Seòmar agus comataidhean

—and I am sure that he would wish that I ensure that the Scottish Government operates within the law.

I think that we also know that through the family of the former First Minister, who is a member of this Parliament. He has relations who could not get out through the Rafah crossing because the Israelis were limiting who was able to leave. This is the point that I was trying to make about the fact that borders are controlled on both sides. On the Gazan side of the border, it is controlled by Israel.

Would Mr Brown be content if I were to get clarification on the question from the United Kingdom Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, so that it can confirm its understanding of how that situation operates?

I do not know the answer to that question, Mr Kerr. I would hope that any Government that is in a position to ameliorate the suffering of people in Gaza could and should play its part in making that possible. However, I will defer and seek some advice on the situation in relation to the Egyptian Government and the Rafah crossing, and I am happy to update you on that.

Oh, a magical piece of paper has just arrived in front of me. I am told that the Israeli Defence Force is stopping the trucks, and not Egypt.

We keep such things under permanent review. Because our budget is limited in terms of scope, one of the challenges that we have is that, when these kinds of significant appeals arise—for example, for emergencies in one part of the world or a situation such as Gaza—they are not something that the Scottish Government has any influence over. The requirements arise at different points, and that is one of the areas where we have to work quite hard in order to understand the relative priorities with regard to the different calls on the humanitarian aid that we have in place.

It is true to say that we are having a look at humanitarian aid. I do not know whether Mr Bibby has any specific points to make on whether more should be done, less should be done or things should be done differently. However, as I am sure that he would expect us to do, we are keeping those things under review.

Mr Kerr had the good fortune yesterday to sit next to his colleague Jamie Halcro Johnston, who asked a question at portfolio question time that enabled me to outline some of the controls that are in place, the grant letters that are issued and the processes that are involved. There is also a transparent reporting mechanism for those international partners. Mr Kerr mentioned the Disasters Emergency Committee and UNRWA. They provide reports about the funds that have been raised after different appeals have been made. I think that I am right in saying that the UNRWA report is on its website, so Mr Kerr and the committee can avail themselves of that.

We are confident, as is the UK Government, that the reporting mechanisms are robust and that the aid that has been provided has been used for the purposes for which it was raised.

I will have to look at the details, Mr Harvie. I do not have them at the forefront of my mind. I will not talk about something that I am not as familiar with as you are.

On the wider question of how we interact with Israel, there are a number of different levels to that. I think that Mr Harvie knows that there are some areas where the Scottish Parliament has an ability to influence the UK Government on its areas of responsibility. That is something that I talked about in my opening statement, and I continue to pursue it. It relates to the export licences to Israel.

Mr Harvie will know that the UK rescinded a number of those licences last year. I have not yet received any details about what those licences were for or which licences remain in place. It troubles me that equipment is still being provided to Israel, which will be used as part of the military system that is engaged in Gaza and, yes, the West Bank, too—we should not forget that, although I know that, this morning, we are talking just about the humanitarian situation in Gaza. We do not have transparency about that position, which is why I have written to the UK Government to seek clarification.

There is a series of other attendant and related issues. If we agree that we are not dealing with a state in the established way of doing things, we should be asking ourselves about the other interactions that we have with that state. Mr Harvie will know that the last time that the Scottish Government met with the state of Israel, to tell it how unhappy the Scottish Government was about what is going on, we told it that that would be the last time that we would meet it until it stopped what it was doing. Mr Harvie will know that; it received quite a lot of publicity at the time. Therefore, we are no longer dealing directly with Israel on these questions.

With regard to trade, I think that I am right to say that the United Kingdom Government has suspended its free trade agreement negotiations with the state of Israel, and I think that that action is correct. On whether there is a wider range of trade-related issues that could and should be looked at, Mr Harvie might draw my attention to the fact that the Government of Ireland is introducing legislation in relation to trade from illegal settlements in the occupied territories. If he were to ask me about that, I would say to him that I have been looking at that but that my best understanding is that that is a reserved issue because it relates to direct trade matters. However, I assure Mr Harvie that I remain open to looking at further ways in which Scotland can use its limited powers but also its voice in calling out Israel for what it is doing. I am perfectly content to look at a range of ways in which the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament could make our voices heard and make our moral outrage about what is happening clear.

I know that Mr Kerr takes seriously his responsibilities of ensuring that taxpayers’ money that goes to causes is well spent, whatever those causes are. I agree with him that it is important to understand that. One cannot, in the entire aid area, be 100 per cent sure about 100 per cent of spending going down to the smallest amount. However, because of the countries and organisations that are involved in the processes and the reporting that is involved in them, as a minister who has to sign off on the funding, I have a very high level of assurance in dealing with trusted partners.

Take, for example, our humanitarian emergency fund panel. It comprises the British Red Cross, Christian Aid, Oxfam, Islamic Relief Worldwide, Mercy Corps, Save the Children, the Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund and Tearfund. Those are very well-established and trusted partners. The international donor community—which includes the likes of the United Kingdom, the United States, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Germany, Finland and Canada—operates in the same way when it comes to such questions.

I do not want to deter Stephen Kerr from wanting to ensure that transparency, accountability and systems are in place. That is entirely fair. However, I want to give him confidence—which, indeed, his party colleagues in the UK Government had when they operated the same system—that donors, Governments and humanitarian and aid organisations are all in it together trying to address the Gaza humanitarian situation in the most extreme circumstances of a war that is being conducted in a small geographical area from which the population cannot leave. It is a very extreme situation. I give Stephen Kerr those assurances.

If it would be helpful, I would be happy for us to provide the committee, through the convener, with access to information on where those reports are aggregated so that Mr Kerr, or any other colleagues who wish to learn more about that, can have access.

I am sorry, but I want to finish with a bit of supplementary information. I am advised that we cannot lawfully impose a blanket ban on support for companies based solely on the fact that they are listed on the United Nations database of companies that are involved in the occupied territories. That is but one example of the fact that there are lawful and legal requirements on the Government—

I am not sure whether Stephen Kerr wanted to create an impression when he said that we do not know where the money goes. The money is going towards intervention, as intended.