Seòmar agus comataidhean

I was not trying to catch your eye—I was trying to catch the convener’s eye. Please finish your point.

I realise that none of us want to live in a country that is all intensively farmed—we realise the benefit of wild places. I do not want to get hung up on words, but have you considered just how badly the word “rewilding” goes down in marginal communities—that is, marginally viable, fragile rural communities?

Can you tell me what it involves and how you will do that in the next few years?

Not everyone watching will be familiar with how the Nordic Council of Ministers, or the Nordic Council, works. Will you say a little bit about how the Nordic Council of Ministers is embedded in the political cultures of the countries concerned? Many of us look with envy at the diplomatic reach of a country such as Iceland. How do the individual countries relate to the Nordic Council of Ministers? How do your pronouncements as an organisation relate to policy in the different states?

I will resist the temptation to ask whether Scotland can become a member in the future. You said that the vision for 2030 is that the Nordic region will become the most sustainable and integrated region in the world. That is a huge ambition.

I am not suggesting that it is your job to decide what the law should be; I was just curious about whether you thought that it should be a criminal offence to run an event or whether you felt that there should be a law to achieve the ends that you have spoken about.

When we talked about the decline of the activity, you mentioned that race meetings take place only if a bookmaker turns up. If that decline is going on, are we at the point at which bookmakers do not turn up or are unlikely or less likely to turn up? How interested is the gambling industry in the activity?

You recommended that no new greyhound tracks should be permitted in Scotland. Will you clarify who they should not be permitted by—an independent agency or local authorities, for example—or whether that should be done through criminal law? What do you mean when you say that they should not be permitted?

Donald Cameron rightly said that devolved power is writ pretty wide. My question is about the section 35 powers. Are they so broadly phrased as to be writ pretty wide as well? Do you have any view about how the “governor general clause”, as it was called at the time, is phrased and about what latitude it gives to ministers in the UK and what latitude it might give to hypothetical ministers who might see themselves in a governor general-type role? What do you feel about the phrasing of that section of the Scotland Act 1998? Do you feel that it is general in the way that it is phrased?

You touched on the question that I was going to ask, Professor McHarg. I am genuinely not sure that I understand how an upper house—the House of Lords—revised or otherwise, will find itself in a less contentious position, given that 90 per cent of its members will not be from Scotland or, on a good day, perhaps 80 per cent. I am not sure that I understand how the decision as to whether Scotland’s consent to something is required would be less contentious because the other 80 per cent or 90 per cent included people from English local authorities or regional authorities. I just do not understand how that would be a less contentious or difficult political situation.