SCOTLAND’S place on the international stage has been very much in focus recently.

We have had the nation’s relatively uncontroversial success on the foreign direct investment (FDI) front, highlighted in my column in The Herald on Wednesday.

While uncontroversial, and told in cold numbers, the inward investment success story sometimes appears not to be everyone’s cup of tea, at a time when too many people seem determined to talk Scotland down at every opportunity.

Meanwhile, on Monday, Secretary of State for Scotland Alister Jack seemed to somewhat enjoy picking at the bone of contention over Scotland’s promotion of itself on the world stage as a devolved nation.

He painted a picture of the Scottish and UK governments working well together on trade and investment, “including Scottish agriculture, universities, food and drink”, ahead of giving evidence to a Westminster committee hearing on “promoting Scotland internationally” on Monday.

However, he appeared more than a little irked about Scottish Government ministers talking about Brexit to representatives of overseas governments, when he appeared before the committee.

This political hot potato of an issue formed the basis of my column in The Herald on Friday.

Mr Jack declared: “Consuls of foreign countries have made this point to me directly - that they find it uncomfortable when the Scottish Government ministers raise separation, independence or other foreign affairs issues, constitutional foreign affairs, with them.”

He declared that Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Constitution, External Affairs and Culture Angus Robertson had on one occasion “described Brexit as a calamity, said it had posed additional challenges for Scotland, not least because Scotland was pro-EU”. Mr Jack added that, at a St Andrew’s Day reception in a European capital, Mr Robertson had “criticised the impact of the EU exit on student exchange programmes to Scotland”.

READ MORE: Ian McConnell: Jack stirs hornet’s nest as Scottish Government ministers tell truths 

It seems somewhat unreasonable to insist on Scottish Government ministers not mentioning “foreign affairs issues”, especially given the monumental extent to which these have in recent times impacted on Scotland, its businesses and its economy.

Brexit is indeed a “calamity” which has “posed additional challenges for Scotland”. It should be noted that it has also created major problems UK-wide.

And, in the education sphere, Brexit’s impact on student exchange programmes to Scotland is of course lamentable. It is also major, and pertinent to discussions in a wide range of perfectly valid contexts.

If these are key parts of the evidence Mr Jack has to offer on Scotland, in the minds of the Conservatives, somehow overstepping the mark when talking to representatives of overseas governments, it seems the UK Government is making a big noise about nothing much at all.

READ MORE: Ian McConnell: Cat has critics’ tongues as SNP backing of Prestwick Airport pays off

That said, devolution looks increasingly like something the Conservatives want to turn into a battleground. We have seen this in the context of the deposit return scheme. On this front, the Tories have made what was clearly not an ideal situation, in terms of the Scottish Government’s efforts to launch such a scheme, much worse.

Scotland has always had much to offer internationally, and should surely be allowed to promote itself to best effect on the trade and inward investment front, without having to beg permission from or be supervised by the UK Government.

READ MORE: Travel: from historic temples to high-speed rail 

Representatives of overseas countries will generally be aware of the current constitutional set-up and, if they are not, they can find out with the most basic of research.

Brexit will, you would imagine, be a relevant topic in many discussions.

It is most pertinent to the practicalities of trade. Frictionless trade between the UK and European Economic Area was lost with Brexit.

Brexit is also important in terms of skills and labour. It has most definitely exacerbated the UK’s skills and labour shortage crisis.

Scottish Government ministers looking to promote the nation as an inward investment destination might be expected to at least acknowledge this context as they set out all that Scotland still has going for it, in terms of its university graduates, successes at the cutting edge of technological advances etcetera.

On the FDI front, a survey published by accountancy firm EY earlier this month revealed Scotland had reclaimed its previously long-held position as the top UK location for financial services FDI outside London.

And figures from FDI and trade promotion agency Scottish Development International (SDI) showed inward investment projects won in the 12 months to March 31, 2023, are expected to create or safeguard more than 8,500 real living wage jobs, the highest number of planned jobs secured from such activity since the 2018/19 financial year.

Returning to Mr Jack’s testimony, why shouldn’t Scottish Government ministers talk about the effect of Brexit on destroying university exchange opportunities which previously benefited greatly students not just in Scotland but in the UK as a whole?

If Mr Jack is concerned that Scottish Government ministers could somehow be interpreted by the representatives of other countries as talking for the UK as a whole, a highly unlikely scenario of course, Holyrood ministers could always just mention the effect on Scotland.

And then the representatives of other countries could, if they were interested, go away and read up on the UK-wide impact.

One thing is for sure though – Mr Jack did not present any kind of convincing case that Scottish Government ministers were somehow causing confusion on the international stage.

And his testimony did nothing to dispel the notion that the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office guidance on “how to manage and support devolved government ministerial visits overseas” is both unwelcome, in terms of its potential detrimental impact, and entirely unnecessary.