Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes, they were very helpful.

My question was about how you work out what is most significant, given that there might be business interests, for example. We think that some things that are important have not come through an initial tracking—that is one of the things that we are asking the cabinet secretary to look at. However, I was thinking about your role, as people who have contacts that you have developed over the years.

Dr Stein, you are in the Berlin office. How does it feel from your perspective? It was interesting to hear at last week’s meeting the perspective on some of this of a German MEP, David McAllister, who is chair of the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs. To what extent do we track stuff in different offices, and to what extent does information come through the Brussels office? What is your role and the role of officers like you across the EU?

Thank you, Mr Hall, for your written paper, which is very useful. I want to follow on from the comments that you have just made. In your written submission, you said that you see a major challenge in how things are developing, and that you think that common frameworks would be

“a more effective alternative to manage divergence, whilst respecting devolution, and so enable the UK Internal Market to operate without friction or distortion.”

Can you say a bit about the collective discussions that you have had on the farming side across the four nations of the UK, and what discussions you have had with the different Governments to get your view across?

Have you been able to have discussions with ministers to get that point across? The key point that comes across very strongly in your written evidence is that the approach will undermine agricultural support, the environment, animal welfare standards and food production. You say you that are nervous about dispute resolution. What is the reality without common frameworks and without ministers bringing people together and negotiating?

An issue that came up last week was the need for better relationships in the UK offices that are based in different parts of the EU. How can we make better use of existing links, given the very significant changes that have taken place? Perhaps Mr Webster or Mr Johnson is best placed to answer that.

What comes across very strongly is that you need the common frameworks but, at a basic level, it is about getting meetings going on things such as the agriculture framework. Your evidence is very clear and helpful.

That is useful for our thinking about our scrutiny of the Government.

Finally, I want to ask about parliamentary connections, such as through the parliamentary partnership assembly and the Conference on the Future of Europe, whose work I understand is not finished yet. Have we missed the boat on that or is there a chance to come in officially towards the end of its work?

Thank you for that answer. I am certainly following the recent agreement in Germany with great interest.

It is good to have you at the meeting. Your comments on democracy were well made. We have spent quite a few weeks getting evidence about how we scrutinise the keeping pace legislation, so the parliamentary connection is really important for us. Your observations about subnational state governments are important for us because European countries are still our nearest neighbours and we want effective links plus accountability.

For us, the priorities are that we maintain relationships; interparliamentary liaison work is important for us within the UK but, of course, it is important that we liaise across Europe, as well. What are the opportunities for us? We think about the top priorities post the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—the shared climate agenda challenges and the climate challenge that people in Germany and Belgium experienced this summer with the climate crisis—and we think about the relationships that we need to foster and how they link to our trade relations. What would be our best approach in keeping pace with colleagues in Europe, both at European Parliament level and at the level of the devolved states and the regional government agenda, which is very important for us?

Thank you very much.

I have a question for Dr Zuleeg. I would like to focus on two topics that are clearly of major importance to Scotland. Following the United Nations 26th climate change conference of the parties—COP26—in Glasgow, are there opportunities for the Scottish Government and the EU to link, in a practical way, activity on the climate crisis and on economic development? Would such a link be fruitful in putting priorities in for the Scottish Government over the next few months?

I have found it interesting to listen to your answers to my colleagues’ questions. I will ask about the priorities for how we make the connections, in terms of both our scrutiny of the Scottish Government and our parliamentary work.

Mr Salamone, I want to follow up in detail a couple of recommendations that you make in your report. First, you make a suggestion that the Scottish Government could

“better delineate the operation of Scottish offices within ... UK diplomatic missions.”

Can you tell us a bit more about what that would look like in practice?

Associated with that, you have also talked about the range of offices that the Scottish Government has. How could they be better used, and what do you think the priorities should be for their expansion in the EU? I think that you said that the existing offices were logical, but you also said something about needing more of a rationale for the best options for expansion in the EU. Could you focus on those two issues?