have contributed a lot more. Given a lot more, if we were asked, I'm just going to say no more on that. I've got to go back to Borders. I'm going to bring in briefly Colin and then allow Norma and Gary to answer that. It might be a point that the panel might want to make after the answer to that question, but Margaret mentioned SOSEP and Sodorant MAP. As well as the consultation on the development of the bill, do you think that you've been actively involved in the working of SOSEP, which is obviously the agency that is in place at the moment, that has a budget of £10 million? I mean, what say have you had in how that partnership actually spends that £10 million? Because obviously that scene is the precursor to the new agency. Have you been involved in the work of the new partnership? Margaret, I'll let you come back briefly on that and then move to Norma. Definitely not. I would love to have been. We certainly would have made... I don't want to be negative because it is a big area and they've got to cover it, but I do think that we had a part to play and if we'd been involved, we could have contributed a lot more and we will do moving forward. I can trust to tell you that. Norma, do you want to come in now? Yes, thank you. Certainly, I've been invited to sit on one of the community's theme group, which is a subgroup of the executive part of the structure. Frankly, it's only because I'm involved in that that I've actually managed to get to grips with what the structure is and, to some extent, the processes that are being used to decide how the £9 million is being spent. I think that I could reflect the wider concern in the third sector that it's perceived as a lack of transparency about decision making, accountabilities and so on. I think that it probably is, in reality, inadequate communication about what's going on. Of course, transparency and communication are closely linked, but anyway, in short, I think that a better communication strategy on what's happening now would help considerably to herald the arrival of the new agency when it comes along. If we could start to improve that, I think that it would be welcomed more positively. Gary, do you want to give a brief answer on that? Yes, there's been a huge volume of consultation on this and we've certainly been partied to that. I think that going forward is about the quality rather than the volume, and that's why I made the point earlier about, yes, the organisation has to get going once the parliamentary process has moved on, get a chairman in place, get a board in place, but it needs to go further than that, and it needs to engage with all of those groups and businesses right across the south of Scotland to ensure that its direction matches that of the local economy. That perfectly leads to Peter's next question, surprisingly. I just want to comment that it's quite stark the difference between Matt's answer and partly Gary's answer to Margaret's answer. There's obviously some sort of disconnect there between some of the various organisations, and I'll just park that there. My next question is, there has been some debate as to where the headquarters of the new agency should be and whether there should be a co-location, maybe two locations, to cover the geographical issues that there are in the two areas. I just wonder what your thoughts are, because the Scottish ministers will decide where the headquarters will be and whether there will be one or two locations. What are your thoughts on that aspect of the new agency going forward? I was normally indicating before you, so I'll let Norma come in and then come to you, Gary. Yes. Needless to say, the subject of much discussion locally, and it would be tempting—I'm based in Dumfries—and it would be tempting, I think, for me to say it should be in Dumfries, of course, and there are several options which no doubt have been discussed. However, I think at this point, for me, a more important question is, how can we decide where the location of the organisation should be before we are really clear on its remit, its powers and its objectives? I'm just slightly concerned about making decisions about form, if you like, before we are really clear on function. I think that I would make the same comment. I don't know if we're going to be asked about the staffing levels, but I nearly fell off my chair when I read the figure of 125 to 175 people intended to be employed. Again, it seems to me that you can't make the decision about how many people are going to be employed and who's going to be employed until you've got a clearer understanding of what it is that you want its organisation to do. There are certainly some good arguments to be made for having several bases across the vast region. Perhaps I shouldn't emphasise the sheer scale of things and the needs of Strunar are quite different to Hoig and Dumfries and Eymouth and all the rest of it. I think that there's also a good case for co-location with other organisations who also have a South of Scotland remit. So, not one week in one place and one week in another. Sorry, Gary and Matt. Co-location has to be the answer here. There is a commonality across the South of Scotland, but there is enough diversity. Looking at the borders, every town is different. Every town has its own individual character. The same can be said for the Freeson Galloway as well. If you put something into Freeson, people in Strunar would complain that it's a four-hour round-trip to get there. They'd be right. In this day and age, does it really matter where we have a nominal headquarters? I dare say that there will be a