Seòmar agus comataidhean

Interestingly, my letting you make an intervention, Mr Hoy, was predicated on your giving me a benefit of Brexit, but, as usual, you neatly avoided that.

I note that 26 per cent of Scotland’s economy is rural.

Forgive me, but I will start with the bad news. In the referendum on whether to remain in or leave the EU, commonsense Scotland voted 62 per cent to remain—it did not matter which part of Scotland you lived in; every council area in Scotland, urban and rural, voted remain. That was in 2016. The result was that David Cameron resigned and in came Theresa May, who was dispatched quite quickly and was followed by oven-ready Brexit Boris, with that £350 million a week so-called Brexit bonus for the national health service plastered on the side of a bus—oh, and, apparently, a queue of other countries just itching to do trade deals with a liberated UK.

I recall President Barack Obama warning that, after Brexit, the UK would be at the “back of the queue” for trade talks with the USA, and President-elect Donald Trump is going one better by threatening tariffs of 10 per cent to 20 per cent on imports to the USA, which is the UK’s biggest trading market. There are tough times ahead for food and drink exports from Scotland. Beatrice Wishart was quite right about that so-called queue of people waiting for trade deals.

Interestingly, before the referendum, Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne issued extremely dour predictions on the effect of Brexit on the economy. Those predictions went all the way to 2030. He is better than Mystic Meg, as his predictions have come to pass. Fast forward eight years and the independent Office for Budget Responsibility has said:

“weak growth in imports and exports over the medium term partly reflect the continuing impact of Brexit”,

which it expects to

“reduce the overall trade intensity of the UK economy by 15 per cent in the long term.”

If you are going to tell me a benefit of Brexit, I will listen.

Well, I do not know—what a choice. I will give way to my friend Mr Hoy.

I challenge the member for suggesting that it would be very difficult for Scotland to re-enter the EU. Most of our legislation and policies remain EU compliant. They are now being dismembered, but they are there, so it would be much easier for us than for somebody who was coming in for the first time.

I was a secondary school teacher long, long ago. Is there a role for teachers in that regard? They often identify changes in the behaviour of children in their classes. Is there a role for primary and secondary school teachers, simply by being aware that the issue might be one factor that they might not otherwise think about? They might think of other types of abuse, but perhaps not that one.

In the interests of keeping to my time, I did not mention Sitka spruce, but I lived in Galloway 40 years ago when Sitka spruce was being planted hell for leather all over the place. Could the rest of us be copied into the answer that you give to Mr Smyth about regulation and everything else, which you are not at fault for, because you did not plant them 40 years ago? They are acid forests, though.

The First Minister will be aware that, without any notice to the Scottish Government, NHS Lothian has withdrawn its share of funding for the Veterans First Point service—some £200,000 or thereabouts—thereby leaving the Scottish Government alone to fund it. As Glencorse barracks is in my constituency, I am aware of how vital that specialised service is for veterans, to whom it provides mental and emotional support, both through professional interventions and with the help of peers. Does the First Minister agree that that is a very wrong decision on the part of NHS Lothian, which seems particularly cruel and thoughtless as we approach remembrance day?

Like Mark Ruskell, I think that this is an interesting and important topic, given the £500 million of damage that is caused to the environment per year by the species in question. First, though, I thank Audrey Nicoll for bringing the debate to the chamber, not least because I have learned that Jackie Baillie is a defender of ancient woodlands. Her talents are extensive.

Invasive species are, as we know, introduced either directly or indirectly by man. Trade, transport, travel and tourism can move species around the world. Many species have been introduced intentionally for commercial purposes, such as for ornamental gardening, for farming or for forestry or as pets, only to escape and become established in the wild. Other species simply hitchhike, moving to new countries via people and transport. The most recent hitchhiker I can think of was a scorpion that had innocently taken shelter in a pair of trainers ordered online. The lesson is this: we should check inside our shoes, just in case. I once found a dead mouse in one of mine.

But I digress. It is easy for invaders to move around in a world of international trade, at both private level and commercial level, but I want to talk about plants. Plants or seeds that we buy from the garden centre will have undergone tests and certification that are pretty stringent and which have become even more stringent since our leaving the European Union. Before, there would have been, as I understand it, one biosecurity certification at the point of departure; now there is one from the EU export source, one on arrival in the UK and another at the wholesaler. That all comes with additional costs, which are all passed on to the consumer.

The issue was raised at a recent meeting of the cross-party group on gardening and horticulture, of which I am a member. Indeed, a joint letter from the Fresh Produce Consortium and the Horticultural Trades Association called for a meeting with the UK Government over the continued problems that their members face when importing plants, including trees and cut flowers, under the current border system. Notwithstanding that, biosecurity is crucial, and it is endorsed by the HTA.

However, some plants have escaped in the past and are now invading. Some have already been mentioned, but I will repeat a couple of them. The notorious Japanese knotweed, which was once considered an ornamental garden plant, has become established in woodlands, on riverbanks and in coastal areas. Its dispersal is due to both deliberate and inadvertent human activity, as a result of which fragments of the aggressive root system get washed downstream, spread and propagate, changing the habitat structure of riverbanks and thereby impacting on biodiversity, ecosystem structure, conservation efforts and even salmon fisheries. I recall seeing the plant with more friendly eyes some decades ago as it flourished along the riverbank at the bottom of my garden, before we knew that it was up to mischief.

Rhododendron ponticum—the purple rhody—is another non-native garden escapee plant that has become established and has spread across large swathes of Scotland, overwhelming other plants and preventing natural woodland regeneration. Again, I can recall seeing that in my youth just a few decades ago, when it was thought to be really pretty. How times have changed—and it is not the first or last example of a plant moving from being admired to being despised.

Then there is the American skunk cabbage, which is, yes, skunk by name and skunk by nature. It is very smelly. Years ago, when I visited Dawyck botanic garden near Peebles, which is one of the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh’s gardens, I thought that the yellow flowers growing in the streams were stinky, although that could be overlooked, because they were beautiful, and I selected one from the gift shop. A few years later, the Royal Horticultural Society told me to destroy it.

I thank Audrey Nicoll for bringing the debate to the chamber. I have found the research engrossing as well as worrying. Grey squirrels are more infamous, through no fault of their own—we brought them in—but we must also consider seeds, plants and the wee beasties that travel on them.

Minnigaff.