Seòmar agus comataidhean

The UK Government and the Scottish Government are aware because it is custom and practice for civil servants to constantly speak to one another in the United Kingdom and with European Union contacts. That is how diplomatic relations work.

The Scottish Government does use public money in support of the defence sector, which is a very important part of our economy. We know that there is a live debate about how one ensures that there is an ethical dimension to all that. There is a challenge involved in that, which I am sure that Mr Bibby would recognise.

I am sure that he and I would agree that it is important and necessary that we are able to help one another in a European context and support neighbours in need, such as Ukraine. However, at present, we have a challenge to ensure that the UK Government listens to our views on issues such as our calling for the United Kingdom to end all weapons supplies to Israel, and that we have systems in place to ensure that that actually happens.

In relation to the European Union, it is of significant interest to us that the UK and its defence sector are a part of that wider process. We all realise that having a multitude of weapons systems, calibres and standards across our different armed forces—when we are, sadly, seeing a common threat in Europe—is part of a wider reason why we need to ensure that we co-operate. The Scottish Government is supportive of that and of having a defence sector here.

Other European Union countries are investing significantly in defence—Germany, for example, has announced €500 billion in additional defence spending, which I am sure will not all be spent in Germany—and I very much hope that Scotland will play its part, as will everywhere else in Europe, in relation to the marshalling of resources in a European Union context.

Absolutely. What we are talking about in relation to the EU-UK deal is what is on the margins of improving relations with the European Union. Yes, an SPS agreement would be a really good thing—of course it would. Yes, being part of the Erasmus scheme again would be a good thing, as would having closer energy co-operation—we have not had time to get on to that subject this morning, but, given how important our energy sector is, surely such co-operation would make a lot of sense to everybody. Those are the areas in which the European Union is prepared to have improved relations, but that is far short of being a member state.

If one could have all the advantages of being in the European Union without having to deliver on the acquis communautaire and be part of the processes of being a member state, the European Union would not function. Everybody would cherry pick what they wanted and ignore the things that they did not want. That is not how the European Union works. Although it is right for the UK Government to seek the best possible reset of arrangements and the best possible agreement that can be reached—on defence and security, as well as on the wide range of other issues that we have talked about—that is not the same as being a member state. It is important to be reminded that that is the case, and Mr Adam is absolutely right to highlight it.

That is my point, Mr Kerr. Do we want to do government by newspaper leaks?

If Mr Graham could give a bit of detail, that might be helpful.

I think that that is a known unknown at the moment, Mr Kerr, to answer your entirely reasonable question. I will just say that I think that it is in everybody’s interest to make progress on all of these things as quickly as we can. The threat to us all in Europe is very real. The requirement to have everything at the disposal of our armed forces so they can do the job that they must do is a priority for everybody. Similarly, it matters for our economy and for all the other areas of the potential agreement that these things proceed at pace.

However, I do not think that there is clarity yet as to whether there will be a different delivery date—if you want to call it that—for what Mr Kerr quite rightly points out are three distinct parts of what emerged from the UK-EU summit. As soon as we have any clarity on that, I will be content to share that with the committee.

That has been agreed with the United Kingdom.

Convener, I am sure that you wish me to stick within the requirements of this particular evidence session. However, I say to Mr Kerr that there is an elegant solution to the conundrum that he highlights, which is that, just as for the 27 nations that sit at the top table in the council of ministers, that nominate a commissioner and that have members of the European Parliament, the best solution for Scotland’s future optimal relations with the European Union is for us to be a member state.

The good news is that I do not think that we need to reinvent the wheel in the devolved context. We had a review of intergovernmental relations, which were looked into in great detail by this committee and others and were broadly welcomed. Everybody declared their willingness to make the structures work.

Since the new UK Government has come in, there has been a difference in tone, in that there is an avowal that the processes are there and that they should work and that it wants to have good relations with devolved Administrations. As is the nature of these things, some bits of the UK Government are better than others at understanding why things matter and why intergovernmental processes should be prioritised.

A reasonable amount of time has elapsed since the new Government took office, which is enough for us to understand what it wants to do, how it will do it and what processes are in place. We have moved beyond the very general declarations that were made at the start on willingness to make things work, to reset and to do things better, and we are now at the point where the questions are: “Are the meetings taking place?”, “Are they discussing substance?” and so on.

As for public consultation, it is not for me to do the job of a committee, but I would have thought that the committee could take evidence in public, involving people from the UK Government—

No—