nominal headquarters, but that needs to exist in communities right across the borders from west to east from north to south. It needs to be there where businesses need it, when businesses need it and the idea of one single headquarters just doesn't make sense in this day and age. It needs to be co-located. If it's to integrate with the functions of Skills Development Scotland, the local councils, business gateways and Scottish Enterprise, it needs to be co-located with those organisations. Matt, briefly, and then we're going to move on to the next question. Probably similar to what everyone else has said, the location of how you deliver a service needs to be based on the needs of that particular, whether the highest need or the highest support need is for it to be. That's how any service is generally delivered, but we shouldn't just look at delivering services as bricks and mortar in terms of the world's changing. We're moving into a digital economy. We're looking at—we all access services in a digital format, all of us. Again, I think that the new south of Scotland agency needs to play to that, to cover that vast area, as we've already mentioned, to support people. Sometimes people want the support virtually and not actually want it face-to-face, so we need to think that through a bit clearly. I think that some of this comes back to what the south is and ensuring that we have a vision and a mission for the south that is agreed upon across those areas in the south of Scotland, and once you have that, the location is still an issue, and I get the sensitivities around it, but it's less of an issue because people believe in the south of Scotland, they believe in it like it's the islands and islands enterprise as well. The other part of that is that there are a number of assets that we have in the south where there's opportunities to co-locate with SDS or old Scottish Enterprise buildings, and we should be looking at bringing those assets back into play, because that in itself creates further economic development across those local communities as well. So what I'm saying, let's not just be focused on bricks and mortar, use the digital economy, look to create a vision for the south, which lessens the sensitivities around where it's actually placed as well. Thank you. I'm going to move on to the next question. I just say that I've tried to give everyone a chance to enter in an answer on each of them. I may have to be a little bit tighter on the next section, because we're halfway through the questions and very close to the full time that we've allocated, but it's very important that we continue this. Colin, if you'd like to head off on the next question. Thank you, convener. I know what you said just before my contribution. Thank you for that. I'm not saying you're verbose, Colin, but... Good morning, the panel. The bill proposes that the board of the new agency should be appointed by Government ministers. Do you think that that's the right approach? How do you ensure that the board actually has the experience and skills that properly reflect the stakeholders in the south of Scotland? I suppose crucially, how do you make that board accountable to the south of Scotland and not just accountable to Government ministers? Who would like to head off on that? Margaret, would you like to... Well, the Government ministers, I do trust them to make that decision, but they can't make that without totally discussing that with the area and making a real effort to get it right. Ideally, it would be done in a much lower level, but we are where we are. I've never had a problem working with ministers in the past, so I'm not really worried about that. It's more that we get the right people involved on that board and it covers across the whole of the region. We're not just looking at the same old... I keep saying this, the same old, same old. We really need to get the quality and to get it right for the future of the south of Scotland. Gary, do you want to chip on that? Yes, boards are appointed. I would hope that the advice on which appointments are made is sound that local knowledge is very much part of it and that the overall board, once it's there, will reflect the demographics and the nature of business and community across the south of Scotland, but I do think that it needs to go beyond the board and it needs to have a defined connectivity into businesses and communities right across, so it can't rely exclusively on the board. The board should be there, it should be knowledgeable, it should be appointed on a... the basis of ability, it should reflect the local needs, but there must also be that link into communities and businesses across the area, particularly, as you would expect me to say, smaller businesses, because they do make up such a huge part of the south of Scotland economy. Can I just touch on that? What would the mechanism be to achieve that, then, because the bill doesn't cover that at the moment? Yes, I mean, it's something that's not within the bill itself and I'm not sure what the formal mechanism would look like if there was a formal mechanism for that, but it would need to have connectivity in some way to reflect the huge geography and the huge range of businesses that you have. I don't know what that looks like, but it needs to be there somehow. Colin, I can't give everyone the chance to do every question, as I've said. Norma, I'm happy to bring you in. If I can just be a little bit helpful, then, if Gary has mentioned specifically the role of businesses into that new board, into that new agency, maybe Norma and Margaret can talk about