7th October 2026
The Scottish Government has appointed a new Trade and Investment Envoy to the United Arab Emirates.
Ronnie Graham, a Dubai-based lawyer and managing partner of Winston Taylor's Dubai office, has been appointed to promote Scotland's business and investment interests in the UAE. The appointment comes as Economy Secretary Stephen Flynn visits Abu Dhabi and Dubai to meet UAE ministers, investors and business leaders.
It sounds straightforward enough.
But there is an obvious question for anyone following the Scottish constitutional debate:
Isn't international trade a responsibility of the UK Government?
The short answer is yes, when it comes to trade policy and trade agreements.
But that is not quite the same thing as promoting Scottish companies overseas.
And that distinction is important.
Westminster controls trade policy
International trade is a reserved matter.
That means the Scottish Government cannot negotiate its own free-trade agreement with the UAE, decide Britain's tariffs or sign an international trade treaty on behalf of Scotland.
Those powers belong to the UK Government.
Indeed, the UK already has a substantial trade operation in the UAE.
The Department for Business and Trade has staff in both Abu Dhabi and Dubai, providing advice and practical support to UK businesses looking to export to the UAE.
The UK also has a His Majesty's Trade Commissioner for the Middle East and Pakistan, whose responsibilities include promoting UK exports, inward and outward investment, market access, trade policy and UK Export Finance across the region.
So there is already a British Government structure whose job is to promote British trade and investment in the UAE.
And that includes Scottish companies.
So what exactly does the Scottish envoy do?
This is where the Scottish Government says its role is different.
Scotland has developed its own international business network, working through Scottish Enterprise, Scottish Development International and its Trade and Investment Envoys.
The Scottish Government says the envoys work in a non-political capacity, using their expertise and connections to promote Scottish trade and investment interests and strengthen local market knowledge.
In other words, Ronnie Graham cannot negotiate a trade treaty for Scotland.
But he can potentially introduce a Scottish company to an investor in Dubai.
He can help open a door.
He can identify a business opportunity.
He can help a Scottish company understand the market.
And he can promote Scotland as a destination for investment.
That is a different function from negotiating Britain's trade policy.
There is already a sizeable UK operation
This is where the arrangement becomes interesting.
The UK has a Trade Commissioner for the Middle East and Pakistan.
The British Embassy has commercial staff.
The Department for Business and Trade operates in Dubai.
And the British diplomatic network already works with UAE businesses and government.
So Scotland is not filling an empty space.
It is building a Scottish layer alongside an existing UK operation.
That raises a perfectly reasonable question:
Does this improve Britain's ability to win business, or does it create another layer of bureaucracy?
There is no automatic answer.
It depends on whether the Scottish operation actually produces results that would otherwise not have happened.
Scotland already has a growing UAE relationship
The appointment does not come out of nowhere.
The Scottish Government has been increasingly active in the UAE.
Scotland Week UAE took place in January 2026, with Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes leading a trade and investment programme involving Scottish companies in areas including clean energy, agri-tech, food and drink and technology.
The Scottish Government says Scotland exported £548 million of goods to the UAE in 2023.
Another Scottish Government publication puts the figure at £635 million, reflecting differences in the statistics and measurement periods used.
Either way, this is not a tiny market.
The UAE is already an important destination for Scottish exports and a potential source of investment.
And there is a bigger Gulf opportunity
The UAE is also part of the Gulf Cooperation Council, alongside Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
The UK concluded negotiations on a UK-GCC free-trade agreement in May 2026.
The agreement covers the UAE as well as the other GCC states, although it is not yet in force because the necessary domestic procedures and ratification still have to be completed.
This illustrates the division of responsibilities rather neatly.
Westminster negotiates the trade agreement.
Scotland tries to help Scottish businesses take advantage of it.
There is nothing inherently contradictory about those two activities.
But does Scotland need its own envoy?
That is the more interesting question.
The Scottish Government argues that relationships matter in international business.
A Scottish company trying to win a major contract in the Gulf may benefit from somebody who understands Scotland, knows the company and also understands the UAE business environment.
A UK trade official may be able to provide much of that support.
But the Scottish Government argues that having people specifically focused on Scottish capabilities and Scottish investment opportunities gives businesses another route into the market.
That could be particularly useful for smaller companies.
A multinational can afford its own international sales team.
A small Scottish engineering, food, technology or renewable-energy company may not be able to.
There is also competition for investment
The story is not just about Scottish exports.
