That concludes topical questions. We now move on to the next item of business, which is a statement by the First Minister on Scotland's place in Europe. The First Minister will take questions at the end of the statements, so there should be no interruptions or interventions, as Colin Diggas has said. Siding officer, let me begin today by expressing my condolences and sympathies to all those affected by last night's appalling attack in Berlin.  Felly, mae'r niwed i'r gymhau yng Nghymru. Rwasgwyl i dystafell sydd fyddwn i gyflwynt ddiweddol, ysgolenedd, yn eu yw eu rhai. Dyma'r cymdeilio'r cyllidau, yn ymddiannau, i ddim yn agorau amser yn ei bethau, i ddod iddo i gynnwyslernosio celytionol, ond itpau—i rhaid i wneud ofeth y deallus cyfan—o eu meidio. Rydyn ni'n rhoi wrth eu prifsgwyr. Brachysau yn y bydd, ac yn ffraeg yng Nghymru i'w prifsgwyr oedd ymddangosidd gyda'r iawn. Rydyn ni'n rhoi'n eu hwnnw gan ynghymru, ac rydyn ni'n The paper is actually the first and only detailed plan for dealing with the implications of Brexit to be published by any government in any part of the UK. Six months on, the fact that there is still no clarity, no plan, no direction and no leadership from the UK Government on an issue of such profound importance to every individual and every business across our country quite frankly beggars belief. This should be of particular concern to MSPs in this chamber, as there are many here who believe and who argued that the case for leave was sold on a false prospectus. As everyone knows, I believe that Scotland should be an independent country. As an independent country, we should be full members of the EU. Indeed, if we were independent, we would not now be facing the situation of being taken out of the EU against our will. The manifesto on which I was elected as First Minister just eight months ago said expressly in relation to independence that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. That change of circumstances has occurred and there can therefore be no question about the legitimacy of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish people considering afresh the question of independence if that is necessary to protect our interests. I have made clear and I do so again today that the option of independence must remain on the table. Without this option, Scotland would simply have to accept the inevitability of whatever decisions the UK Government makes, no matter how damaging they are to Scotland's interests. That is not a position, in my view, that any serious politician or party should ever be content for Scotland to be in. As First Minister, it is my duty to ensure that all options are open to Scotland in these unprecedented times. However, as I have also made clear, independence is not the focus of the paper that we have published today. The paper that we published earlier today is about fulfilling in full the commitment that I made to the Scottish people in June. The day after the referendum I promised to explore not just my preferred option of independence but all options to protect Scotland's place in and relationship with Europe. The paper also delivers on the mandate that was given to this Government by Parliament on 28 June. I quote, I explore options for protecting Scotland's relationship with the EU, Scotland's place in the single market and the social employment and economic benefits that come from that. I said specifically that we would seek to find a solution that would enable Scotland's voice to be heard and our interests protected from within the UK. That paper fulfills that commitment. Indeed, it goes further and sets out ways forward that I believe would also be in the interests of the rest of the UK and indeed in the interests of other European nations. Scotland's place in Europe sets out practical proposals to keep Scotland in the European single market. It also details the additional powers that the Scottish Parliament will need to serve, protect and promote Scotland's economic and social interests in the post-Brexit landscape. Let me be very clear that those proposals fall short of what I consider to be the best option for Scotland and for the UK, full membership of the European Union. In the unlikely event that the UK Government had a change of heart and decides to remain in the EU, it would have my support, but that is clearly not an outcome in my gift. I am therefore seeking to set out a sensible way forward for Scotland that respects the reality of the situation that we find ourselves in. In that regard, those proposals represent a significant compromise on the part of the Scottish Government, not a high bar for the UK Government to pass. The proposals in that paper are a serious and a genuine attempt to build consensus, to square the circle created by the referendum result and to unify the country around a clear plan to protect our interests. I hope and expect that the UK Government, in considering those proposals, will demonstrate the same flexibility and willingness to compromise. I also hope that Opposition parties will consider those proposals seriously. To those who say that they want to protect Scotland's place in Europe but do not get behind those proposals, the question will be, if not this plan, then what? Simply criticising the Scottish Government's proposals without coming up with alternatives will be tantamount to telling Scotland that it simply has to suck up whatever the Tory Brexit Government at Westminster decides, no matter how damaging. I suspect—they may prove me wrong but I doubt it—that that will be the position of the Scottish Conservatives, but it will be a much harder, I would suggest, impossible position for Labour and the Liberals to explain. Let me turn now to the detail of the paper. It sets out in some considerable depth why keeping our place in the single market matters so much. It matters principally to our economy, to jobs, trade, living standards and investment. It is estimated that being outside the single market could cost the Scottish economy 80,000 jobs. Workers could lose £2,000 a year after a decade of a hard Brexit. Being in the single market also ensures protection for workers and consumer rights. It facilitates the flow of skills that our economy depends on and allows all of us to travel, work, study and live across Europe, if we so wish. It will guarantee the rights of EU citizens already living here—something that, disgracefully, the UK Government has still not done six months on. It provides a platform for co-operation on some of the major issues of our times, like climate change. The paper sets out the primary ways in which Scotland's place in the single market can be protected. It has three principal strands. First, we propose that the UK as a whole should stay in the single market by remaining a party to the European Economic Area agreement and that it should also stay in the customs union. It is important to remember that membership of the EU and of the single market are not one and the same. They are, in fact, two distinct propositions, as the position of three of the four EFTA countries demonstrates. I accept that there is a mandate in England and Wales to take the UK out of the EU. However, I do not accept that there is a mandate to take any part of the UK out of the single market. It would make no economic sense whatsoever for the UK to leave the single market. In fact, it would be economic folly of the highest order. It would be entirely democratically justifiable for the UK to remain within the single market. The Scottish Government will continue to argue and seek to build consensus with others of Light Mind across the UK for continued UK membership of the single market. However, I reluctantly accept that, as things stand, given the rhetoric of the Conservative Government, that seems at this stage an unlikely outcome. The Tories, quite unbelievably in my view, seem intent on placing a higher priority on cutting immigration than on absolutely anything else. The economy jobs living standards all lag way behind on their list of priorities. As a result, the second strand of the paper proposes ways in which Scotland could stay in the single market through EFTA and the EEA, even if the rest of the UK chooses to leave. The paper does not shy away from the challenges associated with such an option. On the contrary, the paper specifically identifies the key challenges that would be faced. For example, how continued membership of the single market could be achieved without Scotland being an independent country, the legislative and regulatory requirements, the issue of financial contributions and the practical implications around free movement of goods, services and people. Crucially, it sets out the basis of how each of those challenges could be overcome if the political will exists to do so. It is also very important to note—I know that many across the chamber have emphasised this point—that the option does not prioritise membership of the EU single market over continued free trade across the UK. Talk of a hard border for Scotland has always rung hollow and will continue to do so from a UK Government that says that no such border will be required between a post-Brexit UK and the Republic of Ireland, a continuing member of the EU and customs union. However, that argument aside, this paper sets out clearly how free movement of goods, services and people would continue across the UK, even with Scotland, in the single market and the rest of the UK not. In that respect, it is worth emphasising that what we propose would not see Scotland having a different relationship with the customs union to the rest of the UK. We hope that the UK will stay in the customs union. If it does so, then this proposal would enable Scotland to be in both the single market and the customs union. However, if the UK opts to leave the customs union, then Scotland, in common with other FDOT EEA countries, would not be in the customs union either. There will, of course, be disadvantages to Scottish business if we are not in the customs union, which is why I argue that the UK should stay in it, although those disadvantages would be minimised if Scotland remained in the single market. However, under this proposal, the border between Scotland and England would not be an external EU customs border. What is in effect of customs union now between Scotland and the rest of the UK would continue. Now, there will be those who say that I know that a differentiated option for Scotland, such as the one that we propose, would be too difficult to achieve. As I have said already, this paper does not underestimate the challenges. However, I think that it is important in response to that suggestion to consider those three points. First, it is the case that there are already today a range of asymmetric and differential arrangements in operation within the EU and single market framework. Denmark, Greenland, the Faroe Islands is one, the Channel Islands another. There are many others. The solution that we seek for Scotland would be different, of course, in detail and scale to many of those arrangements, but it would not be different in principle. Secondly, the UK Government already appears open to a flexible Brexit approach in relation to different sectors of the economy, as we have already seen in their approach to Nissan. It will also be necessary to take a flexible approach in relation to Northern Ireland and to Gibraltar. There is, quite simply, no good reason why such flexibility should not also apply to Scotland. Lastly, as we are now seeing on an almost daily basis, everything about Brexit will be difficult, challenging and unprecedented. The negotiations ahead will be characterised in all respects, particularly if the UK does intend to leave the single market and customs union by a need to find practical solutions to a whole range of complex issues. It is in that spirit that we seek to find solutions that will respect the voice and protect the interests of Scotland. The final strand of the paper deals with the powers of this Scottish Parliament. It is, in my firm view, time for a fundamental reconsideration of the devolution settlement in light of Brexit. The paper argues that, in light of the removal of rights and responsibilities provided by EU law and whatever the outcome of the Brexit negotiations, Scotland's interests within the UK demand considerably enhanced and