how they see, in Norma's case, the third sector being involved in the activities of the new agency, and maybe, how would you see the social enterprise being involved in the activities of the new agency, because obviously there will be a new forum for your sectors. Norma, if you'd like to start off and then bring... In terms of mechanisms for making sure that the ministerial process has influence from the local level, it seems to be that you've got the existing SOSEP structure, that there are some mechanisms in there that could be used for discussion and channeling views and influence. However, specifically about the third sector, I do have quite a lot of concerns about that. There are 2,300 voluntary organisations in Dumfries and Galloway, and I suspect that there will be a similar number in Scottish Borders. Of course, we hope for adequate representation on the board from the third sector, but it seems to me, and I speak from some experience on this in different organisations, that it's very hard to represent 2,300 organisations if you are one person. I don't necessarily have an answer to that, but I do think that it's something that needs some careful consideration. Margaret, would you like to go on? I totally agree with what Norma is saying there. When I was recruited as ambassador for disability from the UK Government, it was a long and arduous process, but I felt that we got there in the end. However, I do think that we need to make sure that all of the third sector, and especially social enterprise, I would say that, but I really do feel that that's a business and it's driven by business. It's just what it does with its profits that makes it different. If we can be on there, we are a really good, critical friend. We're that just now for the local authority, the NHS, and all our key partners, and I think that we could do the same for the new agency. All right. Sorry, I thought that you had more questions. You could come up with more if you wish, convener. No, I'm sure that you could. John, the next question is for you also. Thank you, Colin. Thank you very much, convener. There has been some mention already of small businesses and attracting them in business gateway. In fact, it was mentioned, and I am on the economy committee, so we are also doing a study of business gateway at the moment. One of the things that we found in both SE areas, Scottish Enterprise and HIE areas, is that sometimes business gateway and SE or HIE work together quite well, but sometimes that's not the case. Sometimes there's overlaps and the same business is getting different help from both. More often, there's a gap in the middle and HIE don't help, business gateway don't help, Scottish Enterprise don't help and business gateway don't help. Do you think that we should be putting something in the legislation to try and make this a bit more joined up, or is it just impossible to help every business? There seems to be some nods of agreement, so Noma and they're not on to Gary and I'll pick up anyone else who wants to come in. I think that a formal clarity on roles and responsibilities of all the agencies would be extremely helpful, not necessarily removing any, but being absolutely clear about what each organisation is responsible for and also how they agree to work together, some kind of memorandum of understanding. I would say that, but I think that you could add into the mix the third sector interfaces and the agencies like Scottish Enterprise Network, SCN and Firstport who also have a role in developing social and community enterprises. I think that it would be extremely helpful if the bill could give some formal recognition and clarity to all those different organisations and what they do. Gary Fuller by Matt. Yeah, I mean certainly in terms of the new organisations, how it relates to other bodies which provide services. I'm not sure it has to be in the bill, it would certainly have to be in the plan of the organisation, which we'd hoped to see come forward fairly quickly. It is important that they talk to each other. It is important, as I've said before, that the new organisation delivers additionality. For a business going for support, it's important that they have that one-stop shop that has been talked about in the business gateway debate as well. To them, the structure doesn't matter. They just want help when they need it at the point that they require it. They need to be able to go to the new agency or go to any part of economic support in the south of Scotland and be able to get that full range of services wherever they go to. If they pop into the local office, if they ring the number, if they go to the website, all that support should be there, whether it comes from business gateway, south of Scotland enterprise, Scottish enterprise or SDS. They need that support there and then, and we're looking for south of Scotland enterprise to provide that additionality to ensure a better service for local businesses. We've got an opportunity to get it right in the south of Scotland. It has been patchy in terms of business gateway in the rest of the country. Those areas where it works brilliantly, those areas where it doesn't work so well, this is an opportunity to get it right in the south of Scotland. If I can just come back to you before anyone else comes in. Scottish enterprise, as I understand it, focus on growth and on certain sectors. You could have a real growth business in retail and Scottish enterprise wouldn't look at you or in international recruitment and Scottish enterprise wouldn't look at you because you're in the wrong sector. Should