Chamber and committees

Regarding the international offices and the joint working between missions and embassies, we find that there are different programmes of work between, say, the Copenhagen office and the Irish office, and Washington will be different again. Does there need to be a consistency of approach? You have highlighted that there is perhaps a difference in energy or focus from one office to the next. Does that play out in terms of our interests in those particular countries and regions? Is there something more about the joint working that needs to be codified or brought into a more consistent approach?

My last question is about how the relationship plays out in Ireland. I did not see on the list of concerns from the secretary of state that there had been inappropriate bilaterals or meetings in Ireland. When the committee went to Ireland recently, my sense was that there was a very different set of expectations there, that conversations were far more fluid between politicians in the north and south and across the UK, and that there was less concern about, or stricture put on, the nature of those conversations and who has to be in the room. Is that your conclusion?

The “Promoting Scotland Internationally” report is really interesting, and I want to pick up on a couple of points.

The focus of the report is on promoting Scotland internationally, so it is all about culture, economic development and the diaspora. Is there a question for your committee, Mr Wishart, about how Scotland projects itself internationally, particularly from a global justice perspective?

Giving birth to the industrial revolution is in our history, and we were part of a colonial project of empire. There are questions about how we relate to the world now. I am thinking about the Scotland-Malawi link as a way to address global justice in a modern age. Beyond the work of embassies, economic development and promotion, which are hugely important, is there anything that needs to be considered in how we project ourselves as an international player? That brings in soft power, the United Nations climate change conference of the parties and things that you have already mentioned.

It is clear that there can be an intersection. For example, there are trade and business elements at COP, but there are also global justice and international negotiations elements. Some of those are reserved matters, but they impinge on devolved responsibilities.

I noticed that the Office of the Secretary of State for Scotland was at the Arctic Circle Assembly meeting in Reykjavik. Again, that assembly is about trade and business, but it is also about the big challenge of the climate. It seems that there is something there.

Yes.

I think that there was some relationship between Wales and Lesotho at that time as well.

I have a number of questions about the most exciting issue: the joint budget review. I apologise that I was not here for the first couple of minutes of the meeting. However, I am aware that Philip Raines commented on the accuracy of the detail in annex J. It would be very good if the committee could get further updates on that.

I want to ask about the first two strands of work: the overall climate narrative, which was introduced last year, and the classification or taxonomy, which was, I think, introduced this year and is about whether spend is helping or hindering our attempts to tackle climate change. How are you reviewing those two bits of work? Will there be further improvements and further detailed evaluation? Obviously, some accuracy issues have been highlighted. What will you do next year? The information that has been provided is valuable, but it always leaves us wanting more detail and a sense of whether spend is making it harder or easier to tackle the climate emergency.

So, just to be clear, is the intention for that to be across the whole of Government? When we are looking at plans for investment in the NHS, and considering capital, new hospitals, refits or whatever, will the decisions around climate change and low carbon be absolutely intrinsic in the thinking? Ultimately, judgments might have to be made about what to invest in, which will bring in other factors, but I want to be sure that the climate thinking will be there and will be absolutely clear, evaluated and numbered. Will judgments be able to be made on the real value of investment in climate?

I want to ask about the fair fares review. We are still waiting for the review to be published and for there to be discussions in Parliament about the various options that, I am sure, will be set out in it. Currently, the Government is committed to two big concessionary travel schemes, and it was announced that free bus travel will be extended to people who are in the asylum system. Will you confirm that the budget for next year covers the concessionary travel schemes that are in place and what the Government has committed to already?