Seòmar agus comataidhean

I want to pick up on what has been said, including about bycatch, the need for a complete absence of disturbance on the sea bed and what Dr Coby Needle said about changing the design of creels to avoid bycatch. We need to ensure that we are working with our fishermen. The Galloway Static Gear Fishermen’s Association has 20 vessels and more than 40 members. Their knowledge makes them experts in the territory where they are fishing. I am keen to ensure that we continue to work with the fishermen so that the science, data and evidence are accurate and they can fish for the future.

I am interested in other issues that might impact the spawning of cod, such as climate change, predation by other species and activities other than disturbance of the sea bed. One of my local fishermen says that he is witnessing more sea bass in the northern waters. Could you say something about the impact of climate change and other activities that might affect spawning?

Good morning, cabinet secretary. In my work on the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee and in various health-related cross-party groups, and following the work of Henry Dimbleby and Chris van Tulleken, I have been looking at different issues around ultra-processed foods—that is, foods with a high fat, sugar and salt content. I am therefore interested in the work of the commission in that respect. Will its remit include food production as well as food security? Given that that is part of how we look at the whole food system, will that be a focus of the commission?

You mentioned America, Rachael. I forgot to mention that I was a registered perioperative nurse for 30 years, working in California, England and Scotland. I am thinking about activities in the United States. A lot of violence has been perpetrated over the years, and there has been serious intimidation of people who work in healthcare at the homes of doctors, nurses and staff. My point is that, when we speak about people encountering protest, that includes staff, which you talked about earlier. The overarching aspects of the bill will protect everybody who is going to their work or going to access healthcare. That is what we are aiming for. Is that correct?

The bill deals with protected premises, and there is a definition of protected premises in it. The bill also has commitments for future proofing aspects of it, including the potential to extend its scope in the future to cover general practices, pharmacies and other areas that provide support. I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the definition of protected premises and the ability to modify that in the future.

I have in front of me section 8 of the bill, which deals with reduction. Would you require further consultation on that, as opposed to ministers simply making decisions? Are you saying that 200m should be the shortest distance but that ministers should be required to consult on any alteration of a zone to ensure that any changes are informed by evidence?

Wherever zones might be in the future, a 200m radius is proposed in Scotland. That is different from what is in the UK legislation, which provides for 150m. From reading our briefing papers, 150m seems to be adequate, except at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital in Glasgow, which has a part where people could gather and be heard from the wards that provide healthcare for women. What are your thoughts on the 200m proposal in Scotland and on the potential to give ministers the flexibility to extend or reduce the zones?

My question follows on from Sandesh Gulhane’s question about silent prayer. Does the other legislation look at the number of people standing outside a clinic? There is a difference between having one person, who might be a minister or a priest, and having 10 people. Does the legislation cover when it is okay to walk into a place or to stand outside in silence?

My next question is on a different subject—the rights of protesters versus those of women who are seeking an abortion. Our briefing papers say that the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women found that several aspects of the law on abortion in Northern Ireland violated women’s rights. Its report made a number of recommendations to

“Protect women from harassment by anti-abortion protesters by investigating complaints and prosecuting and punishing perpetrators.”

I am interested in aspects where the rights of women who are seeking medical care supersede the right of people to protest and the right to free speech.

This relates to my previous question about what should or should not be in the bill. You have already given information about the number of stakeholders who have fed into the process—you said that it was about 1,300—and about people who have volunteered to participate in looking at policy development as we go through. How do we make sure that people who will benefit from any rural funding engage with the process, feed into it and are part of it? It is not just farmers. As I heard at the meeting on Monday, where there were farmers, crofters, land users and community development people, creating thriving communities is part of the discussion.

Going back to the bill, which is what we are talking about, there are stakeholders who think that a clearer direction of travel or key parameters for future support are needed in the bill. What do you think of that? Again, I am going back to engagement with stakeholders, because in looking at the bill and the information in front of me, there could be clearer information about biodiversity, regeneration, sustainable farming and emissions reduction. I would be interested in hearing what you think about that.