that also apply to the south of Scotland enterprise? I think that south of Scotland, in terms of account management, should be able to define its own sectors and should be able to support accordingly. Even some of the key sectors, for example tourism, I think that there's a handful of businesses across the south of Scotland who are supported by SE on an account managed basis. This is an opportunity for support to be given to a wider range of businesses as reflected by the local business demographic. Mr Lanshire? I think that it goes back to what I said earlier. It's about complementarity of support and no-wrong door approach. If you're a business in the south of Scotland and you walk through the new agency's doors and they can support you on whether it's a growth sector or whether it's business support, that's what they should do. If that's within their remit, that's what they should do. However, if it's not, they should obviously give you guidance and support to signpost you to the likes of Scottish Enterprise, to the likes of SDS, and to the likes of the other agencies that are within the area in an aligned approach. The danger that if we get too caught, I think that this is my remit, this is your remit and that's this remit, is that people get lost in the cracks quite quickly. It needs to be collaborative in terms of no-wrong door approach to move things forward. The other area that I'm quite interested in as well is how do we connect even further beyond those agencies as well into areas like things like UK Industrial Strategy, Scottish National Investment Bank, which really drive investment into some of the great opportunities that exist in the region too. That's not a focus that I don't think we've picked up yet as part of this conversation. It's probably not for now. However, my point being is that I don't think that we can be too rigid in people's remits and responsibilities, but we do need that complementarity. We need that complementarity of services where people can be signposted and pushed towards because there's better support available and it's within their remit and expertise at Scottish Enterprise or SDS or others. Margaret, do you want to comment on that? I just totally agree with what you've said there, Matt, because we certainly, the organisations that we've started up, we do bring Business Gateway in for some support and not so much for Scottish Enterprise, but that's because of size. However, that's what we need to do. There's no wrong approach to this. We just have to make sure that whoever is best placed to offer the support that that's made to the businesses when they're starting up and we can get or when they're looking to grow, which is my real hope that we'll get some real growth. John Swinney. John Swinney. The other area that I wanted to ask about was attracting investment into the area. Is that something that you actually want? Do you think that we want in the South of Scotland to have more bigger branches of international organisations? I think that you've had a bad experience with Pinnies and if you put 400 jobs all in the one factory, that sounds a bit like putting all your eggs in the one basket. Is that something that the agency should be doing? Or would you just rather that we kept lots of small businesses and help them do better? Business about me includes social enterprises? I've started with you a couple of times.  Business is good for an area where it's indigenous and scale up in terms of providing jobs and economic growth, whether that's a micro business, whether that's a 10-person business or whether that's a 1,000-person business in an area. The agency should be focusing on how it can support driving high quality, fair work jobs into the region and moving forward, as well as supporting those indigenous businesses that wish to scale up as well. In terms of investment, to support any of that, it needs investment in infrastructure, whether that's transport infrastructure, roads, railways, et cetera. There's a role for both government and private and public sector to support investment, too, to allow those opportunities to attract maybe a global national entity, but also to allow the scale up of businesses within that area, too. I think that it's too full. The focus should be—I'm not saying we should just run after every international business, but would you come if you didn't think that there were skills in the area, that there weren't the transport links, et cetera, as well? I don't think that we can just see the attraction of large corporates in isolation from the other needs of the area and what needs investment in terms of infrastructure as well, because that allows your indigenous businesses to grow, support, go further. Digital connectivity is part of infrastructure investment, too. Yes, I think that the short answer is yes. We need both. I think that this is an opportunity for the new agency to show leadership. I think that any success in this will depend on the new organisation, the new agency, developing that close link with the Scottish Government, Scottish Enterprise and the other agencies that attract inward investment, making sure that the priorities for the new south of Scotland economy or the emerging south of Scotland economy are known and understood at the national agency level, so that the priorities that will keep changing as it grows will be known and understood, so that the investment will come if it's available. Do you think that Scottish Enterprise has been more keen to get businesses in the east of Brighter V rather than forgetting about the south of Scotland? I think that