strengthened powers for this Parliament. The paper that we have published today looks at three broad categories of powers that must now be considered. First, it looks at the power set to be repatriated from the EU, which currently sits within Scottish Parliament responsibility, for example, fishing, the environment, justice and agriculture. I hope that all members will agree unreservedly that those powers must remain firmly and unambiguously within devolved competence. If there is a need to agree UK-wide arrangements on any matter, for example, such as animal welfare, that must be done by agreement, not by imposition, Brexit must not become an excuse for a Westminster power grab. Secondly, powers to be repatriated that are not currently devolved should also now be considered for devolution. Powers in areas such as employment law and social protection would allow this Parliament to protect key rights and avoid the risk of a deregulated race to the bottom by Westminster. Thirdly, a much broader range of powers to protect Scotland's interests and support a differentiated solution of the kind proposed in the paper must also be considered, for example, power over immigration. Indeed, it is worth noting, I think, that growing support across the UK for greater flexibility over immigration is now increasingly being expressed. In short, the proposals in the paper are detailed, they are serious and they are reasonable. They are designed deliberately and unashamedly to respect Scotland's voice and protect our interests, while also acknowledging and respecting the vote in other parts of the UK and the position that the UK Government now finds itself in as a result. Let me now briefly set out how we intend to take those proposals forward. We accept absolutely that the negotiation that will start on the triggering of article 50 will be a negotiation between the UK and the EU. We are not seeking a separate parallel negotiation with EU institutions or member states. That is why those proposals are aimed first and foremost at the UK Government. We want the UK Government to make clear when it triggers article 50 that it intends to stay in the single market and the customs union. If it will not do so, we want the UK Government to seek, as part of its negotiation, a differentiated solution for Scotland as set out in this paper. We will submit those proposals formally to the UK Government through the joint ministerial committee framework for discussion in the new year. I intend that this Parliament will continue to be involved and informed at every step of the way, as it has been already through 11 parliamentary debates to date on different aspects of Brexit. The Prime Minister, when I met her in Edinburgh in July, pledged to fully and fairly consider the proposals that we brought forward. She repeated that commitment without reservation when I spoke to her yesterday, and I welcome that. It is beyond any doubt whatsoever that the Brexit vote, with its different outcomes in different parts of the UK, has raised fundamental questions for all of us. It has raised fundamental questions about our relationship with Europe, but it has also raised fundamental questions about how political power is exercised across the UK. To the Westminster Government, my message could not be clearer. Your response to those proposals will tell us much, perhaps it will tell us everything that we need to know about whether the UK is, in reality, the partnership of equals that you claim it to be. To our European partners, I want today to reaffirm our belief in and our commitment to the core values of solidarity, co-operation and democracy that underpin the European Union. To the people of Scotland, I pledge this. I will continue to do everything that I can to protect your interests as we navigate the challenging times ahead. The First Minister will now take questions. There will be around 40 minutes for questions, so if members wish to ask a question, please press their request-to-speak button now, and I call on Ruth Davidson. We all here want the best deal for Scotland in the Brexit talks that are to come. On this side of the chamber, we believe that that means coming together to negotiate hard in the interests of all of us in the UK, not throwing up more divisions between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom. It is vital that the SNP Government begins to recognise that we achieve more by pulling together and not pulling apart. We believe that there is plenty of scope to do just that. There is plenty of room for agreement between the UK and Scottish Governments, perhaps more than the SNP likes to think. Given that we are all part of the same country, perhaps that is not a surprise. We all want the freest possible trade between the UK and the EU. We all want a deal that will allow our firms to continue to sell and operate within the European single market. We all want a deal that ensures that European companies can still do the same here. I am confident that the Scottish Government and the UK Government can work together to achieve that. However, I have to question many other areas of the SNP Government's approach from today. On its proposals for EEA membership, the Scottish Government's paper in 2013 that such a deal would mean that Scotland's citizens would lose all ability to influence the law and regulations to which they would be subject. The First Minister also said in July that to end up abiding by the rules of the single market but not to be able to set them would be, in her words, giving up control. That breaks one of the SNP's own five tests. Does the First Minister accept that that is the case? On its plan for a separate deal, the First Minister claimed this morning that Scotland could opt to stay in the single market with the UK out without damaging UK free trade. However, many firms such as the head of Scottish engineering are pointing out today that that would mean that Scottish manufacturers having to adopt two different regulatory systems in order to trade in the UK our largest market. He says that that could mean that Scottish firms being ditched for firms elsewhere in the UK. Can the First Minister explain why that would be in Scotland's interests? Lastly, the First Minister insisted this morning that she wanted to find compromise and that she is not using it to manoeuvre for independence. Yet the paper today declares that one of the reasons the SNP supports membership of the European single markets is because it would, in its words, ease the transition to a full independent member state. If she really wants compromise, wouldn't a start be to end all talk of another referendum? Isn't it the time to end the threat of transitioning to something that people in Scotland don't want and have roundly rejected? Ruth Davidson mentioned comments that we made in 2013. We did indeed make those comments about the EEA, but I remind Ruth Davidson that, in 2013, we weren't facing the situation of being taken out of the European Union against our will. In fact, if I can quote Ruth Davidson from around about that period, what she said then was that voting no meant that we stayed in the European Union. Of course, the reality now is that, if we stay in the UK, the choice today is not between EU and EEA. The choice appears to be if we are in the UK between EEA and being out of the single market altogether with all of the damage that we will do. That is why what we are putting forward is a sensible solution. The contempt I hear from the Conservative benches for the views of the Scottish people on this issue, given that the divisions around Brexit were created by the Conservatives, is frankly quite staggering. Ruth Davidson's views might have more credibility if they were remotely consistent with anything that she said either before or in the immediate aftermath of the EU referendum. Remember that lion roaring at Wembley stadium about how Brexit would be a disaster and people were not being told the truth, people deserved the truth? That roaring lion has now been replaced by a meek mouse telling Scotland that it simply has to accept whatever damage Brexit is going to do. That is the transformation in Ruth Davidson. However, it was not just before the EU referendum, but after the referendum, the week after, on 30 June, Ruth Davidson came to this chamber at First Minister's question and she said, and I quote, that retaining her place in the single market should be the overriding priority. She asked me what I was going to do to secure it. Today, I have put forward proposals that would secure Scotland's place in the single market. The question for Ruth Davidson is whether she is on the side of the people of Scotland in trying to protect her place in Europe and in trying to stop the damage that Brexit will do or whether she is simply on the side of the hard Brexiteers in London. I suspect that we have got the answer to that question today. I associate myself with the remarks of the First Minister's regards to the atrocious events that we have seen in Berlin over the past 24 hours. Scottish Labour has and continues to be supportive of the Scottish Government's right to be fully involved in the negotiations about our future in the aftermath of the EU referendum. Today, we welcome the starting point of the Scottish Government's approach, and we agree that the best outcome of Brexit would be for the whole of the United Kingdom to continue to enjoy the benefits of the European single market and the EU customs union. We have had, I think, 13 debates on Brexit in this Parliament, and Labour has voted with the SNP on 12 of those occasions. The only time we diverted was when the SNP suggested that the European single market was somehow more important to Scotland than the UK single market, and that is clearly wrong. The First Minister should therefore accept that and end the uncertainty facing our economy by ruling out a second independence referendum. As we work out the future for our relationship with Europe, it is important to recognise that this is not just a decision for the Tory Government in Westminster, as Alex Salmond tried to suggest at the weekend. There are 27 other nations of the EU that also have a say. That is, of course, the very nature of the European project. The Scottish Government document refers to the need for the reshaping of the UK constitution. The United Kingdom is leaving the European Union, and we therefore need to start developing a plan for what happens when powers are repatriated from Brussels to Britain. I note that much of the Scottish Government's paper today sits well with what Labour proposed two weeks ago, particularly with regards to powers on agriculture, fisheries, employment law and workers' rights. I therefore ask the First Minister, if she agrees with me, that we need a people's constitutional convention across the United Kingdom to talk about power, where it sits and how it is exercised. No, I do not. I think that what Scotland really needs now is politicians that will stand up for its interests and make sure that Westminster does not walk all over those interests. At the time that people's convention had met, deliberated and decided, we would already be out of the European Union. We would already be out of the single market. Those jobs would be on their way to being lost. We need action now. I welcome some of what Kezia Dugdale has said. There are welcome or support for what we said around more powers, but let us get on with pressurising the UK Government to deliver them. I welcome what she said about the UK staying within the single market, but what she did not comment on was our proposal to try to keep Scotland in the single market. Kezia Dugdale has said to me on more than one occasion that she wants Scotland to stay in the UK and in Europe. We have put forward a plan that sets out a way for us to achieve that. Is Kezia Dugdale going to back that or not? We know that she does not support independence, although I am not so sure if in her heart that is really Kezia Dugdale's position, and I suspect that she knows that I suspect that. I take that that is the position of the Scottish Labour Party. If she does not support independence and she is not prepared to get full square behind the proposals in this paper, she needs to come up with some of her own proposals. The only alternative is to do what the Tories are doing and say that it is all down to Westminster. I