Seòmar agus comataidhean

We all know that the cost of living is much higher for island communities—it can be 20 to 65 per cent higher than for those on the mainland, even during good times—and we also know that the level of fuel poverty is higher in the islands and the Western Isles. Shetland Islands Council told us that the rate of fuel poverty there is running at something like 96 per cent and that people need to earn more than £100,000 to lift themselves out of fuel poverty—which is nigh on impossible. That is as much because of climate change and the quality of the housing stock as it is because of the cost of fuel, which obviously also plays a part.

Other members have asked about housing. How confident is the cabinet secretary that programme money is being spent in a way that tackles the issues that are important to Highland communities?

That would be helpful. Perhaps you could provide some information on how we can install insulation in those homes, because people cannot switch off their heating over the summer. We hear of people being encouraged to switch off heating to save energy, but you cannot switch off the heating in those climates.

Do you agree with the proposed scheme and that the powers in the bill are required, given that there are powers in the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 to require a registration scheme?

Deer are a healthy food source; the meat is nutritious and it has a low carbon impact. However, given the way that deer are dealt with out of season, they are not going into the food chain. We have heard reports that deer are being left to rot on the hill. I am not convinced that the Scottish Government has pursued every possible solution to the problem by holding land managers responsible for managing their deer numbers in a way that allows the deer to go into the food chain.

We know that deer fences keep them out and that it is possible for people to manage deer numbers on their land down to zero—or as close to that as possible, as one or two will always get across—if they want to. If someone has a deer fence and they manage their numbers, they can manage the deer properly. Can we assess whether all those options have been used before we use the nuclear option of killing deer willy-nilly at any point?

I absolutely get that we need to manage deer numbers and protect the environment, but deer numbers being allowed to get out of control seems to be a recent phenomenon. Given the number of licences that are being applied for, which is why you are putting forward the SSI, what steps has NatureScot taken to encourage land managers to manage their deer numbers?

We have all heard of contract killing coming in to manage deer numbers, almost against the will of some land managers. We hear stories about deer being shot from helicopters and obscene things like that going on. What does NatureScot do when such contracts are let out to manage deer numbers? How does it encourage those land managers to manage their deer properly in season?

It does not feel safe. Am I right in thinking that night shooting really only happens out of season? In the summer, there are long days and lots of light.

What research has been carried out into the safety of the process? To me, having people going around at night shooting things seems inherently unsafe. People walk around and go into forests at night. What research has been done to ensure that people cannot be inadvertently shot?

I am thinking about the safety of people. You are talking about issues to do with animals.

When will those be available?

I am getting a little more concerned as I hear the evidence. Most out-of-season deer management is carried out by Forestry and Land Scotland, which is a Government agency. It applies to NatureScot, which is a Government agency, for a licence to do that. It appears that NatureScot just ticks the box and gives permission. There seems to be very little evidence of NatureScot trying to encourage the Government agency Forestry and Land Scotland, far less anybody else, to amend its practice to keep within the spirit of the law. I am getting really concerned that the measure is just about convenience and that very little thought has been given to, first, the food chain and, secondly, animal welfare.

What checks and balances are in the system? You have said that the reason for introducing the legislation is that the out-of-season management happens anyway and that the legislation will cut down on administrative burden. However, it seems to me that the administrative burden has never been doing its job, because the two Government agencies are working hand in hand to make life easy for one another.