A self-congratulatory opening for the Scotland: A Technology Nation debate, held in Scottish parliament’s chambers yesterday, was met with a flurry of front bench challenges from the opposition. 

While Richard Lochhead, the Minister for Small Business, focused on Scotland’s well-documented successes, the Labour and Conservative parties brought up some of the glaring omissions from the innovation minister. 

Lochhead introduced Scotland as something of a technology nation already, venerating its growth, its advancements in fintech and space, as well as progress on 5G. 

He described Scotland as a rising star in the global tech sphere, congratulating the investment it’s attracted, the number of rising fintech startups in the nation, its rocketing space industry, and Dundee’s spinout successes and games industry in particular.

However, despite referencing the need to transition to a clean and green economy in his Linkedin post promoting the speech, Lochhead made no reference to energy consumption, green technology, emissions reduction, EV charging, or renewable energy in the opening of the debate. 

Glaring omissions were soon quickly brought up by both the Labour and Conservatives attending – not just omissions in topics covered, but omissions in attendance of the ruling party’s cabinet members at the debate. 

Daniel Johnson, Scottish Labour MSP, pointed out that none of the cabinet secretaries of the Scottish National Party were in attendance despite the collaborative and overarching issue of technology. 

Meanwhile, Scottish Labour and the Scottish Conservatives brought in their front benchers to discuss shortfalls in education, budgets, and yet-to-be-addressed advice laid out in the now ageing Scottish Technology Ecosystem Review, written by the government’s chief entrepreneurial advisor, Mark Logan, in 2020. 

Johnson also brought up the paradoxical nature of the debate: “Technology is undoubtedly one of our strengths,” he said, “But are we a leader in technology, are we there yet?”

He mentioned that it was unlikely California, Taiwan, Estonia – globally regarded as technology powerhouses – would see the need for a similar debate. 

“Frankly, a motion discussing technology that doesn’t even name check AI is behind,” he added. 

Liam Kerr, Scottish Conservative MSP, overall concurred with his Labour colleague. “Surely if a debate in Scottish government is to interrogate a topic, to celebrate the successes absolutely, it must also acknowledge the challenges on the horizon.” 

Kerr said the motion failed largely to do so, highlighting “the government’s inherent stifling tendency to think very much in silos.”

Opposition parties mainly spent time, however, scorning the SNP’s record on education for the technology sector. 

“350 fewer science teachers, 300 fewer maths teachers, 180 fewer computer science teachers, with less coming through” Kerr lamented. 

Oppositions lambasted the SNP’s budgeting for higher education as well, with 63% of colleges facing a budget deficit, according to Kerr. 

The SNP snapped back, saying that they had no choice as the UK had cut the Scottish budget. To which, Kerr retorted that they should “cut the waste, grow the economy – then we’ll have the money.”

Johnson pointed out that industry is also pressing for education to be a priority to close the skills gap, which brings to question who the SNP is listening to – if the industry and the opposition are putting an emphasis on education, why did they omit this critical sector from their tech ambitions?

When challenged by Labour’s amendment, Lochhead went on the defensive, saying that the amendment made it seem as if the government had made no progress since the Logan Report. 

Scottish Labour education and skills spokesperson, Pam Duncan-Glancy MSP, reiterated that the statistics were true; that the government had a shortfall of computer science teachers and were not hitting their targets, putting the skilled workforce at risk. 

“There is a risk that we rest on our laurels. There are a number of challenging recommendations we have yet to tackle,” Johnson pointed out.

Richard Leonard, Scottish Labour MSP, also pointed out the conflicting nature of technology in Scotland, as colleagues had already pointed to the issue of Scottish inventions not staying in the nation to benefit its workforce. 

He was the only minister to mention the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and Scotland’s near hypocritical position: “We welcome the humanitarian aid provided to Gaza, but what good is it if we are also providing public funding to the high tech arms providers with the latest technology to bomb the people of Gaza?”

He also pointed to the potential folly of listening intently to big businesses, mentioning that Amazon was inviting parliament to consider their research and development record. “I hope they tell us about their tax record, their trade union recognition record, their record as an employer, on worker’s rights.” 

He urged the Scottish government to consider the shortfalls of technology and to consider how Big Tech could affect the people of Scotland. “I am more convinced now than ever that what we need is an alternative economic strategy. Not one to be found in either the politics of nationalism or the economics of market capitalism.”

Recommended

• Skills Shortage Mires Scots Economy in “Low Growth Cycle”
• Scots Broadband Rollout Numbers Lower Than Previously Reported
• Scots Gov: Autumn Statement Offers ‘Worst Case Scenario’

Scottish Green representative, Maggie Chapman, was the only MSP to bring up clean energy and a greener Scotland, pushing for an alignment of sustainable innovation. She specifically called for the right to repair to be introduced to reduce waste. 

While opposition leaders brought their front benchers, Lochhead lacked cabinet backup, and failed to even mention education again in his closing statements. 

“The majority of members spoke about education today, yet we have nobody here from education from the Scottish government: no cabinet members, no ministers, yet opposition have deployed their front benches,” Tory MSP Pam Gosal said. 

This accusation occurred toward the end of the debate, as more members casually entered the chambers after missing almost every opposition point. 

The comment led to a political scuffle, with Bob Doyle – an SNP MSP who is neither a cabinet member nor on any education committee – saying that while he missed the debate, he had attended a Burns supper the night before at a school and spoke with teachers. 

Even so, MSPs filled the chamber only after deliberations ceased to strike down both Labour’s and the Conservative’s amendments without hearing them out in the debate.