Seòmar agus comataidhean

Finally, on another subject, we have alluded a little to rural areas, many of which need new people and also new houses. The Government is putting money into social housing. I appreciate that displaced persons might not want to stay here in the long term, but should local authorities and other agencies be factoring in the needs of displaced persons in planning for housing in rural areas?

First, I thank you for coming here again. I emphasise that the committee has written to the UK Government about seasonal workers; we are very sympathetic to them being on the visa scheme and their applications being processed as quickly as possible.

On a completely different subject, what more do you think that Scotland, its civic society and the Parliament can do to continue to keep the suffering of the Ukrainian people in the public imagination, to ensure that attention does not go away?

Thank you.

Minister, you have set out some of the reasoning, but I wonder whether you could give a practical example of the new process that we are talking about and say how the GB approach would differ from the EU approach. You have given your reasons for taking your own approach, but perhaps you could give us a real-life example.

Dr Goddard, we have had written evidence from the SAWC about the disqualification and deprivation orders. Do you feel that the bill deals with them adequately? There is a provision in the bill about preventing the persons concerned from owning the horse concerned. Does that plug a loophole in the law?

Thank you.

Lord Bonomy, one of the many issues that you have touched on is vicarious liability. I think that you described Scots law makers as being reluctant to go down that route, but can you briefly set out the concept and tell us how unusual it is in Scots law?

Finally, you said that you thought that the bill was already clear in its meaning. Do you feel that the concept of vicarious liability needs to be in it?

Could other panel members comment on the point that Mike Flynn has just covered, around pest control, and, perhaps more generally, their view of the workability of the bill in that area? With previous panels, we have discussed whether the legislation might have unintended consequences, such as in cases where dogs slip their leads and chase after rabbits. I am keen to get a general view, first, of whether other panel members accept the point that has been made about the need for pest control and, secondly, about the workability of the bill on the issue of rabbits.

I want to ask briefly about annex 2 to the notification, which sets out the frequency of checks. It is proposed that there will be checks at a frequency of 30 per cent for some categories. Can you explain why that is the case? What is the reasoning behind that figure?