hope that we can work together, but it is time for the Scottish Labour Party to get off the fence and start to back Scotland unequivocally. Willie Rennie I think that all our thoughts are with the families and the victims in Berlin. I thank the First Minister also for an advanced copy of her statement, along with the rest of the country, but nevertheless we thank her for an advanced copy of it. It is regrettable that the First Minister has given up on the UK remaining part of the European Union, despite committing to explore all of the options. It is not one of her three options set out in her report today. We will not give up on the United Kingdom in the European Union, even if others have. The First Minister's differentiated option of Scotland in the single market is confused and complex. Independence, however, is at the very front of the document, the very back of the document. It is clear that independence is front and centre, as it has been for the First Minister's entire political life. Is it not the fact that the First Minister does not want any other option to succeed as she only wants Scottish independence? Firstly, to Willie Rennie. I imagine that he would have noticed this by now, because I think that everybody else has. Everything about Brexit is confused and complex, so in a situation where everything is confused and complex, surely our duty is to try to get the best deal for Scotland. To try to navigate the path through that is best for Scotland. I would seriously have hoped that the Liberal Democrats, who are enthusiastic in their support for our place in Europe, would have been able to get behind those proposals. Does Willie Rennie not understand how ridiculous the first part of his question sounded that I have given up on the UK staying within the EU? I would love the UK to stay in the EU. I did not want there to be a referendum on EU membership and I want the UK to stay in. If the UK Government has a change of heart and decides that it wants to stay in the EU, it will have my wholehearted and enthusiastic support for that option. However, that does not appear very likely at the moment to Willie Rennie. I have to set out a path that deals with the reality of the situation that we are in. That is what we are doing—setting out serious, reasonable and sensible proposals. To all the parties in this chamber, I say this and I say it in all sincerity. If you think that there are flaws in those proposals, if you think that there are areas where those proposals can be strengthened, then bring your ideas and suggestions, because simply sitting there in the sidelines criticising the only Government bringing forward a plan for Brexit just is not good enough. So, if you want to bring forward your suggestions, I am all ears. Bruce Crawford, to be followed by Murdo Fraser. Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, do you agree that there are many sectors that are highly dependent on EU citizens who choose to live and work in Scotland? For instance, the tourism and agriculture industry, which rely heavily on workers from other EU countries, or the health and social care sector, where there are about 1,400 doctors working in Scotland who are from other EU countries. Can the First Minister tell me what comfort she can provide to those EU citizens as a result of the proposals that the Scottish Government published today? Does the First Minister agree with me that the impact on our economy and, indeed, on our society as a result of those EU citizens not being able to remain in Scotland would be as dramatic as it would be unacceptable? First Minister. Yes, I agree with that in terms of what those proposals mean for EU citizens already living here. Scotland is staying in the single market, either with the whole of the UK or separately from the UK that chooses to leave the single market, would secure the rights of people already living here. But Scotland being in the single market would do that, do more than that. It would also mean that freedom of movement could continue, because that is important to our economy and that is what is so often missed from much of the debate about immigration. Bruce Crawford rightly talks about the different sectors of our economy, the parts of our public services that are heavily reliant on people who choose to live and work in this country from other parts of the European Union. I want to see that continue, just as I want to see the situation continue, where people from Scotland and the rest of the UK can go and visit or study or work in or live in other European countries. I think that that is good for economies across Europe, but I also think that it is good for our culture, our societies and for increasing the mutual understanding between different countries, and I think that that is something that we should give up very reluctantly. The paper sets out very clearly how that can be continued, and that is one of the reasons why I am sitting here looking through some of the many supportive comments that have been issued today about this paper from stakeholders across Scotland. It is quite striking how many of them, whether in the private sector or in our university sector or in our public sector, specifically mention the importance of freedom of movement. I hope that it is one of the reasons why people get behind this plan. The First Minister and her front bench colleagues have been on a charm offensive across Europe over the past six months. Given that any differentiate deal for Scotland would require the unanimous support of the other 27 Governments within the EU, can she tell us today how many other EU Governments have signalled their in-principle support for her proposal? If Murdo Fraser ever wants any lessons on charm offensives, I would be happy to arrange for my colleagues to provide them. Is barely a serious question from some— Anybody who asked that question hasn't read the serious proposals that we've put forward. What we have said very clearly is that we're not seeking at this stage a parallel negotiation with the European Union. We recognise that for those proposals to work, then in due course, of course they will require the agreement of other European countries, but first and foremost we require to persuade the UK Government to make them part of their negotiating strategy. Another example of how we are doing this in a logical, sensible way that puts the interests of Scotland first. I readily accept that people across this chamber disagree with aspects of the Scottish Government's approach to this, and there is, of course, disagreement on the issue of independence, but surely as we seek to navigate a way through this situation, complex, unprecedented, one that we didn't create, that we try to navigate a way through it that is right for Scotland, then surely we should expect this chamber to get behind us as we do so. Lewis Macdonald, to be followed by Ross Greer. Thank you very much, the First Minister says that if there are flaws in her proposals or different ideas, then she's all ears. It's pity that that was not the ten of our response to our suggestion of a constitutional convention. Even though her own paper says very clearly that it recognises the need for constitutional change across the UK. Let me give her the opportunity to respond in the way that she's described. Paragraph 157 of the paper says that the conditions of membership of the single market would make no difference to trade to and from different parts of the UK, even though the European single market dictates common rules and standards. Paragraph 149 appears to say that the issue of different conditions of sale of goods and services applying to different parts of the UK is merely an administrative matter, even though it is surely the single hardest question that her proposals have to address. Since she clearly does understand that the single market and the customs union are not the same thing, can she explain how Scotland can belong to two different single markets at one time at the same time and make an attempt to build support for proposals rather than simply seeking to divide? The paper sets out much of the detail of this. There will not be a difference of approach in terms of the customs union between Scotland and the rest of the UK under this proposal, so the Scotland-England border will not be an external EU customs border. The customs union that effectively exists across the UK right now would continue. Round the external UK border, regardless of what happens with a differential solution for Scotland, if the UK is out of the single market and the customs union, it will require to be administrative arrangements to assess tariffs and standards. If Scotland was in a different relationship to the single market to the rest of the UK, then those external border arrangements would have to take account of that to make sure that the correct tariffs or arrangements were applied to goods and services depending on where in the UK they originated or where in the UK they were intended to be sold. None of that applies to the border between Scotland and England. The paper sets that out in detail. I am more than happy to engage and have my officials engage with any member of this chamber who wants to discuss those issues of practicality in greater detail. The paper readily concedes that all of those issues will require to be discussed with the UK Government in greater detail. Aside from all of that, I would make the point, and it is probably better directed at this side of the chamber to be fair than to this side of the chamber. We have a UK Government right now that is saying that there will be no requirement for a hard border between a post-Brexit UK and a Republic of Ireland that will still be in the EU and still in the customs union. David Davis went to Ireland not too long ago and explicitly said that Ireland will not have to choose between the EU and the UK. I know that there are obviously different circumstances pertaining to Ireland, but in a practical sense, if the UK Government can say that with such certainty for an independent country that is still going to be in the customs union, then why on earth would we not be able to continue free trade across the UK, where Scotland and the rest of the UK would have a common position in terms of the customs union? Yes, let's continue to discuss the detail, but if there is political will to do that, then those points of detail can be resolved and those challenges can be overcome. Finally, on the constitutional convention, I want to work with others who are willing to work with us across the chamber. I know that there are areas of common ground between the Scottish Government and Labour, and I am genuinely, sincerely keen to work on them. However, on the issue of just putting everything into a constitutional convention, it would be fiddling while Rome burns. We need to address those issues now. We need to get on with it. I do not think that it is a mystery what powers this Parliament needs to protect Scotland's interests. Let's get on with it. That is what the interests of Scotland demand. Ross Greer, followed by Ivan McKee. The Greens welcome that the Scottish Government is proposing options for Scotland's continued relationship with Europe, but today's proposals make a significant compromise. They are not what our electorate voted for and the amount to damage limitation is not a positive solution for Scotland. We recognise that attempt to find a compromise with the UK Government, but will the First Minister confirm that this is the greatest extent to which the Scottish Government is willing to compromise, given that further concessions would result in unacceptable damage to Scotland? In addition, today's publication makes clear the Scottish Government's commitment to free movement of people. The UK Government, on the other hand, seems committed to prioritising free movement of capital over people. Will the First Minister confirm that this is not an area where it is willing to compromise with the UK Government? The First Minister. I do not think that the Scottish Government's position when it comes to free movement of people could be in any doubt at all. I do think that even our sternest critics would have to concede that the Scottish Government, in the face often of criticism and often quite tough challenge, has always stood up for the principle of freedom of movement and has