you have to judge Scottish Enterprise on their results, and the economy in the south of Scotland is clearly not flourishing. I am all for inward investment because I really think that we need to build on the infrastructure, and I hope that the city region will benefit from that. However, the one thing that I do not want would be to see what has happened in the past. If some investment comes in, organisations come in, they take the money and go, and then we are left to pick up the pieces. That is not the kind of investment that I would want to see for my region. I would like it to be sustainable, long-term and skills-based. The next question is from Richard Lyle Richard. You are quite right, Margaret Simpson, to be sustainable and long-term. Last week, the Scottish Government's bill team confirmed that the Government is not proposing to give south of Scotland Enterprise those powers, including compulsory purchase powers, powers to enter land without permission, powers to require people to give information under penalty, penalty of criminal sanction for not providing it, and those powers are not being pursued for the south of Scotland agency. Do you believe—and I am sure that you will—that the south of Scotland Enterprise is to work and to be successful and to drive forward what you have spoken about this morning? The need for investment in the region has the same powers as Scottish Enterprise and HIE, specifically compulsory purchase powers, powers to enter on to land, powers to require people to give information, and in my view, full powers, not part powers, to start with. I am sure that that is not a leading question. Who would like to go with that? Yes. Why would you want to tie their hands in any way to give them all the powers that they need? Matt? I cannot really answer it to be quite frank, because I have not read that part of the bill itself. I can come back to you on it. I think that there is certainly a different fault on it, that is what I will say for now. I think that there is different faults on what should be in the bill in terms of those compulsory purchase powers and so on. Have we got a position on that? We do not, but I can come back to you, Richard, after the committee to suggest more. I have not had people on the phone constantly asking that question, but what I do think that the organisation needs is the ability to be agile. We are facing a very uncertain economic period. Whatever happens south of the border today, we are going to be facing a very uncertain economic period. The new agency will be coming on stream, probably right in the middle of all that, so it needs to be agile. It needs to be able to deal with any economic shocks across the south of Scotland in a way that perhaps Scottish enterprise was slow to in the wake of the bigger recession of 2008 to 2009. Richard, do you have any more questions? It has been my view since we started looking at this bill, maybe a comment rather than a question, that we have to give you the full powers. When I worked with the Royal Bank, I was in the Dumfries Galloway in the Scottish border and I know all the different towns that you are speaking to. They all have different needs. In Stranra, I had a need better than Dumfries. Do you want something that is going to work rather than something that is just a swap? Everyone is nodding by the way. I think that that is a yes. Jamie, you had a question, I think. Thank you. I was just to really follow on. It is not necessarily around the powers that the agency should have, but one of the complaints that we hear often from small businesses or medium-sized businesses is access to working capital to grow their businesses. Do you think that this agency will have any additional resource in that respect, or will it just be a co-ordination role in terms of existing government bodies that are able to provide funds to businesses? I think that it absolutely has to have capital to invest, money to invest. I would be very concerned if the amount being spent on the running of the agency dwarfed the amount that it had to give out for business development and social enterprise development. I totally agree with what Norma is saying. It does not need to be massive amounts, but a small amount can make a big difference, especially when you are trying. It is about the support as well. Matt, I agree. There are many pots of money out there that businesses can access. Some are maybe restricted to one type of business or another. If that can help to co-ordinate and ensure easy access to those funds and perhaps provide some additionality—again, I keep making that point about additionality—if it can do that, that would be great. Fine. There is one final question that I would like to ask. As it is coming up to Christmas, we are all used to writing wish lists. As I am not in the Government, I cannot promise to deliver this one, but is there anything not included in the bill that the witnesses feel that they should be in the bill? I will give you all the chance to answer that. You can add one thing on your wish list if there is anything that you would like to add. I do not think that I would necessarily add anything to the bill. It is essentially a piece of enabling legislation. What we do want to see is a plan. We want businesses in the south of Scotland to be part of the development of that plan, and we want to see it as soon as possible. So, the fact that there is not mention of a plan and reviews within the bill, you do not think that it is necessarily that important? I do not think so. I think that the bill is there to create the agency. It is a means