Seòmar agus comataidhean

Do you think that the proposed transfer of certain functions to the Lord President alters the general principles of the bill?

Members of the judiciary have raised concerns that transferring functions to the Lord President risks politicising his role. Others have said that transferring functions might mean that consumer groups will not have enough say. What is your position on that?

That is helpful. Thank you, minister.

First, I thank Beatrice Wishart and congratulate her on bringing the debate to the chamber. I know that she has a deep commitment to serving her island constituents.

I am grateful to speak on a matter of vital importance to Scotland, in particular for rural and coastal communities such as those that I represent in Banffshire and Buchan Coast. Although—I admit—we are not an island, there are threads of the same theme of connectivity running through. The coastal aspect of rural living adds an extra dimension, which raises issues that must receive proportional attention in Parliament.

Although we are here to acknowledge the significance of connectivity in Scotland’s rural and island areas, I also acknowledge the Parliament’s commitment to Scotland’s net zero targets, as it is essential that our actions align with those environmental aspirations.

The essence of my address today is the importance of local decision-making in infrastructure projects. Our rural and coastal communities, each with a unique set of needs and challenges, must have a say in the projects that directly impact their lives. Whether that involves implementing fixed links such as tunnels or enhancing other transport services, the voice of the local community is paramount. When local communities are at the forefront of such decisions, it not only ensures that the solutions are tailored to their needs, but instils a sense of ownership and commitment to the success of the projects.

Safety and economic vitality are at the heart of our concerns. Connectivity is not just a matter of convenience—it is a lifeline that supports local economies and tourism and ensures the safety of our residents.

In that context, I highlight the exemplary work—which I take any chance to plug—of the Campaign for North East Rail. As an ardent supporter of CNER, I have raised its work in the chamber previously, and I met the former Minister for Transport, Jenny Gilruth, to discuss the transformative impact of re-railing the north-east.

The Scottish Government’s allocation of funds from the just transition fund for CNER’s feasibility study marks a significant step forward. It awarded CNER £0.25 million pounds from the fund, and the feasibility study has made great leaps forward in the past few months, with the appointment of world-leading consultancy firms AECOM and Stantec to explore the possibility of passenger and freight services running north of Dyce and onwards to Peterhead and Fraserburgh for the first time in more than half a century.

My office’s recent conversation with Jordan Jack, the general secretary of CNER, highlighted the campaign’s focus on collaboration with local interest groups. That approach, which aligns with the former transport secretary’s advice, ensures that our efforts in improving transport infrastructure are inclusive and community driven.

It is a privilege to talk on this subject. It is no secret to the Parliament that campaigning for human rights is a deep passion of mine, mostly because of the experiences that I have had throughout my life and the experiences of those I love. To be honest, I have to pinch myself some days in the knowledge that I have the privilege of being a member of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, which is a role that I deeply appreciate having.

I whole-heartedly support the motion and, in particular, I recognise the importance of understanding the dire consequences that the Covid-19 pandemic and the cost of living crisis have had and continue to have on human rights for all of us. The impact is exceptionally significant on those who are living with disabilities.

The reopening of the independent living fund, along with the commitment to develop and implement an immediate priorities plan for disabled people, marks a significant step forward. It is heartening to see the Scottish Government taking concrete actions to address the pressing issues, which reinforces our ambition to lead the world in human rights realisation.

People with disabilities face not just financial but societal challenges, which affect access to public services, general mobility and connectivity, community cohesion and—consequently—the basic human interactions that we need for our health and wellbeing. Without adequate support, dealing with that challenge can leave a person feeling isolated and abandoned in a world in which they should feel that they belong.

One aspect of the motion that resonates in particular with me is the acknowledgement of the need for social and cultural rights for people with disabilities. As members know, my father is deaf. That has shaped my understanding of what aspects are needed for a whole-person approach to disabilities. I was raised alongside deaf children and CODAs—children of deaf adults. I have to agree with the comments of my colleague Kate Forbes on dignity and having less patronising attitudes. Being an interpreter for my father over the years has been enlightening—but not in a good way, as we have been faced with ignorance from many parts of society.

I was surrounded by a visually vibrant and expressive community. I will paint a picture of the deaf club in Aberdeen. The incredible building in which it was held was a place of drama clubs and sports clubs, with shelves of trophies and pictures of successes adorning the walls. There was an integrated church and a large kitchen that was used regularly for events. There were snooker tables and bowling mats, and a stage in a hall where signing musical shows and comedy shows were held and performed by deaf people and hearing people alike. Deaf people from all over the UK would come to visit and participate in events. I particularly loved meeting deaf Santa there one year as a wee girl.