never been prepared to be part of the anti-immigration rhetoric that regrettably we have seen from some, not in this chamber but in other parts of the UK. I hope that that is beyond any doubt. I have said very explicitly—the paper, I think, says it explicitly—that this is a compromise position. This is not my preferred option. I want Scotland and, for the benefit of Willie Rennie, I want the UK to stay in the European Union. That is what I argued for, and unlike some in the chamber I have not changed my mind or my position on that. I think that the best option is Scotland and, indeed, the UK being in the European Union. I will make two further points. First, I have to deal with the reality of the situation that we find ourselves in. That is what I am seeking to do. First, I recognise that, as First Minister, not just as leader of the SNP, I have a duty to try to find a way through this situation that is not of our making and that tries to bring as many people across Scotland together in consensus as possible. That is what I am trying to do. It is what I will continue to try to do. I hope that I can persuade people across the chamber, or at least across most of the chamber, to get behind us on this and to be part of the discussion around the detail of this that will be required to take part. However, with this chamber, I will continue to seek to persuade people across the country that this is the way forward that we should embrace. I hope that I will have the green support recognising absolutely that Ross Greer and I share a view when it comes to independence for Scotland. I welcome the proposal from the Scottish Government, enabling Scotland to stay in the single market after Brexit. It will do much to mitigate the economic damage of Brexit to individuals and businesses in Glasgow province and across Scotland. The proposal is also good for businesses across the UK, enabling them to trade in the EU single market after Brexit using Scotland as a base. What evaluation has been done of the economic benefits to Scotland and to the rest of the UK of this proposal compared to a hard Brexit? That is a really good question. It is challenging at the moment to do—giffen that the Tories have put Scotland into this position, frankly they are content for this entire debate—it is quite disgraceful this afternoon. Those are serious issues for every individual and every business across this country, and they are being treated with contempt by the Conservative benches. I do not think that that will be lost on many people. It is challenging to do specific analysis and modelling while the position of the rest of the UK is so uncertain and unknown at the moment, but it is an important point that we should continue to model the economic impacts of the options as they take shape. However, there is a point here. I hope that it is one that is not lost. That is why I said that those proposals, although they are unashamedly motivated by Scotland's best interests, are in the interests of the rest of the UK as well. For part of the UK, even just part of it, still to be within the single market, I think would have economic benefits for the whole of the UK. I would hope that that is something that the UK Government would consider when it gives its wider consideration to those proposals. I think that it is a very important point to have been raised this afternoon. First Minister categorically states within the paper that, in her view, the best option is for Scotland to become a full member of the EU as an independent country. As the First Minister will no doubt be aware for a new member to exceed to the EU, there is a comprehensive approval process, including the adoption of EU standards and rules in 35 different policy fields, known as the Aki, which includes chapter 13, full participation in the common fisheries policy. Fergus Ewing stated on 7 December during a debate on fishing negotiations that the common fisheries policy has not been a success for Scottish fisheries, and I recognise that there are opportunities for industry outside the EU, and I fully intend to press the UK Government to make the most of those opportunities. With this clear contradiction within the heart of Government, and given that the First Minister called new powers to this place a fib and a half during the referendum campaign, how does the First Minister intend to represent our coastal communities, as well as the 1 million Scots who voted leave, including the 400,000 SNP supporters, who currently feel that their voice is being ignored and that they are simply being airbrushed from history? First Minister. I think that all that Ross Thomson has managed to demonstrate in that long and winding question is that he has not actually read the proposals that we have published today. One of the things that is said in here is that the option that we put forward for staying in the single market through EFTA and the EEA would mean that Scotland is not within the common fisheries policy, so giving this Parliament much greater flexibility over fishing policy. I appreciate that Ross Thomson is far too young. I am almost too young to remember what I am about to cite here. It was a Conservative Government, remember, that treated the Scottish fishing industry as expendable. Expendable was the word that they have used. I think that it is really important now that we do not give a Tory Government the free hand to treat the Scottish fishing industry as expendable all over again. Lastly, for any Conservative still to be standing here after everything that has happened over the past two years and talking about the difficulties, according to them, of an independent Scotland getting into the European Union. Remember, it was the Conservatives, joined, I may say, by some of their colleagues across the Parliament who said that voting no was the only way to secure our membership of the European Union. Scotland voted no. We are facing exit from the European Union, and that is why we should never, ever, ever listen to a word that the Conservatives have to say on this matter again. Emma Harper is to be followed by Neil Findlay. I welcome the publication of Scotland's place in Europe. Could the First Minister outline what the reaction has been to this dip document? Secondly, does she agree with me that it is disgraceful that, six months on from the vote, the UK Government has produced nothing but meaningless sound bites on their plan for Brexit? The reaction that I have managed to see so far, and I have to start by conceding—I have not seen it all yet—but the reaction that I have seen from stakeholders across Scotland has been very positive. Not everybody will agree with everything in this document.  Across all of the reaction, I have seen quite a warm appreciation of the fact that the Scottish Government alone in these islands at the moment is coming up with some kind of plan to try to get our way through this situation. I look forward to working with those across Civic Scotland, as I look forward to working with others in the chamber as we take those proposals forward. It is the case. Every time I say this, I find myself thinking that it cannot surely be the case. We are six months this week on from the EU referendum, and nobody yet knows any more about what Brexit means than Brexit means than we did on 24 June. If that was just a political debating point, that would be bad enough, but that has implications for the lives and the livelihoods of every single person across the UK. It is an absolute disgrace and the UK Government really needs to get its act together and get its act together soon. Neil Findlay to be followed by Alex Neil. On paragraph 145 of the document, the Government emphasises its desire to stick to current EU rules on procurement, competition law and state aid. Why on earth would we want to stick to rules that prevent industries from being supported by the Government, forces our railways and ferries to go out to tender and prevents the living wage to be paid to all public contractors? Those are three areas of EU law that the Government has previously claimed, frustrated at from taking progressive policy choices. Now the First Minister appears to be preparing to die in a ditch to keep them. How is that stronger for Scotland? At this moment, every member of the Labour front bench is studiously looking at their phone to try to avoid the suggestion that this is the official Labour line. I suspect that it is not. I think that Neil Findlay might feel more comfortable sitting over on this side of the chamber having just expressed. On the substantive question that Neil Findlay raises, it is an important and legitimate question. There are many aspects of the European Union rules and regulations that I do not agree with. He has mentioned some of them that I have long argued should change. We continue to argue should change. From within the European Union, we should argue for changes. There have been some changes to procurement regulations over the past few years. Neil Findlay's approach appears to be that we should throw the baby out of the bathwater because we do not agree with some of those and give up all the benefits of EU membership and single market membership. With the greatest respect, that is just a difference of opinion between us. The real danger of where we are just now is the compromising of workers' rights. We will see if we leave powers that are currently regulated by Europe in the hands of a right-wing Tory Government at Westminster. I do not want to do that. That is why I would rather we stayed in Europe and why I would rather these powers were in the hands of this Parliament, not in the Tories' hands. I am obviously in favour of all those powers coming to the Scottish Parliament with or without Brexit. Can I ask the First Minister a couple of factual questions about the proposed arrangement in the paper? The First Minister is in relation to value-added tax, because, obviously, as part of the single market, value-added tax is the most important taxation aspect to the single market. It is not listed in the list of powers being demanded of the Scottish Government to be transferred to this Parliament. Can I ask the First Minister to look at the issue of value-added tax? The reason it has not been devolved so far, according to the UK Treasury, is because under EU rules we are not allowed to vary it within a state. Under those arrangements, would that rule still apply or would we be able to take full control over all aspects of value-added tax policy in Scotland? I think that there is absolutely no reason now whatsoever why VAT could not be devolved to this Parliament, because the argument is that Alan Neill rightly says about why it cannot be devolved and why we can only be assigned a share of VAT revenues rather than have power to decide is because of European Union. With or without the proposals in this paper, with the UK leaving the European Union, there is no reason why that argument continues. I will look more closely at that and at all other issues that anybody raises if anybody wants to raise issues of detail. However, I repeat again this for all of the undoubted imperfections in those proposals, because there will be, because they are not our ideal solution. In spite of all those imperfections, that is a plan that is about protecting jobs, trade, investment and living standards in Scotland, because the implications of being taken out of the single market for all of those things I think would be devastating. That is why I hope that people, when they have had more of a chance to look at the detail of this, by all means come forward with questions and with suggestions, but I hope that people across the chamber will get behind it. I welcome the document that was published by the Scottish Government this morning.  