to an end, but obviously how the agency operates is something that businesses across the area would want to clearly see. I am going to work straight down the line. Briefly following on from Gary, I have said it before. I do not think that it is for the bill itself. I think that the new agency needs a clear vision that people are behind, including businesses themselves. It needs outcomes attached to what operating plan that it comes up with around economic growth productivity, et cetera, that we have already discussed. It needs to look beyond the region. The danger is that it just becomes too local in its thinking, and that is good at the start, but it needs to go past that and look at the opportunities beyond its boundaries. Margaret? I think that everything that has been said, but I would make a plea for the third sector, especially my sector, to be involved. I am not sure if it is for the bill. I think that I would like it to be in the bill. That is a per capita approach to funding. If the agency were to be given funding that relates to the population, as I believe that I have had, we would have never had that before. That would be a very good starting point. Thank you very much for coming in and giving evidence this morning on this important bill. I am now briefly going to suspend the meeting to allow you to depart, and committee members, if you could be back here in five minutes, are ready to start the next agenda item. I suspend the meeting. Thank you. We are going to move on to agenda item 2, which is the European Withdrawal Act 2018. There are seven notifications. We have received consent notifications in relation to seven UKSIs as detailed on the agenda. These cover common fisheries policy, common agricultural policy, in trade in animals and related products. All these instruments are being laid in the UK Parliament in relation to the European Union Withdrawal Act 2018. All seven have been categorised by the Scottish Government in general as category A, i.e., making minor or technical amendments. Six of the proposed SI's on the common agricultural policy could also be considered as category B to the extent that the transition from the EU to a UK framework would be a major significant development. Are there any comments before I suggest possible outcomes in relation to this? John, you want to make a comment? Thank you very much, convener. The phrase minor or technical is dotted throughout these documents. On one level, that is very correct, although it is often the replacement of EU with the words UK. Nonetheless, many of those relate to very far-reaching implications, so I know that we are going to come on to some possible options, because I would certainly want, and I am particularly looking at things such as the common agricultural payments and the trade in animals and related products, that we maintain a watching brief on those. Does anyone else have any comments? Jamie. The committee will note that two of the SI's are England-only instruments. My question to the Scottish Government is whether it will propose Scottish SSIs to reflect similar changes. Does anyone else have any comments? As I am going to pass a comment, I should declare an interest that I am a partner in a farming enterprise in Scotland. However, the only comment that I am going to make is based on what Mr Finlay said and what Jamie Greene said is that it is appropriate for the committee to agree to write to the Scottish Government to confirm its content for the consent for the UK SSIs to be referred to in the notifications to be given, but no request for response from the Scottish Government on the wider policy matters identified. Is the committee agreed on that? That is agreed. The next item on the agenda is a public petition. The committee will consider the following petition, and that is PE 1598 by Guy Linley-Adams, on behalf of the Salmon and Tract Conservation Scotland on protecting wild samonoids from sea lice from Scottish salmon farms. The committee has invited to consider whether it wishes to take any further action in relation to the petition. Options include—yes, I will come to you, Mr Llyw, when I have given the options— is options to include closing the petition given that the issues raised in the petition have been addressed in the salmon farming in Scotland inquiry, or we could agree to take any other action that the committee considers in prep. Mr Llyw, you would like to make a comment. I agree with the first option that says closing the petition given that the issues raised in the petition have been fully and previously considered in the salmon farming in Scotland inquiry, which we have recently completed. Does anyone have any other comments? I agree that this particular petition should be closed in light of the significant work that the committee did on the issue. I still think that it would be prudent for the committee to think about during the course of the remainder of the parliamentary term to consider whether the recommendations given in the report have been implemented or taken on board by the Government at some point before the end of the term. Does anyone else have any comments? I can take on board the comments that you have made, but I do not remember what you have put in our sunset clause, but I am quite relaxed about your comments. In relation to the petition, it seems appropriate from the comments that we have had around the table that we write to the petitioner saying that we have closed the petition and informed the petition committee that we have done to. If that is agreed, the committee will now move into private session.