Seòmar agus comataidhean

Ten years ago, the Scottish National Party was willing to forsake its place in the European Union and was warned that the European Union was going to—[Interruption.] It was willing to forsake that. The SNP called José Manuel Barroso, the President of the European Commission at the time, “preposterous” for suggesting that an independent Scotland would have to rejoin the EU. Let us not be revisionist about this: it was the SNP that was willing to put at risk our place in the European Union. I have just said that many of us on the no side could not foresee Brexit, but, equally, I presume that nobody in the yes campaign could have predicted the collapse in the oil price during the past 10 years, which would have brought economic turmoil to a newly independent country.

We should have learned another lesson in the decades since the referendum, which is that, beyond the binary question of yes or no, there is a far richer debate about the devolution of powers, which is rooted in the realities of the modern world. For all the heat and light of 2014, both sides accepted that this was a dynamic debate that accepted two unavoidable truths, which were that the Scottish Parliament needed more powers, and that people wanted more decisions to be taken closer to home but felt that it would be better if Scotland retained elements of the union, including the currency, the central bank and the monarchy—propositions relating to all of which were contained in the Scottish Government’s white paper in 2014.

As I said, the constitutional argument exists on a spectrum; it is not just a binary question. That spectrum is not just about Holyrood and Westminster; it is about councils, too. Power close to home does not mean that power should sit exclusively in Edinburgh; it means power being handed down to our towns, cities and communities. However, under the SNP, Scotland has become more and more centralised in recent years. Councils have been relegated to the role of delivery agents for the centre, rather than being a genuinely empowered level of government. The same is true of NHS services and police services being centralised. I believe that those issues form the real debate about Scotland’s constitutional future.

It is right for people to consider the best place for power to lie, whether that be at Westminster, Holyrood, local authority or community level, as long as they do so in good faith, not blind faith. There is and always will be a place for that discussion. However, as that discussion goes on, we cannot continue to look backward. We cannot allow every discussion about Scotland’s future to be reduced to a look back at the past. The people of Scotland deserve better than that. They deserve action, ambition and a Government that is focused on improving their lives right now, not in some hypothetical independent future.

Let us not squander our time on debates that seek to divide us. It is time to move forward. Let us focus on the issues that matter to the people of Scotland. The path to a better future does not require breaking away from the UK. It requires vision, ambition and political will. Most importantly, it requires unity, not division.

I will make some progress, Mr Greer, with the limited time that I have.

A great many Scots made the respectable and honourable decision to vote in favour of Scottish independence. Many more—a clear majority—affirmed our place as a proud nation in the world’s oldest union.

On that first point, members, including Richard Leonard and Sarah Boyack, have talked about the importance of the Parliament’s and the Government’s having a can-do attitude to solve the problems faced by the people of Scotland. John Swinney even said earlier that Scotland must start focusing again on the things that we can do instead of regretting what we cannot do. However, I say to the First Minister that many people will be thinking that it is not Scotland that has been the barrier to that for the past 17 years—it is the SNP Government.

What emergency?

The cabinet secretary will be aware of the dispute between the Paisley Art Institute and OneRen, which has resulted in the looming possibility of highly valuable local artworks being auctioned off next week. A number of constituents—including the artist Eilidh Montague, who has started a petition—feel passionately that artworks that have been gifted to Paisley should not be lost to the town, through either their sale or their being moved to Glasgow, as has been suggested. Once they are gone, they are gone. Will the Scottish Government look urgently and closely at the issue and offer to convene talks between the two parties to try to find a positive resolution?

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the Commonwealth games potentially being hosted in Glasgow in 2026. (S6T-02092)

We should be ambitious for Glasgow and Scotland, and we should seize the opportunity of that £100 million inward investment, which would not come from public funds. Hosting the games would provide sporting benefits as well as economic ones. Seizure of that opportunity would act as a catalyst for motivating volunteering in sport and for creating international competitive pathways for our athletes, as well as showcasing Glasgow and Scotland to the world.

We all here remember the fantastic Commonwealth games in Glasgow in 2014. However, we should focus not on the past but on the future. Every child in Scotland under the age of 16 either was not born or would struggle to remember those games. Innovative and new-format games could provide children and young people in Scotland today with a unique opportunity to witness and be inspired by world-class athletes on their doorstep.

Does the minister therefore agree that hosting the games would show that we are ambitious not just for Glasgow, our economy and our athletes but for our young people?

On the table is £100 million of direct inward investment from the Commonwealth Games Federation for Glasgow, if the city hosts the games in 2026. That investment incentive is unheard of. It would help to lever in £150 million in economic benefits to the Glasgow city region, provide multimillion-pound upgrades to venues such as Tollcross and Scotstoun, and provide opportunities for job creation, local procurement and tourism. Does the minister agree that the £100 million investment that is on the table and the associated economic benefits present an opportunity that the Scottish Government should seize?

I associate myself with the cabinet secretary’s remarks about the late Euan MacDonald.

This is a total mess, and Scotland’s artists are paying the price for the Government’s incompetence and poor planning. Angus Robertson talks about the commitments that he has given. He gave the sector a gold-plated commitment to replenish £6.6 million to Creative Scotland, but that funding has yet to transpire. The open fund is closed and, as we have heard, the overall lack of certainty has led to some of Scotland’s biggest names, including Paolo Nutini and Biffy Clyro, warning of an impending “cultural catastrophe”. Given the constant cycle of promises followed by cuts, how can Scotland’s arts and culture sector have confidence in its future and in anything that the cabinet secretary says now?

In recent years there has been a significant growth in participation in tennis in Scotland, with more than 270,000 children playing at least once a year, a 29 per cent increase in children playing weekly and record levels of club membership. It is also welcome that half of all schools in Scotland are registered to deliver the Lawn Tennis Association youth schools programme, which is a free offer with resources to deliver tennis in a school setting.

As Sir Andy Murray, one of Scotland’s greatest ever athletes, comes towards the end of his career, how will the Scottish Government work with both Tennis Scotland and the Lawn Tennis Association to capitalise on his success and ensure that every primary-school age child in Scotland has the opportunity to pick up a racket and try tennis?

Last week, I asked the First Minister whether he would convene an urgent meeting to ensure on-going sponsorship of the arts and culture sector. He said that he would consider it. For months, I have been calling for an urgent summit to discuss funding for festivals, many of which are due to take place this summer. This is the last opportunity before recess for the Government to put its intentions on the record. I ask the cabinet secretary to give reassurances and to update the chamber on whether he, the First Minister or, indeed, the Deputy First Minister intends to take up our proposal and hold an urgent summit on festivals in Scotland.