In that spirit, First Minister, I have a question about what the document says about EEA membership. At paragraph 99, the document says that we, as to say the Scottish Government, are advocating that the UK should remain a full member of the EEA. Yet, only three years ago, the Scottish Government said in a document signed off by the then Deputy First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, that, and I quote, the argument that membership of the EEA is desirable because it allows members to gain access to the single market but without having to adopt all of the regulations that full EU membership requires is simply wrong, unquote. That same document went on to say that the Scottish Government therefore does not consider that EEA membership is a desirable option from a democratic perspective. Not my words, but Nicola Sturgeon's. The Scottish Government was correct about this in 2013, so why has the First Minister you turned, and why is she now advocating membership of the EEA despite the fact that it manifestly fails to meet her own tests of what is in the democratic interest? First Minister, let me be the first to advise Adam Tomkins of a really significant event that has happened in the UK since the time of that quote. There was in June of this year, Mr Tomkins, a referendum across the UK on EU membership. Scotland voted to stay in, but the rest of the UK voted to leave, and now Scotland faces being taken out of the EU against our will. If it was still a choice between the EU and EEA, my view is exactly as he has just quoted, but that is no longer the choice for Scotland if it stays within the UK. The choice is now trying to secure our place in the single market through the EEA or being taken out of the single market by the Tories altogether. His leader asked that question as well. I gave the same answer, so I would end by simply advising Adam Tomkins in future that he should probably listen more to his leader and adapt his questions accordingly. Joan McAlpine, to be followed by Alexander Stewart, can I encourage members to be as brief as possible while trying to get as many members in? Thank you, Presiding Officer. The European Committee has heard evidence and received briefings on the way in which the provinces of Canada and the regions of Belgium are recognised and involved in striking international agreements, and even the cantons of Switzerland set their own immigration policy, and there are many more such examples. Given such examples, does the FM agree that a differentiated first minister—excuse me—agree that a differentiated solution for an empowered Scotland will get a hearing in the EU as long as the UK Government accepts and proposes such a differentiated deal for Scotland? First Minister. Yes, that is why we have directed those proposals, first and foremost, at the UK Government. People talk about the response that we have had from other European countries. The response has been very warm, sympathetic and keen to help. However, the one consistent thing that is said by other European countries is that this will be a negotiation with the UK. Therefore, if we want proposals for different solutions for Scotland to be considered, then we must steer them through the UK process. We have listened to that advice and we are acting accordingly. Joe McAlpine is absolutely right. She is also right to look and cite examples of other countries across not just Europe but the world, where some of what is proposed in this paper already happens. Canada and Belgium, for example, where the devolved areas of Belgium have the kind of treaty-making powers that are talked about in here. We are often told by those on the Opposition benches that this Scottish Parliament is the most powerful devolved Parliament in the world. Looking at some of those other examples would give lie to that. We have an opportunity, if we are to seek to find a solution, as I am trying to do within the UK, to try to get some of those powers and give ourselves much greater ability to protect the interests that are at stake now because of Brexit. We will find plenty of examples. There is probably nothing in here that, in some way, shape or form, albeit different in detail and different in scale, but in some way, shape or form does not apply in some other part of Europe or the world. That should give us great confidence that, if there is the political will, there is no reason why we cannot achieve the ambition that is set out in here. The UK is the fastest-growing economy in G7 and is one of the strongest advanced economies in the world, something that benefits Scotland four times as much as the EU single market. The SNP has set out plans for a separate deal for Scotland, but Professor Michael Keating of the Economic and Social Research Council has said that, if we were to harmonise our regulations with Europe and not the rest of the UK, then it would be very difficult to have free trade in England, particularly in the services. Does the First Minister agree with him, or is he wrong? No, I do not agree with him and I am not sure whether he has read the document. I would be perfectly happy to discuss his views. He is a respected academic, but no, I do not agree. In fact, the paper sets out in detail how it can be possible with the political will to ensure continued free trade across the UK while protecting Scotland's continued place in the single market. Again, I would say to the Conservatives why is it that David Davis goes to Ireland and says to the people of Ireland, you do not need to choose between the EU and the UK, but the Conservatives here say the polar opposite of that to Scotland. In the days of the internet and modern technology, people hear what has been said in other parts of Europe right now, and people will come to the conclusion that the Conservatives' arguments are not based on anything other than not wanting to rock the boat for their colleagues at Westminster. Richard Leonard will be followed by John Mason. The report issue today suggests that employment law and health and safety law be devolved to this Parliament. How are Government plans to consult on the suggestion with who? To what extent the Scottish Government considers that there is a Scottish labour market, a UK labour market and a European Union labour market? I want to see that his powers devolved to the Scottish Parliament. The starting point of consulting on that is the document that proposes that they should be devolved to the Scottish Parliament, which is published today. I hope that Richard Leonard would be in support of the proposal in that regard in that paper. I would simply point out that this is just inescapable. Those powers might already be devolved to the Scottish Parliament if, as I seem to recall, Labour had not argued against them being devolved to the Scottish Parliament in the Smith commission process, where we argued for employment law rights over trade union regulation, which, if we had, we would not have had the trade union bill that has recently gone through Westminster. My and my party have been absolutely consistent in arguing for those powers to be devolved to this Parliament. If it is now the case that Labour backs us on that, I absolutely, unreservedly welcome that and look forward to that support being vocal. John Mason, to be followed by Jackson Carlaw. I wonder if the First Minister agrees with some of the evidence that we have had at the economy committee about the importance of free movement of labour for certain sectors in particular of the economy. For example, we heard from Angus soft fruits, where they said that if they could not have access to labour from other European countries, they might have to scale back and to try to match production to the available labour, or they might have to move production overseas. Absolutely. I specifically did see the evidence that was given by Angus soft fruits. In many ways that encapsulates the fear that many employers in many different parts of the economy have right now, that if their access to labour from other parts of the EU is cut off, that will have a direct and very serious impact on their ability to do business. Angus soft fruit set that out very starkly, which is why freedom of movement is so important. I know that people have very legitimate concerns about immigration, but those of us who believe in the benefits of people from different countries getting to travel and live and work in other countries, we have to be able to stand up and have the courage of our convictions and argue that case, because it is right in so many ways, but it is absolutely right for the interests of our economy. The quote that John Mason has just read out, I think, says that much more starkly than I or any other member of the chamber ever could. Our final question is from Jackson Carlaw. The First Minister is right to draw attention to the population demographic, which demonstrates the need for migratory labour into Scotland. She places undue emphasis on the EU, where currently only 3 per cent of those people working in the United Kingdom choose to settle in Scotland. The other 97 per cent choose to settle elsewhere. Given that we will depend upon a migratory workforce from across the whole of the rest of the United Kingdom, does she not understand that by placing obstacles between Scotland and the rest of the UK she potentially undermines the workforce that we need? Can she tell us what it is about her style of government and economic management that is so deeply unattractive to the other 97 per cent of EU migrants who choose not to settle in Scotland? Jackson Carlaw is somebody that I have enormous respect for. We used to cross swords when I was health secretary and he was opposition health spokesperson. While we disagreed often passionately, I always had real respect for the understanding and the analysis underpinning those disagreements. However, I think that the question he has just asked me in many respects demeans Jackson Carlaw. There is absolutely nothing in this paper that would put a single obstacle on the way of somebody from other parts of the UK wanting to live in Scotland or somebody in Scotland wanting to live in other parts of the UK. As I have said, often in and outside this chamber, my grandmother came from England. Many of my family live in England. The idea that no matter our political disagreements, I would or I am putting any obstacles in the way of that free movement across the UK is completely without foundation. Let's disagree whether there are real disagreements. I can have no quarrel with that but, for goodness sake, let's raise the quality from that question that we just had and debate the real issues that currently face Scotland. That concludes our statement and we now move on to the next item of business, which is a debate on motion 3190 with the name of Martin MacDonald. We'll take a few minutes just to change seats.


In a previous experiment, you set up a series of electrochemical cells using different metals and their metal ion solutions. You can also set up an electrochemical cell using the same half cells but different concentrations. We have two copper half cells here consisting of a copper metal electrode and a copper sulfate solution. The solution on the right is .2 molar, the solution on the left is .1 molar. We have a salt bridge containing potassium nitrate that connects the two half cells. If we look at the voltage on the voltmeter, it reads positive 6.1 millivolts. We have a positive voltage when the red lead is attached to the .1 molar solution and the black lead is attached to the .2 molar solution. The red lead is our anode and the black lead is our cathode. The current is running in the cell in order to try and balance the copper ion concentration in the two half cells. Oxidation is taking place in the left half cell because the concentration is lower in that half cell. Copper metal is leaving the electrode to form copper ions and increasing the concentration of copper ion in that half cell. In the right half cell, copper ions are being reduced to copper metal that played on the electrode. That's reducing the copper ion concentration in that solution. As time goes along, the copper ion concentrations in the two half cells will become equal and the voltage for the cell will go to zero. We can change the concentration in the half cells by adding a compound that will precipitate copper ion. I'm going to add some sodium sulfide to the right half cell. The sulfide ion will precipitate the copper ion in that solution and reduce the copper ion concentration. This should reduce the copper ion concentration to below the concentration in the left half cell. We'll switch which half cell is anode in the cathode and the voltage should turn negative. The sulfide ion has precipitated the copper ion. It's reduced the copper ion concentration in the right hand beaker below the concentration in the left hand beaker. The right hand beaker is now the anode and the left hand beaker is now the cathode.


