Seòmar agus comataidhean

I suggest that the committee should write to the Scottish Government, highlighting the solutions proposed by the petitioner and the Scottish Taxi Federation and asking it to consider those.

As Mr Whitaker mentioned, we are talking about golden eagles and buzzards that fly on the west coast and the islands, where there is little obstruction. Those birds need to fly on the uplands. Their natural instinct on seeing, for example, a mountain hare, is to take it.

I will ask about legislation on animal welfare. Some captive birds of prey will never fly again because of the threat of prosecution to the owners. Does the Animals and Wildlife (Penalties, Protections and Powers) (Scotland) Act 2020 override the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006?

Basically, that means having no information.

I wonder whether we could write to Argyll and Bute Council and to Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority to seek their views on what is planned for the A82.

We have heard that the co-design is limited to the development of the charter, the complaints process and independent advocacy. Is that correct? If so, will you expand on how you have engaged?

Thank you, minister. What is the timescale for the development of the charter, the independent advocacy and the complaints process? Will the complaints process be independent of ministers as well as commissioners and care service providers?

The committee has heard evidence that there is wide support for a charter, a complaints process and access to independent advocacy, but—there is always a “but”, minister—previous briefings have said that the model for the charter is not clear. Will the charter of rights and responsibilities provide a clear understanding of what people can expect from the national care service in terms of their rights? Will the reference to rights be explicit, will they be enforced and, if so, how?

I am David Torrance MSP.

Recommendation 17 is important, because if we can engage with young people and reach out to them, they will engage with the Parliament much more easily in later life. The Parliament is only just over 20 years old. For many people in Scotland, this Parliament was not here when they were younger or even middle-aged, so it is unlikely that they would have engaged with it at any time in their lives. That is a key point.

On the point about mentorships, internships and competitions, I run a Christmas card competition for school kids, but I could not offer them a prize in the Parliament—a day out in the Parliament and a meal, for example. As you know, that is not allowed. That should be looked at. I have six or seven primary schools involved in my Christmas card competition, which is great.

When I heard that 19 individuals with such different backgrounds were going to meet, I thought that it could be a recipe for disaster. However, I am really impressed with the 17 recommendations and that the group were 100 per cent in agreement on them, so I say well done to every one of the people who took part.

I have a question about engagement and individuals with lived experience. I have been in the Parliament 11 years and some of us have been here a lot longer—I am not looking at the convener. We see the same witnesses all the time. It is the same groups of self-interest. How does the Parliament reach out to get people with lived experience? How do we make the effort to go out into the communities and find people rather than getting the same groups give evidence to the committee all the time?