Seòmar agus comataidhean

Do members agree to the proposed action?

Members indicated agreement.

I will bring in Sophie Bridger, first.

Do other witnesses have any comments?

On our next panel, we have Dr Ron Cook, who is medical director of NHS 24; Professor Mary Joan Macleod, who is a linical pharmacologist at the University of Aberdeen; and Professor William Whiteley, from the centre for clinical brain sciences at the University of Edinburgh. I welcome you all.

Following on from the discussions of public awareness of stroke symptoms, the committee would like to explore more issues around clinical awareness of symptoms. We will go straight to questions, and I will lead off.

How are less-common stroke symptoms currently considered when assessing patients for potential strokes?

I will let you go first, Professor Majid.

Dr Cook, this question is specifically for you. NHS 24 is a point of contact for most of the public. You are preparing a revised stroke training package. Have you seen it and does it cover the symptoms that we are talking about?

Our next petition is PE1812, which was lodged by Audrey Baird and Fiona Baker on behalf of Help Trees Help Us, which calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to deliver world-leading legislation to give Scotland’s remaining fragments of ancient, native and semi-native woodlands and woodland floors full legal protection before the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—in Glasgow in November 2021.

We last considered the petition at our meeting on 17 April 2024, when we agreed to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands and to the Confederation of Forest Industries—Confor. We have received a response from the Acting Minister for Climate Action, restating the Scottish Government’s commitment to addressing biodiversity loss and noting some of the action that it is already taking to deliver nature restoration in advance of the natural environment bill being introduced in Parliament for consideration.

Members will have noted from our papers that, since the minister’s response was received, the Scottish Government has published a summary of the responses received on its consultation on the strategic framework for biodiversity, as well its biodiversity delivery plan for 2024 to 2030, which indicates that the new register of ancient woodlands is due for delivery by mid-2027.

Members will also be aware that the programme for government included a commitment to introduce a natural environment bill during the current parliamentary year. The response from Confor notes its commitment to sustainable forestry management and support for efforts to find balanced solutions that respect environmental considerations as part of that.

We have also received two submissions from the petitioners, the first of which draws our attention to a Scottish Environment LINK strategy to tackle invasive non-native species in Scotland, noting that forthcoming legislation offers an opportunity to ensure that commercial forestry plays a responsible role in managing the impact of Sitka spruce spreading from plantations on to neighbouring land. Their second submission welcomes the update on plans to develop the register of ancient woodland, while raising concerns that that will not necessarily result in additional legal protection for ancient and native woodland.

Do members have any comments?

Do members agree to close the petition and to write to the Scottish Government?

Members indicated agreement.

Our next petition is PE1979, which was lodged by Neil McLennan, Christine Scott, Alison Dickie and Bill Cook, who join us in the public gallery this morning. Welcome to you all. We are also joined for consideration of this petition by our MSP colleagues Edward Mountain and Ash Regan. Good morning to both of you.

The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to launch an independent inquiry to examine concerns that allegations about child protection, child abuse, safeguarding and children’s rights have been mishandled by public bodies, including local authorities and the General Teaching Council for Scotland; to examine concerns about gaps in the Scottish child abuse inquiry; and to establish an independent national whistleblowing officer for education and children’s services in Scotland to handle such inquiries in the future.

We last considered this petition at our meeting on 6 March 2024, when we agreed to write to the Minister for Children, Young People and The Promise, the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman and the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland. Copies of the responses that we received are included in the papers for today’s meeting.

Members will note that, although the SPSO suggested that there is merit in exploring an independent national whistleblowing officer role for education and children’s services, its experiences with the establishment of the national health service whistleblowing service demonstrate that it is not a straightforward process and “would require careful design”.

The response from the Children and Young People’s Commissioner echoes that sentiment and notes that, although she supports the exploration of a potential whistleblowing officer role, it is not a role that could be fulfilled by her office, nor does she have any evidence of children and young people wanting the commissioner to take on such a role.

We received two responses from the minister, the first of which refers to the Scottish Government’s determination

“to ensure that robust child protection measures are in place across Scotland”,

through implementing updated national guidelines.

The minister also indicated her willingness to meet with the petitioners. I understand that that meeting took place on 4 December and that the minister committed to keeping the petitioners updated on her work to support more robust and consistent investigations of specific cases. As the minister noted in her second response, and in response to recent questions in the chamber, that work includes engaging

“with Association of Directors of Education in Scotland representatives about the issue of how safeguarding concerns ... are investigated at local level”,

as well as establishing a national public protection leadership group

“to discuss ways public protection process in Scotland can and should improve”.

We have also received several submissions from the petitioners, which welcome the constructive and thoughtful submissions from the SPSO and the CYPCS. They highlight continued concerns about fragmented investigation systems and the power imbalance experienced by those raising safeguarding concerns, and the need to ensure that those with lived experience of such issues are part of designing an independent whistleblowing system.

The petitioners’ most recent submission comments on their meeting with the minister. Although they

“welcome any action that strengthens the protection of children and young people”,

the petitioners remain concerned that the Scottish Government has, so far, failed to address “fundamental points” such as public confidence in child safeguarding when systems, networks and personnel involved in historical and current allegations of abuse continue to be in place.

That is quite a lot of information. I ask my colleagues Edward Mountain and Ash Regan whether they have anything to say before we begin the discussion.

Our next petition is PE2035, which was lodged by Alex Hogg on behalf of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, and calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to officially recognise the legal control of abundant generalist predators as an act of conservation to help ground-nesting birds in Scotland.

The committee will recall that we took evidence from the petitioner last year and that, at our subsequent meeting on 17 April 2024, we agreed to write to the Minister for Green Skills, Circular Economy and Biodiversity. Due to ministerial changes, the committee wrote to the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands, and has received a response from the Minister for Agriculture and Connectivity. The committee’s letter asked about the proposed ministerial statement, research into different conservation methods, funding, zoning and education.

The minister’s response reiterates that the Scottish Government agrees that predator control can be an important component of species conservation, alongside other techniques such as habitat management and translocation. The response states that there is no specific information available on the costs and outcomes of each conservation method. The response notes that the efficacy and costs of each method or approach to conservation of a particular species depend on a variety of factors and therefore cannot be easily compared on a like-for-like basis.

The Scottish Government is currently reviewing the financial support available for agri-environment and climate schemes and, as the review develops, the Government will be considering the funding available for predator-control activity.

Members will recall that the petitioner suggested the use of zoning to allow for targeted predator control while preventing widespread removal of species. The minister has outlined work on a generalist predator population survey, which aims to better understand the size and impact of predators on capercaillie conservation and native pinewood restoration. The minister explains that the outcome of that work will allow further consideration of whether zoning will be useful to allow targeted predator control while preventing widespread removal of predator species.

The petitioner has provided a written submission, which states that he agrees with many of the points that have been made by the minister and is satisfied with the answers that have been provided. However, he reiterates his call for a ministerial statement.