Now time for members and statements from here on Bruce. Thank you very much mr. Speaker I rise today to to draw your awareness to a very serious situation and I think all of you in this house would agree that There's nothing more honorable than being elected by constituents to represent them here at the Ontario Legislative Assembly We cannot take that responsibility for granted nor should we be playing games with it But unfortunately, there are a number of people from Godridge From my rotting of here in Bruce that are furious with the with a particular member who had chose to play games With a devastating event that wreaked havoc on their community August 2011 last last week in Response to a sincere question speaker the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Chose to possibly mock me by saying do if you do not support this cap and trade Would you like to expose your constituents to another tornado? I'm paraphrasing a notch speaker, but that was the gist of it The people in Godridge are furious and they say how dare can an elected official Make fun of a devastating event that absolutely tore of town and families apart Speaker I expect better of the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, and I do ask sincerely for an apology for the town of Godridge. Thank you Well, good afternoon speaker and welcome to this local newscast Let's start off with a good news story for the eighth time in the past 10 years the town of Tecumseh Has ranked within the top 10 of Canada's safest communities Statistics Canada does the ranking and for safe communities with more than 10,000 residents Tecumseh is rated number six in the country Essex County warden Tom Bain is recovering from a nasty spill while jogging one of his race horses Warden Bain suffered four broken ribs a crush collar bone and a broken bone in his back Tom we need you get well soon, and we're thinking of you up here at Queens Park And while we're thinking of the mayor and councillors in Leamington as well speaker Condolences go out to the family of Leamington councillor Rick Atkin Rick died suddenly of natural causes last week And we will miss them in our region Tomorrow as you know is the national day of mourning Too many workers continue to be killed on the job We must do more to make workplace safety a priority in this province Ceremonies highlighting this will be held across Ontario tomorrow. I'll be here and this the one in Windsor, but Later this year. I hope to introduce a private members bill It'll call for the lowering of flags at all schools hospitals municipal buildings colleges and universities on the day of mourning And that speaker is the latest news from Windsor to come to back to you in the anchor desk Thank you members statements. I'm kind of liking this members team member from Cambridge Thank you speaker today. I rise to discuss a constituent of mine who faces a daily battle to breathe Dean Sellers is a resident of Cambridge who suffers from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or COPD Which inhibits his ability to live a normal life COPD is a disease causing chronically poor airflow to the lungs making it extremely difficult to breathe COPD tends to worsen over time The Ontario Lung Association states at over 850,000 ontarians aged 35 or older suffer from COPD and that includes my son Rory now age 35 They struggle with each breath they take the Ontario Lung Association is raising awareness about COPD And encouraging ontarians to have a spirometer test, which is effective in early diagnosis key to treatment later on Dean's COPD has deteriorated and now he has just 14% lung capacity He requires an oxygen tank to breathe, but even then it's difficult Dean's family organized a fundraiser on april 18th at the Cambridge Newfoundland Club To raise money to help him and his wife Sue to cope with its disease Dean is currently awaiting a double lung transplant And he is looking forward as he told me that evening to spending time with his children and grandchildren for many years to come Dean's story reminds us of the importance of organ donation Only 25 of Ontarians are registered as organ donors And I want to encourage all Ontarians to sign up today at bea donor dot ca One organ donor can save eight lives. Thank you. Thank you member statements to member from Thank you, mr. Speaker this weekend I had the privilege of attending the soldiers of songs performance at the list of allegiance Their performance was a tribute to the dumbbells the pioneers of sketch comedy In 1917 around bimmy ridge a group of soldiers came together to form a comedy and musical troupe called the dumbbells They they entertained Canadian troops during the first world war with humorous songs and sketches about life in the trenches After the war the dumbbells toured canada as professional entertainers They became the first ever canadian production to score a hit on broadway The dumbbells journey is now being celebrated in dr. Jason wilson's musical play soldiers of song Soldiers of song is a canadian theater show that travels around the world Celebrating the dumbbells The show was a wonderful tribute to the soldiers who entertained their comrades and boosted morale through the first world war I would like to thank the elizal legion and the north perth arts council for bringing the show to perth wellington I would also like to recognize listful native andro nullton who performs in this show I would encourage everyone to go and see the soldiers of song and learn more about these canadian entertainers. Thank you speaker Thank you members davids members davids Name a chicken going on here member from sudbury Thank you, mr. Speaker and I rise today on behalf of the people of sudbury to recognize senator marie charrette-poulin Who stepped down as senator for the northern ontario region on april 17th due to health reasons senator charrette-poulin was born in Raised in sudbury and of course in hailbury as well But before being appointed to the senate in 1995 she had an exemplary career as a public servant She founded the cbc's northern ontario french services as well as the radio station cbon She later went on to serve among other rules as the vice president of the cbc And the deputy clerk of the privy council In the senate She was always an advocate for northern ontario and in particular our francophone community in the north and in 2006 Mr. Speaker she became the first francophone woman to be president of the liberal party of canada Now see us in a today's charrette-poulin. Thank you to senator shenet for Speaking for francophones in ontario the people of sudbury in ontario. Thank you For your years of service That I could speak to about senator poulin attending But the one that was think most important was the one last year In which all of us attended at the cooperative funeral hall the renaming of a new memorial for all of our fallen soldiers That were killed in afghanistan and that was something that senator poulin was very proud to attend And we all thank her for her years of public service. Thank you, mr. Speaker Do Other members statements the member from leeds granville. Thanks, speaker. I rise to celebrate a Great initiative that has truly captured the hearts of leaders of leeds granville on may the 8th Hundreds of people from my riding and beyond will gather at centennial road church to take part in leader cast 2015 I've had the privilege of attending the brothel leader cast in the past. It is truly an inspiring day last Speaker That remarkable turnout that we've had the 400 people is a real tribute to the hard work of local organizers But it also says something about our community Leeds granville is renowned as a place where people roll at their sleeves to support a good cause The reason is we're blessed with so many people ready to accept the responsibility of leadership They come from all walks of life and contribute in many ways But they share a common trait the desire and courage to be a champion for positive change I'm a great supporter of leader cast because the message from the incredible lineup of speakers is all about empowering people To be even more effective leaders this year's theme the brave ones has speakers that include patent manning Malala you sub say and rudy juliani Unfortunately a previous commitment has caused me not to be able to attend this year's leader cast But to those that are attending I want to thank you for taking time to be involved And i'm so excited to see what great things leader cast 2015 inspires you to do. Thank you speaker Thank you members statements from members from nickleville. Thank you speaker I'm happy to rise again today to draw attention to my constituents in the in go gamma Who are trying to work through the aftermath of the beautum in spill that occur in their community on march 7 For people down here go gamma is easy to forget But for the people of go gamma as the ice starts to melt and the waters in the bay show signs of oil floating on top The worries are constant Local citizens have questions about their community's future as a community on the shore of the macamee river and the beautiful lake Minnesota walkie their future lies in that water's health and its ability to continue to support surrounding wildlife And their environment the people of go gamma are asking For support from their provincial government. They want help with the environmental assessment and all this data and the interpretation of it They want help putting a dollar figure on their loss They want their provincial governments to pay attention to them It acknowledged that they exist that they're struggling right now and that they need help Right now go gamma all by themselves are trying to hold cn2 account The community of 200 strong holding a multi million dollar corporation to account. This is a david and goliath battle The provincial government needs to step in it is the responsibility of the provincial government to hold cn2 account Thank you speaker. Thank you Member statements the member from kingston in the islands Mr. Speaker i rise today to tell you about a wonderful initiative in my community called kingston gets active months Sponsored by the canadian sport for life kingston and funded by the ministry of tourism culture and sport The program challenges us in four simple ways to eat healthier connect more be more mindful and get more active Being healthy could mean using more local fresh fruits and vegetable for their nutrients and drinking more water Connecting more might mean volunteering with an organization or a charity or joining a ymca or sports club If you work behind a desk being mindful might involve getting up and changing positions every few minutes Being more active could mean leaving the car at home or walking or using a bike instead Or it could mean squeezing a walk into your work day Mr. Speaker this month I encouraged members of the public to join me on an hour pre-lunchtime walk and chat and I hosted two public hikes at a local conservation area I feel wonderful having done it and i'm proud to say that i've done almost 7 000 steps today I'm determined to try and continue I'm happy that so many local businesses and agencies joined in to offer free activities for people of all ages during kingston Then it gets active month. I want to congratulate the wonderful canadian sport for life team laura peterson Mary jane gordon denita arthur's chris evley Ashley johnson christin cotay linden woodfield and jennifer ashbury who have worked so hard to foster lifelong health and wellness by increasing the opportunities for play and physical activity in our great community Thank you Thank you speaker I rise on behalf of All members of the legislature on all three parties to extend our heartfelt prayers condolences and pledge of support to the people of nipal As you will know speaker Very recently they suffered a once in a century level earthquake Currently 7.8 on the rictor scale The imagery and the videos and the testimonials are simply heartbreaking So far we understand that the death toll exceeds 5 000 and the damage to The cultural artifacts to the buildings to the already modest infrastructure of the country in its capital catmandu and as well surrounding areas is really Perhaps of epic proportions Canada has stepped up to the plate speaker Government of canada we thank them for the five million dollar commitment and they've discharged the the dart team the disaster Relief team. I can also tell you that right from itobico This we house the global medic, which is perhaps an echo of the dart disaster relief team They have also dispatched food and aid and people on the ground and personnel and water purification, etc Uh, I would simply say on behalf once again of the people of ontario To the people of nipal we stand with you in your time of need. Thank you I thank all members for their statements and before


Do you invest in property? No, a property definitely not, definitely not. One of the reasons is my family was, and I have been involved in property, contractors, developers for 30 years. So I know the market. If you know the market, if you know a certain industry, certain market, you can tell a bubble where a bubble is a mile away, right? Not only are we in a bubble, it's a trap, right? It's an enslavement tactic right now by centralized power, okay? Gold threads, for sure. And by the way, I'm only referring to investment property, people who are flipping houses and all this chat. Some people have like three, four, 10 properties on the go at the same time they're leveraged through the tilt, right? They're counting on rent being paid and commercial real estate, this, this, this. I'm not talking about someone buying a home for their family, minimal debt, if you can do it, do not go into that huge debt into this, do not over leverage right now, do not do it, do not do it, and by the way, this is not financial advice, right? But if you're buying property at a reasonable price and you understand that you're buying in a bubble and you can afford to hit the economic hit that is coming and has already arrived for many people, just the beginning by the way. And this is you making your family, yourself anti-fragile, bought on a good vicinity that you're not going to be at the whim of a tyrants with their dictates and all. There's so many things, assumptions here, then that is okay to do, right? That is okay to do. So there's a distinction here regarding property.


