Chamber and committees

If you have the sustainable development goals dashboard and you are able to understand whether different parts of the Government are meeting or not meeting the sustainable development goals, or where the Government could do better, who is in front of that? It is about having oversight, so who has an overview of what is going on across the Government? Is it you or somebody else?

Cabinet secretary, I want to ask you about regulatory alignment with the European Union. Regulations very rarely stay still—they often change and evolve over time—but now that we are out of the room with the European Union, we are no longer part of the process of developing and improving them. Is there now the potential for more of a UK consensus on regulation, and, if so, is there any possibility of a divergence from European Union standards and regulations?

We will come on to that a bit later, I think.

I will briefly move on to the horizon programme, cabinet secretary. It was good to understand that the Scottish Government will now promote the opportunities that can come from horizon. Will you say a little bit more about what that will involve? Is it about working with the higher education sector? Is it about the Scottish Government showing leadership with particular research institutes and trying to galvanise potential projects that could come through horizon? I am interested in the roadshow and what is being planned.

You have highlighted a good example of where there would be common interest in aligning with European Union regulations. I suppose, though, that I am interested in the Scottish Government’s position of maintaining alignment with the EU and how that might differ from a UK position.

Perhaps I can give you an example. Next week, a statutory instrument on persistent organic pollutants is coming before the Parliament. The EU is looking to phase out such chemicals, but on a very strict timescale—that is, by 2027. The position of the UK and Scottish Governments is to take a slightly weaker regulatory approach and not to phase out those chemicals by 2027. It is a niche bit of environmental policy, but that is a clear area where the Scottish Government is taking a position not to align with EU policy. I am not asking you to comment on the merits of that—I am sure that we will come to that in the Parliament next week.

Is that an example of where all that regulatory development work is being done within the UK—it is about agencies and regulators working together with industry—but, because that does not involve the European Union, there is potential for divergence? That is a clear area where, if that statutory instrument is passed next week when it is presented to the Parliament, there will be divergence from the EU position. I do not know whether you understand my point there—

Do you want to bring your official in on that as well, Mr Robertson?

However, is that not very high level? When it comes down to individual laws and a choice about whether to align with the EU, where are you in the policy process? It seems that what is happening right now is that you are sitting down with UK counterparts and making a decision about whether you stay aligned on very specific pieces of legislation. I am interested in how you are also talking to the EU Commission about your aspirations around alignment, how you might stay aligned and how you bring those aspirations into those four-nation discussions in the UK about regulations and change.

The committee has looked at that a number of times. There might a desire to stay broadly aligned, but there could be a creeping divergence because you are just not in the room in the European Union so you are not really part of the consensus on how regulatory policy develops further.

I will follow on from that. Scotland’s International Development Alliance was at the committee last month, and it commented:

“We cannot have wellbeing in Scotland at the expense of communities in other countries, so we are keen to see that reflected across the whole of the national outcomes.”—[Official Report, Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee, 16 May 2024; c 30.]

I suppose that there is a question about how you get this out of the silo and ensure that all your colleagues across the Cabinet are taking these important questions about wellbeing and impact on the world—in particular the global south—seriously to the point that they are embedded in their work on economic growth, prosperity and everything else, and there is a question about who leads on that. What does the conversation look like that you and your officials have with other parts of the Government that probably have as much of an impact on the wellbeing of the global south as anything that you can do with your officials in your department with your own quite limited budgets?

Will you expand those for the Official Report?