Seòmar agus comataidhean

Despite tens of millions of pounds having been blown on this already. Has it been completely wasted? Is that the case?

I am rereading the evidence from Will Linden of the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit and Emily Beever of No Knives, Better Lives, at column 15 in the Official Report of our 21 February session.

Will Linden and Emily Beever both referred to the value of schemes such as cashback for communities and schemes provided by grass-roots organisations. Emily Beever said that the cashback programme has recently changed and shifted money away from some of the smaller grass-roots organisations and that there is uncertainty about the longevity of funding across the third sector generally—funding is from year to year rather than longer. Will Linden echoed and supported Emily Beever, stressing the difficulty for third-sector and community organisations. I know that this is a difficult area. It is not always clear who is ultimately responsible for ensuring the survival of such schemes.

Along with the evidence that Mr Torrance has quite rightly sought, can we ask the Minister for Victims and Community Safety to set out what is being done to ensure that the work of those voluntary and third-sector organisations is better funded on a long-term basis and valued? From my recollection of my time in that ministerial role—admittedly, it was a considerable time ago—much of the work that those organisations do helps to turn around young people who otherwise are on the cusp of more serious offending.

I was thinking that the specific action that the petitioner seeks from us is not one that can readily be accommodated. Nonetheless, general questions are raised about the circumstances in which an events body that seeks to hire land gets a blank refusal from local authorities. Why is that? What is the rationale behind it? More information, therefore, would be useful. I appreciate that we do not wish to trespass on the Verity house agreement and local authorities’ responsibilities, but I think that reasonable questions have been asked by the petitioner. I would be reluctant at this fairly early stage to close the petition without at least doing justice to the petitioner by trying to pursue the queries.

Therefore, we should write to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Association for Public Service Excellence and EventScotland—the VisitScotland directorate that supports Scotland’s events industry—seeking their views on the petition and the action that it calls for, including any guidance that they provide to local authorities about developing policies for the hire of public land. In addition to that, it would be useful to see whether there are any private sector tourism bodies that could assist us in providing useful information—I am not quite sure from whom we might obtain that, but possibly the Scottish Tourism Alliance.

We all want events to be displayed on public land. Local authorities are under a lot of pressure in various ways with funding and so on, but the petitioner raises a reasonable question. Therefore, I would be reluctant to just close down the petition without making some effort to get closer to understanding whether there is a problem with reasonable requests routinely being turned down peremptorily by local authorities.

So, where there is no predator control, it becomes a species desert.

That is very clear. Thank you.

The Scottish Government says that it recognises

“that predator control is a ... component of species conservation alongside other”

measures. In your opening statement, you called for the minister to confirm the Government’s support and that it values the work that keepers do and that what you described assists with nature recovery. You have also asked for information about the cost of alternative proposed methods such as habitat control. No doubt we can pursue all those things; you have asked us to do that and I hope that we can.

Do you have anything specific in mind when you say that you want the committee to explore how predator control as an important component of species conservation could be officially recognised? Are you asking for a ministerial statement, a letter to the SGA, or perhaps evidence before this committee, where the minister may be given an opportunity to confirm all the matters that you have requested? Do you have something in mind that would embody official support?

Otherwise the caper is likely to become extinct. NatureScot has also said that it is likely to become extinct if current trends continue. Is that right?

He is head gamekeeper at the Seafield estate.

Well, I did wonder if there was much more we can do, for the reasons that Mr Torrance said, but if members want to write to the society, there is perhaps no harm in that.

Although I support Mr Torrance’s recommendation, I note that we might, in addition, when writing to the Lord Advocate, seek from her such data evidence as is available, without going into names, of cases that have arisen over the past few years. Legislation was passed in this area fairly recently, I think.

There is no doubt whatever that it is an area of huge public concern, for the reasons that the petitioner sets out in their supplementary submission.

As well as the review of diversion, which I think was instructed last July so might not yet have been completed, it would be useful to find out how many cases there have been of rape by under-16s, how serious the situation is, how many instances there have been each year and any further information about that. That would help to provide a bit more background. It is plain that any case can have tragic consequences for the victim, which is what the petitioner has emphasised in the supplementary submission.

I support that, but in doing so I am aware from my own constituency that the pavement parking ban has caused practical issues for residents in residential areas where the street is narrow and there are usually cars on each side of the road and where, if there is some abuttal of the pavement, unless a car can mount the pavement to an extent, it becomes impossible for people to have a car. That in turn means that some people are effectively isolated, particularly elderly people, those with impaired mobility and those with disability. It is an issue that has been raised with me, and it has quite severe consequences.

The safety of pedestrians is very important, but there is another side to it. In taking up Mr Torrance’s suggestion, could we ask whether that aspect has been considered and whether local authorities in other parts of Scotland have received complaints such as those that have been raised with me? If not, perhaps some further work might need to be done, because I suspect that the issue will come back, and we will probably receive a petition on the topic before too much longer.