for coming down and for receiving this trophy. We moving on to our next category. And thank you so much, yes, thank you so much Mr. Bukrit. This is one last category and then we allow you to leave as well. The research in this category, the brands that went into trouble, waters the year before last, but last year was a comeback for them. Let's find out who the shortlisted nominees are. The research in category is, I mean, you know, it's about a comeback. And you really care about a comeback only of brands which who were blockbusters at some point of time and have had a tough time somewhere along the way. So I think the ones that we've chosen as a jury have been brands who went through a tough time in the past but have come back stronger in both the consumers' minds as well as in business. And I think only a few brands have the ability to do that. And that's why we've been very selective about choosing these. I mean, given away, the first one is, of course, Britannia, good day, and to do the honours. We're also invited on stage, our moderator for the panel discussion earlier this evening, Mr. Abhik Chathapathya, co-founder, experience, please come up on stage and join Mr. Mahesh Keri along with him also, Mr. Anand, the way he consumed a marketing-intensive bank who is also a jury member. Please come up on stage and do the honours for Britannia, good day.


I want to thank you all very much my being here before lunch today I had a talk with Congresswoman Johnson and Mayor McNamara and 11 other distinguished citizens of New Britain and I know that some were Republicans and some were Democrats and they represented many occupations and backgrounds and we had a good discussion and I got to straighten out some things that I thought might be not straightened out some people's minds I don't know whether we agreed on everything everyone was very polite but I think I think we do agree on the principles of economic freedom that all of us cherish and while we were there I couldn't help being reminded of a story a lot of things remind me of stories these days I'm a I'm a collector of stories I really am that I can verify are told by the Soviet citizens among themselves they reveal that they have a sense of humor but also that they have a certain kind of cynical outlook on their system there and these stories give you an idea on what they're thinking and this one's very brief it's about two Soviets who were talking to each other and what a master what's the difference between the Soviet Constitution and the United States Constitution and the other one said that's easy the Soviet Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of gathering the American Constitution guarantees freedom after speech and freedom after gathering we had a lively discussion there go and the mayor can attest and today on the city steps I'll be asking new Britain to join a great national discussion the kind that our founders launched 200 years ago when they drafted our Constitution and submitted to the people for ratification the kind that the 14 of us had were having a few minutes ago if we didn't agree on everything well neither did the generation that gave us the Constitution but I'm here today because I believe that the outcome of this discussion will determine the strength and health of our nation and what it stands for in the decades to come I'll be talking out there about what I hope will be among the most important legacies of my presidency the economic Bill of Rights now you've heard a lot about this from our critics on one hand they say it's a ploy something I've cooked up to distract attention from whatever I don't know but on the other hand they say little it's new here which I guess means it's made up of things that I believed in and fought to achieve for years and now I'm working to make certain that America doesn't lose all that we've done but it can be one or the other not both and I'll plead guilty to the second charge I went to Washington to do a job lower taxes restore our defenses cut the size and intrusiveness of government tune up the carburetor and step on the gas of the greatest engine against poverty and for opportunity in the history of man the free enterprise system of the United States of America we've achieved a great deal of that we still have a government that spends too much and a deficit it's too large as long as we have those we can't be sure that growth that we've enjoyed these last four and a half years will continue today I'll talk about the way that things were before I came into office and the way they are now and about the role of economic freedom and the opportunities that America offers all peoples but I thought I'd make one especially important point to you it's about poverty in the years before we elected the breakdown of our economy hit the poor the hardest between 1979 and 1980 in the years before we were elected the breakdown of our economy hit the poor the hardest the poverty rates soared growing at the fastest rate even as three million people were pushed into poverty in that brief time with our recovery that rise has been stopped and poverty has dropped at the fastest pace in 15 years although today new britain's unemployment rate is 3.9 percent which is very much lower than the next gentleman the president of the united states a mr. president he never lost our belief in ourselves or in our country we kept up our chins and our hopes and we decided that we were going to make our city again mr. presidents and so very proud of our city there is a renewed feeling of optimism about our tomorrows buildings are going up and unemployment is going down all the united states has come calling and we could not be happier ever since river city was a family about some of the folks in congress but wanted to vote against again the congressman listened and then when the fellow was done he leaned back and said you're right you're right you're absolutely right so when the fellow left the congress wife went in and she said that first man wanted you to vote for the bill and you said he was right why of all the cities in the country i'm starting here in new britain well it's just that new britain is the place to be so fast that just about every time you shop for groceries or stop for gas prices have gone up and whenever the family made a lecture to keep up with the rising cost of living washington took extra in taxes and you ended up with less but young decouples had to forget the american dream of owning their own homes between high taxes and high enterprise zones and congress and congress want our enterprise zones for both and then you get the new britain that started on their own and we're sending in the enterprise zone right now our economic expansion of american history well it will be the longest economic peace time expansion in man-american history because i've learned that more people have held jobs this year than ever before in our history yes a bigger proportion i had to learn i don't know whether you know that the potential employment group of america is considered to be everybody male and female in other words do you want to go on to a future of more growth more jobs and more opportunity yeah i saw recently a scholar of their country who happens to speak flu in russia was going on a visit from russia he was in a cab going to the airport it's a true story and the cab driver was quite young actually decided yet so by coincidence when he got off a plane in muskau and got in a cab he had another young fella driver and the young fella said they haven't told me yet there's a difference in whether or not economic independence and growth just as our political freedoms need protection that's what the economic bill of rights is all about the people didn't give them hell i just told them the truth and they thought it was hell the american people have a right to the truth about federal spending a line item veto the economic bill of rights will also say that if the federal government wants to make sure that congress doesn't use a balanced budget amendment as an excuse for


Everybody forced here ripping case number three of twenty one twenty two immaculate basketball hobby Pick your team case here Andrew a calves angie M heat bohia be hawks Bradley C jazz Brian T bulls Chang s with the wizards and Pacers Chris S Kings Felix and with the pistons in the Rockets appreciated Felix Gavin D. Blazers Harper B magic and T wolves hang Y has the Lakers Hilton T Thunder hero s Nick's James G Nets Jerry J Spurs Jordan s Raptors Preciated Jordan For grabbing one of the last three teams there Julian H bucks Kato sons Kenneth G Celtics Kenny T Pelicans Lane Larry Kenny T Pelicans Larry with the Clippers Nick E sixers or in W Mavericks Ramin has the nuggets Shawn M Warriors T Juan Grizzlies and Victor F Hornets. Here we go. Good luck everybody Hank will have a tiktok and I don't have the I don't have the energy for tiktok for in this break But the skip one I'll have to come see us here Victor Carl Dan Jordan everybody's here. What's up? Keep it going guys get these next few breaks filled up Let's pull some big cards in this one now. I want to see one of those last three teams have a monster hit here Hopefully was a Work though wait first. I've got Lakers Anthony Davis number three of 49 Go Lakers heat game warren relic jimmy butler 47 of 99 Miami on the board now. You have hit just about every single break. I think Standout memorabilia beautiful jumbo patch of Tyrese maxi 21 of 25 Philly Yeah, since he came back for sure They're gonna be tough in the east three colored jumbo patch Tyrese maxi sixers I think the southers are better, but They're still tough still tough redemption Grizzlies RPA red Zaire Williams There we go Grizzlies red RP 8 of 49 Zaire Williams There we go Time Lord auto two of 25 Robert Williams a third for the Celtics Yeah Tatum's a baller You go seize Time Lord auto there to 25 Yeah, what 51 yesterday or two days ago an RPA Grand Theft Alvarado 81 of 99 for the