Seòmar agus comataidhean

I thank both witnesses for their fascinating evidence. I am particularly interested in what is happening in the north-east, where my constituency is. In Banffshire and Buchan Coast, we have seen the real effects of climate change, as we have been at the forefront of a lot of storm damage, flooding and coastal erosion, and that has been compounded by the bird flu epidemic. There have been massive losses in the numbers of our coastal birds, particularly at Troup Head. The devastation could linger on for decades to come because of what has happened. At the same time, the perception is that we are overrun with gulls, because they make themselves a bit of a nuisance with the locals.

We are trying to build knowledge about the changing environment in the north-east, given the impacts on our climate, our wildlife and our biodiversity. As you suggested earlier, farmers see those changes, and they know and understand what is going on. They are keen to help as rapidly as they can by, for example, encouraging more clover growth. They are concerned about the lack of butterflies—they are saying that there have not been as many butterflies as they would normally see. There has been a rapid change in the landscape, but there is perhaps not so much public awareness of what is going on.

In the light of COP15—the 15th conference of the parties to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity—and given the Scottish Government’s biodiversity strategy, what good is coming out of what is going on? What does it mean for the future agriculture policy? How can we energise and educate people to get on board with what is happening?

Jim Stephenson talked about women’s participation in legal services and them dropping out. We recently had a gender-sensitive audit of the Parliament. Maggie Chapman and I were members of the board for that, and we looked into the barriers to women’s participation in politics as a whole. We know that the better the representation of women in Parliament, the better women are served across Scotland. Would a gender-sensitive audit of legal services be considered? A lot of the issues that we are hearing about this morning affect women disproportionately.

Thank you. I am sure that Fulton MacGregor will be able to come in with his other hat on as member of the Criminal Justice Committee.

Since I became an MSP, a few constituents have approached me with concerns that the court system was being used to abuse them further with regard to abusive relationships, whether that abuse be physical domestic violence or coercive and controlling behaviour. The issues range from one partner receiving legal aid and then financially draining the other to—and I have looked into and read a bit more about this—ex-partners being able to cross-examine partners whom they have abused and who might even have taken out a restraining order against them. These things have been allowed to happen in the court system, and it seems that women have been disproportionately affected. Are you aware of and attuned to such matters, and what can be done about them?

I see Jen Ang nodding, so I will pick on her first.

Good morning to the witnesses, and thank you for your testimony so far, which has been enlightening.

I am curious about your expectations of the proposed agriculture bill. Have they changed from when you first came into the process? If so, in what way? Perhaps Vicki Swales can start.

Thank you, convener.

I am grateful to Sandra Docherty, the petitioner, for bringing the petition to the committee. She has done an exceptional amount of work to get it this far. I think that she has also widened the conversation around Makaton. The petition has made many people, specifically elected representatives, aware of the issue.

My only concern with regard to the petition is that I feel that its scope is so narrow that it could limit the potential for what the committee could do with regard to Makaton. I would like us to do a broader piece of work, and I am not quite sure that we can do that with the petition.

That is really helpful.

There is a slight delay, sorry. Good morning. It is great to hear from all the witnesses today.

A crucial part of the committee’s work involves delving more into core obligations. What would those look like in practice? We have heard some suggestions that minimum core obligations should be more relative than universal. I find that almost counterintuitive when it comes to what core obligations should be. I would like to hear your views on whether we should have a flexible, relative approach or a more universal, catch-all approach.

Good morning. It is nice to see you both again, and it is nice to see Fernando, too—it is a joy.

I want to ask about contested heritage. I am curious and want to get your viewpoint. In towns, villages and cities throughout Scotland, there are statues that perhaps have a negative past associated with them. For example, the statue of Henry Dundas in Edinburgh is being recontextualised in the form of a plaque, because he was in favour of delaying the abolition of slavery. What are your views on that? How can we, as elected representatives, take action on those things and call them out? I will go to Zainab first.

That is really helpful.

It makes sense, and I am really grateful for your contributions, because we need to know whether recontextualising is enough. Zainab, you made the point that you feel that statues are erected in honour of somebody and are not just a reflection of history in a moment in time. Even if we are looking back on these things, looking forward in how we give honour and show history is important so that we do not repeat mistakes. It was really interesting to hear your views on that, so thank you.