2. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the total cost of its “Building a New Scotland” series of papers, including the recently published “Migration to Scotland after independence” paper. (S6O-02713)

I reiterate my apology to Murdo Fraser for not being there to answer his question in person.

The Scottish Government is publishing the publication costs of all the papers in the “Building a New Scotland” series. The Parliament has been informed of costs for the first five papers in the series, and we will publish the cost information for the recent “Migration to Scotland after independence” paper shortly.

I thank the Minister for his answer, although I did not hear a number in the response that he gave.

The constitution is, of course, a reserved matter. The Scottish Government is spending public money on these papers, but we know that people in Scotland do not want independence and that even people in the SNP do not think that it is likely to happen. We have a budget process coming up and we have huge demands on the Scottish Government budget—not least from people who have recently been flooded out of their homes and who are looking in vain for support from this Scottish Government. Would the money not be better spent on them than on those pointless papers?

First, I welcome Mr Fraser’s on-going interest in the “Building a New Scotland” series. He complains about parliamentary time being given over to discuss these matters, but he is clearly warming to the prospect, given that he has asked me that particular question.

In respect of the costs of the work that we are undertaking, I will put the issue in context by noting that, in 2022-23, expenditure on the constitutional futures Division and the BANS papers that we have published constituted 0.0035 per cent of the Scottish Government budget. When we compare that with the massive opportunities of independence, which we see when we look at countries all around us such as Ireland, Norway, Denmark and Finland—all of which are healthier, happier, fairer and wealthier countries—I think that that is a price worth paying.

The Deputy Presiding Officer:

I have received requests for supplementaries from two members and will take both.

The values of humanity and compassion to people who are fleeing persecution and conflict should be central to our approach to migration and asylum policy. Can the Minister say any more about how the UK Government’s approach is typified by the Rwanda scheme, which today has been ruled illegal, and how it compares with the Scottish Government’s approach to asylum and refugee policy as set out in its recent paper

“Migration to Scotland after independence”?

The UK Government’s approach speaks for itself. It has overtly said that it wants a hostile approach to migration, which runs totally counter to what we require in Scotland. We need people to come to Scotland. In our paper, we have laid out a sensible and proportionate approach that involves encouraging people to come here for the economic opportunities and to support our economy, while also making sure that we have a humane process to support people who are fleeing from torture, war and other challenges in other parts of the world. We have got it right, and the UK Government has got it wrong.

Given the catastrophic effects that Westminster policies have had on Scotland’s economy—particularly Trussonomics, which Murdo Fraser demanded the Scottish National Party Government follow—does the Minister agree that Scotland cannot actually afford not to talk about independence? More important, can the Scottish Government tell the Parliament what the cost of funding the Scotland Office is, and what it actually delivers for the people of Scotland?

First, I agree with Mr Fairlie’s premise. The real question should be: can Scotland afford not to be independent? For example, the Office for Budget Responsibility says that Brexit will shrink the United Kingdom’s gross domestic product by some 4 per cent in the longer term. We do not want to be dragged down in that respect.

On the Scotland Office, I cannot provide the full figures, of course—only the UK Government can do that—but we know that, in 2022-23, the Scotland Office spent £1.1 million on communications staff alone. In the same year, it spent £47,370 on travel and subsistence costs for just four special advisers, which was £19,034 more than in the two years before. That is hardly good value for the taxpayer.

The Deputy Presiding Officer:

Question number 3 has been withdrawn.