Seòmar agus comataidhean

The international development policy has highlighted some real opportunities. When it comes to managing the process, we have been talking about the soft power as well as the hard power that we have, but one area that we could think about is how we are developing and extending the development goals to inform refreshment of the national performance framework. Where does the balance sit in that respect? How can we ensure not only that we have this policy but that it develops within the national performance framework?

Thank you, convener, and good morning, cabinet secretary. In your opening statement, you touched on the challenges that are faced. As you have identified, we have met a number of organisations, agencies and businesses during our inquiry, and they have talked about navigating those challenges and how adept they have become at managing the situation. It has been difficult—there is no doubt about that.

We have heard from various sectors about how they have had to change and adapt to ensure that they can navigate through the difficulties that they have found, but many have managed to do that, because of the response and support that they have received. It would be useful to hear from you about how the Scottish Government and its agencies have been supporting export businesses to navigate the new trading arrangements with the EU and about whether their work to find equilibrium has been and continues to be supported by the Scottish Government and its agencies.

The working groups and committees that have been set up in the past have managed to balance some of the issues and negotiate others, but there is still a tension. Do you think that there is still a tension that leads to there being winners and losers? If you had a wish list, what would you like to happen?

Ms Oldfather, I recognise that the whole area of where we are when it comes to society and the rights, obligations, wishes and aspirations of citizens is very much part of what is trying to be achieved, but it would be good to get your view on what the barriers are, because there are still barriers. Attempts have been made to co-operate and collaborate on some things. Some of those attempts have been successful; others have not. Sometimes, one side has had a different opinion or view on what should happen.

However, at the end of the day, civil society and citizens still have a role to play in what we are trying to establish. They want to create and be part of the future. That future is dependent on the views and opinions that people have and the side that they sit on. The success of the process will depend on how citizens themselves manage that.

I also talked about transparency and the frustrations that are still apparent, and the knowledge that we want to try and iron out as many difficulties as we can, but there is still conflict in many areas. As you identify, elections are coming in the not-too-distant future for you and for us, which may give a change of direction. Would that diminish some of that frustration and progress things, or will we still be in the same locations?

Time is moving on, and I know that others want to come in, so I will leave it there.

Good morning, panel members. Mr McGuire, you talked about the report being a snapshot of where we are at present. When it comes to participation and engagement, especially in areas such as citizens’ rights and equality, the nations and regions sub-group raised issues about the relationship between the EU and the UK and equalities that do not fall within the remit of the TCA. How is progress on equality and social policy being monitored? There were concerns that the UK frameworks in that area might fall behind in some ways, and we want to ensure that accessibility, equality and transparency are very much part of the process.

It would be good to get a flavour as to whether we are meeting expectations, or whether there are concerns about the mismatch that still appears to be there. There have been areas on which concerns have been raised but things have been ironed out or progressed. It would be good to get a flavour as to where you think we are and what opportunities there might be. As we know, we are in a change situation, given what might happen in the United Kingdom with elections in a few weeks, and with Europe having had elections already. That may have an impact on what can, might and will be done in future.

In the previous evidence session, we discussed mutual recognition systems, and Irene Oldfather discussed where we are on disabled individuals and disabled people’s parking rights. There is obviously a logjam with that, and I know that there is an attempt to have some sort of mutual recognition system when that comes together. It would be good to get a flavour of whether you see that as something that can be achieved in the medium to short term. Are there more problems along the lines of disabled individuals and citizens having difficulties when they go from one place to the other?

The Windsor framework was welcomed and embraced by both sides. How do you see that approach developing in future? Could there be a mark 2 Windsor framework, with more progress on certain areas, such as citizenship, trade and mobility? Those are all still live situations and circumstances, and the hope is that there could be more negotiations and discussions about what might be achieved for the future in that regard.

Finally, what lessons can be learned from this entire saga to try to rebuild confidence in the sector and deal with the reputational damage to which you have already alluded?