It is also about attracting UAE money into Scotland.
The Scottish Government has been actively courting UAE investors.
In December 2025, the UAE's Investopia Global investment initiative was held in Edinburgh, following earlier Scottish Government engagement in Dubai.
The Scottish Government sees opportunities in renewable energy, technology, data centres, advanced manufacturing, food and drink and other sectors.
That makes the envoy potentially useful as a relationship builder, rather than simply a salesman.
International investment is often built over years.
A government minister may visit once.
A trade envoy who lives and works in the market can maintain relationships between visits.
But taxpayers are entitled to ask what success looks like
This is where the Scottish Government should be able to demonstrate results.
It is relatively easy to announce a trade mission.
It is harder to demonstrate that the mission produced something that would not otherwise have happened.
The same applies to a trade envoy.
How many Scottish businesses did the envoy introduce to UAE companies?
How many contracts resulted?
How much investment came to Scotland?
How many jobs were created or safeguarded?
How much additional Scottish export business was generated?
Those are the numbers that ultimately matter.
The Scottish Government already reports significant economic outcomes from its wider international work. Its international strategy report says Scottish Enterprise facilitated more than £2.4 billion in planned international export sales during 2024-25, along with more than £1.16 billion in planned capital investment.
But those figures cover the whole international operation.
It would be useful to know what the UAE activity itself produces.
Is it duplication?
Possibly.
But duplication is not automatically waste.
There can be good reasons for having both UK and Scottish representation.
Imagine a Scottish whisky producer trying to expand in the UAE.
The UK Government can help with British trade policy, customs arrangements, export finance and market access.
The Scottish network can promote the Scottish brand, identify Scottish business connections and help build relationships.
The two could work together.
Indeed, the Scottish Government's own records show that its UAE engagement has involved British diplomatic representatives as well as Scottish officials and Scottish Enterprise.
That suggests cooperation is already taking place.
The real question is therefore not "Why are Scotland and Britain both involved?"
It is:
"Are they coordinating effectively, or are taxpayers paying twice for essentially the same job?"
Scotland cannot negotiate its own trade deals
This point is worth making because international trade can easily become confused with diplomacy.
The Scottish Government cannot decide that Scottish goods entering the UAE should have a particular tariff.
It cannot negotiate a Scottish free-trade agreement.
It cannot change UK customs rules.
It cannot independently offer the UAE concessions in return for better access for Scottish exporters.
Those powers remain at UK level.
But Scotland can decide that it wants to promote whisky, food and drink, renewable energy, technology, universities, tourism or other Scottish strengths in the UAE.
That is broadly what the new envoy is being asked to help with.
There is an argument for making the arrangement work better
Rather than asking whether Britain or Scotland should do the job, perhaps the better question is whether they can make the two systems work together.
The UAE is a good test case.
Britain has the diplomatic and trade machinery.
Scotland has its own international business network, Scottish Enterprise and a strong national brand.
There is little point in two teams arriving in Dubai separately and competing for attention.
But there could be considerable value if the British and Scottish teams divide the work sensibly and share contacts.
The UK can open the national door.
Scotland can then make the Scottish case.
The bigger constitutional question
The UAE appointment also illustrates something broader about devolution.
Scotland does not have control over all the economic levers that affect Scottish businesses.
It does have substantial responsibility for economic development, skills, enterprise support and investment promotion.
So it has developed ways of operating internationally without actually possessing an independent trade policy.
That creates a somewhat unusual system.
One government negotiates the trade rules.
Another government promotes businesses within those rules.
That can work.
But it requires cooperation rather than competition.
What should we judge the envoy on?
The easiest mistake would be to judge the appointment simply by whether Scotland needs a "trade envoy".
The more useful test is what happens next.
If Scottish companies win significant contracts in the UAE, if UAE investors put substantial money into Scotland and if new jobs and exports result, the appointment may prove its value.
If it simply produces photographs, receptions, speeches and another layer of officials doing work already available through the UK trade network, taxpayers would be entitled to ask harder questions.
That is not an argument against the appointment.
It is an argument for measuring it.
Scotland does not have its own trade policy.
It does, however, have businesses that need to sell internationally and an economy that needs investment.
The new UAE envoy sits precisely in that gap between the powers Scotland has and the powers it does not.
And perhaps that is the most interesting thing about the appointment.
**Trade policy belongs to Britain.
But winning the business can still be a Scottish job.**