Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have no comment to make on that.

We will move on. The question is, that motion S6M-03543, in the name of Rachael Hamilton, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

I now bring in Jackie Baillie.

I am afraid that we appear to have lost our witness.

Cabinet secretary, I am a bit confused, because we have had two revisions. An instrument was laid that was then changed. Between changing it and consulting again, what scientific evidence did you get that was not political—that was not a result of the Bute house agreement? I fail to see what scientific evidence changed in that short time.

Is it a point of order?

There will be a division. As we are meeting in hybrid format, I ask members who are attending virtually to vote via the chat function by putting yes, no or abstain and members who are in the committee room to vote by raising their hands.

For

Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)

Against

Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)(SNP)
Minto, Jenni (SNP) (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)

Abstentions

Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD)

The result of the division is: For 2, Against 5, Abstentions 2.

Motion disagreed to.

Under item 4, I ask whether any member has any comment on the Sea Fish (Prohibition on Fishing) (Firth of Clyde) (No 2) Order 2022. Please raise your hand or type R in the chat box if you are participating remotely.

Committee paper 2 sets out options for our following up the instrument, including in relation to the joint fisheries statement, which we will consider on 23 March, any related future inquiry work and the instrument for next year’s fishing ban, when it is laid. Do members agree to follow up the issues that have been raised in the instrument in those future areas of our work programme?

Members indicated agreement.

Item 5 is consideration of the Ivory Prohibitions (Civil Sanctions) Regulations 2022.? I refer members to committee paper 3.?

Under the protocol between the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government, the consent notification has been categorised as type 1, meaning that the Scottish Parliament’s agreement is sought before the Scottish Government gives consent to the United Kingdom Government making secondary legislation in areas of devolved competence.

Does any member have any comments on the consent notification? Please raise your hand or type R in the chat box if you are participating remotely.

I see that no member wishes to comment.

Is the committee content that the provisions set out in the notification should be included in the proposed UK SI? Please raise your hand or type N in the chat box if you do not agree; otherwise I will presume that members are content.

As no member objects, that is agreed.

That concludes our business in public, and we now move into private session.

I am confused. There were no egg counts, so how does the evidence suggest that such an intervention will help? I will put that on the record and move on.