pelicans Yeah, dude Grand Theft Alvarado Nice Jose Alvarado doesn't have a lot of Cards in the rookie class here is nice to see him with a nice RPA. We'll get this mag for you pelicans New Orleans going to Kenny there you go Kenny T Nice Alvarado tries to know that nickname Because he would always do that move or like he would just drop to the baseline if they score and get like a steal on the inbound He did it a few times down the stretch and like he became like that was like his thing He's an older rookie Yeah, or he was a rookie for 21-22. Oh, that's awesome. Grab my shorts. Yeah, that's yeah, sometimes cracking slabs would be worth it for sure PSA 10 blue velocity rated rookie Tatum Love the velocities Spurs Keldon Johnson 24-25 good player there Board of spurs before I keep going here guys. I'm dropping a link for the next one Case for rockets and Raptors left In on sale Keep going. All right, we've got a Warriors patch card Draymond green 38 of 99 where he's Jersey card go game use Draymond Well, that's sick three color patch bulls Zach Levine Got the stripe game worn He might get traded that so some weird stuff happened in Chicago bulls Yeah, he remember he was like there was like arguments reported Yeah, Alice Caruso on 11 of 99 bulls the Caruso It might be overblown, but still like if things and I mean they're underperforming and yeah, there's a lot They just need to shake it up. I think They're just not as good as like the top teams in the east. They're not even as good as like Miami You know what I mean like when it comes down to it Caruso 11 and 99 bulls Here we go Lance Stevenson Pacers auto 33 of 49 That's that's me blowing it in LeBron's ear right there as Lance Stevenson Iconic iconic Immaculate some would say oh here we go Nick's RPA Quentin Grimes 53 of 99 You go Grimes been doing pretty well this year QG go Nick's 53 99 RPA Quentin Grimes Crazy he might end up being the best rookie from that class for the Knicks Over the other two McBride and um, oh, let's forget the other one. All right box three. Oh Q6 is what we call him. Oh Q6 Dang, that's kind of cool. Oh, yeah, I saw seabold trade Pistons rookie Kate Cunningham our first Cade sighting today 79 of 99. What's up Jack? Yeah, Red Sox finally making some more moves. I didn't know We're gonna put Blake in the Red Sox Hall of Fame soon. Oh So I'm just grabbed Rockets Jason F. Just grabbed Rockets for the rest of the daytime.  Thank you Jason Big time order there. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I think Dak Prescott is very good I've always had he's very good Jumbo patch Chris tops for zingas 69 out of 99 you can Yeah, probably worthy nice poor zingish jumbo game use patch card Poor zing is there nice 75th anniversary. I love these man Anniversary Pat Ewing to 75 for the Knicks dual game use Jersey card. I love this design. This is a really cool relic design Like if you PC someone got you got to get one of these I want to see a low number I don't think there's low number 75 obviously, but like maybe there's like some two-color patches in these Be pretty cool. Oh Knicks a legend Latrell spree well auto 75 of 99 nice spree It's all Dak play Mississippi State once running for miles Garrett all game long. Yeah, that happens People still be running for miles Garrett all game long Gotta be top 3d lineman, right? Shadow box auto going to the jazz Bojan Bogdanovic 4 out of 10. Oh This was a this was a wait and It was a him box. Yeah elix n with the pistons here RPA red Kade Conningham 11 of 49 Good night What a hit beautiful red color match on the RPA Goodness gracious There he is the first Kade of the day the first Kade Hit we'll see today Kade box. He had the base of 99, which is a very nice hit and then a fantastic RPA here red color match. There we go pistons There we go. I said, let's see a big hit for those last teams purchase and we saw one next up Pistons Raptors guys pistons Raptors I'll check on a second. Let's say It's four sold out. Oh awesome forest sold out. So case five has pistons. That's case five as pistons Raptors Forest sold out. Awesome. Thank you guys Best best customers in the biz Love our customers man. A lot of you have just become our friends. It's just Being great people and I Said literally hit man, right? Hey, they were available, you know what everybody had a chance they were available. We waited like 10 15 minutes for them to fill up and like we're behind but hey, it's worth it We're pulling big hits number LeBron of 49 Lakers. There we go. I Think we're starting to heat up. I hopefully this this just continues. We're just pulling gas all day long Jumbo Buckster Z Chris Middleton two out of 99 standout memorabilia game used a game used LeBron James Jersey 37 of 99 You guys remember LeBron James The shirtless dude that was wearing like jeans shooting on like a Unlike at the side of a barn Like the vice that threw the ball back at him.  Yeah Jane Springer auto 13 and 99 rookie inaugural ink sixers Personals are not full for tonight. I need to change late robot. There's plenty of space or personal tonight That's later tonight though.  He's so annoying. It's like, oh my god I think that might be I hope that's dust.  Thanks for filling up case four as well. We got case five six seven and eight Left for today all teams on sale that are left the Rockets were just snagged by Jason F. Jason. Thank you again, man big order Let's get you a Jalen Green logo, man. We're a Shenyuan logo, man Let's do it. No, no logomans yet. Oh, we got a Oh Oh, that's that's the first dummy thick part of the day everybody get ready Raptors gone in five and eight I think the Raptors are sold out for the day as well if you all look over more teams More immaculate PYT's tomorrow daytime with Kenzie. We've random styles tonight Yeah, we're not a one left on case five. I believe it's the what the Raptors We're on sale. Yeah. No, just that sorry the Pistons the Pistons on case five I just said the Raptors just sold so Pistons on sale a case five last team in that one There is Chef Curry 74 of 99 base parallel Warriors Chef Curry with a shop boy. Yeah, but they can make another run. I guess when he gets healthy Jumbo Jersey D-Book Sun 67 of 99. Oh, that's what's up. That is That's so cool, you know, I was saying I hope these last few teams hit and Yeah, dude soul of the game Jalen Green Rookie jumbo sneaker relic 15 of 16. Yeah, buddy That's so fire soul of the game. Oh my goodness Chunky card Felix. Wow, man Soul of the game that is fire. Love it. I My instinct I want to touch the this the piece so bad. I'm not gonna do it It's someone else's really hard. Obviously. I'd never do that But but the urge is always there for like a sneaker swatch like that like a glove relic Yeah, dummy thick That's so cool. All right, last few hits of the case Harold and signatures Mavericks Rolando Blackman 2 out of 25 RPA Atlanta Jalen Johnson 87 of 99. Is that a scratch? There's that hair. I Think that I think that's like a hair that would just wipe off we shall see and Clippers RPA Brandon Boston, Jr. 55 of 99 Give me one sec everybody we're gonna recap here Nice to RPA is in the last box as well with that soul of the game Jalen Green awesome box there Love to see it. Wait that one off. It looks like that's like a hair Yeah, maybe he was blinking blinking a bunch when he signed maybe that's his eyelash, I don't know I Like the regular pace from iMac Hard to think of a rookie that we wouldn't at this at this point on the release day anyway All right, relics on the recap here d-book LeBron James Chris Middleton, it's a nice vet relics in this one Pat Ewing Chris snaps for zingas as a wizard Zach Levine three color Dremont green a Tyrese Maxi That one's pretty cool three color jumbo patch and Jimmy Butler nice vet relics Then our autos we've got Pistons Jerry Stackhouse 76ers Jaden Springer inaugural ink Bojan Bogdanovich jazz auto shadow box to 10 Herald and signatures next let's trust free while 75 of 99 Lance Stevenson Pacers auto to 49 Legend legend Lance. That's what they call him Lance legend. That's his nickname Caruso Alex Caruso bulls to 99 Time Lord for the Celtics at 25 RW3 and a Grizzlies RPA Red Redemption Zaire Williams to 49 and then a lot of mags here again We're gonna mag most RPGs today guys Guy Brandon Boston jr. Clippers Jalen Johnson Hawks true RPA is there so the game Jalen Green to 16 That's what's up Rockets Bones Highland rookie introductions That's a sick one red RPA Kade Cunningham Pistons to 49 a Kade Cunningham to 99 a Quentin Grimes RPA to 99 This was a freaking loaded case and a Grand Theft Alvarado RPA to 99. How many RPAs was that one two three four five? Five RPAs That's pretty crazy. That's awesome, man. Thanks again everybody. We're going on to case number four, which is sold out


Here's what people should be asking themselves. There was a lot of science about a task that I don't think a lot of them are going to want to hear, but it's a very good thing and we all have to learn and it's called struggle. It is just the intention to help one other person beyond the self actually is the science of it. And so they should actually be thinking about what are the biggest challenges and adversities that they've had to experience in their life and just anything that has made your life harder reflect on it. What was it? What caused it to happen? How did it make your life harder? And then you start thinking in that moment of need, what did I need that I was not getting at that moment? Right? Who did I need to talk to? What was happening? Think about these things that are big problems. And then the key powerful question for you is there's going to be someone else who's going to go through that same struggle. What role would you want to play for them that you didn't have? And then how would it feel to help someone else going through the same thing? And what's powerful about that is you are the very best person to solve that problem because you are an expert in whatever that adversity is.