The club was a haven for deaf people where they were not just supported; they were given the tools to support themselves—and they ran with it. It was a thriving community with a beautiful language. Sadly, the club had to close its doors over a decade ago. I hope that we can realise the importance of such community spaces. Inclusion in the wider world is important, but ensuring that there are safe spaces in which communities can gather and organise is equally important.

The beautiful language that I speak of—British Sign Language—was one that my dad would be physically punished for using when he was a wee boy in the 1950s. He was forced to conform to the idealised version of an able-bodied person. His parents and peers supported him to learn BSL, and watched him thrive. He was often one of the funniest actors in the comedy shows—according to me.

I often think of what it must have been like for my wee dad back in the 1950s. In my interactions with deaf charities and stakeholders, the conversation often revolves around the need for early and effective support for deaf children. Ensuring that those children have access to the necessary language and communication skills is crucial for their development and future success. That aligns with the broader goal of disability equality, whereby equal opportunities are provided to all children, regardless of their abilities.

Today’s motion, with its emphasis on equality of opportunity and the inclusion of social and cultural rights, is a step towards bridging the gap between the disabled and the able bodied. By incorporating international human rights conventions into Scots law, particularly those recognising sign languages and deaf culture, we are making our society more inclusive and richer.

As we move forward, it is crucial that we continue to engage with and listen to the disabled community. Its insights and expertise are invaluable in shaping policies that truly address its needs and aspirations. That approach ensures that our efforts are not just top down but are informed by those who are directly impacted by our decisions.

Enshrining those rights will not only make our society and culture more accessible; the inclusion of deaf people and people with experiences that are different from our own and which we can learn from and appreciate will make our society and culture altogether richer. I am sure that all of us in the chamber have a keen desire to be part of the solutions for improving the lives of disabled folk in Scotland. That is certainly one of my core inspirations for being here.

I am proud to support the motion and the principles that it sets out. By celebrating disability equality and human rights, we are not just complying with international standards; we are working towards a society in which every individual is valued, respected and given the opportunity to thrive. The motion is a testament to our commitment to creating a Scotland that is inclusive, just and equitable for all. Most important of all, realising those rights will help to deliver dignity for all those who live with disabilities in Scotland. After all, my childhood was not impaired by having a deaf father; it was enriched. I hope that others across Scotland and beyond can feel that enrichment, too.

That needs to come under part of another feasibility study. We need to start thinking outside the box and looking more towards rail. If the member meets CNER—I hope that he has done—and talks to the group about its future plans, he will know that we are talking about getting cars off the road and decarbonising. If we look towards electric rail for the future, that would be the best investment to make.

I am looking forward to the feasibility study that is due in spring 2024. It is eagerly anticipated, and I hope that it will play a crucial role in shaping our transport landscape.

The need for an integrated approach in transport that involves all modes, from ferries to rail, and that deeply engages with local communities cannot be overstated. The motion before us is about not just building tunnels or enhancing ferry services, but building a more connected, sustainable and inclusive Scotland. I know that our current Minister for Transport is dedicated to creating that Scotland, and I thank her for her communications and outreach with local projects in my constituency that I have raised with her.

As we consider the recommendations of the strategic transport projects review 2 as well as the aspirations of Shetland’s grass-roots tunnel action groups and initiatives such as the Campaign for North East Rail, we should remember that at the heart of those projects are the people whom they serve. Let us commit to a future in which every decision that is made is a step towards a safer, more prosperous and more connected Scotland for all.

I commend the Scottish Government for its approach to the bill. The engagement of the minister, Gillian Martin, with stakeholders throughout the bill process demonstrates a commitment to creating informed and balanced legislation. That process has been particularly well navigated in the sensitive field of animal welfare. I know how sincere the minister is in her dedication to the welfare of animals.

This type of legislation, which intertwines modern environmental needs with traditional practices, is challenging but vital for Scotland, which is a nation that has a deeply rooted love and respect for animals. As a long-standing advocate for animal welfare, I welcome the general principles of the bill. It is not a mere set of regulations but represents Scotland’s commitment to safeguarding the lives and wellbeing of animals, particularly our cherished birds of prey. The bill exemplifies our collective responsibility to protect and preserve the natural world, ensuring a harmonious and respectful coexistence with wildlife.

The issue of raptor persecution demands urgent attention. Despite stringent laws, the persecution of Scotland’s majestic birds of prey, including our golden eagles, hen harriers and peregrine falcons, remains a blight on our environmental record. The alarming findings of the Whitfield and Fielding report, alongside subsequent RSPB data, highlight the urgency of the situation.

As well as protecting wildlife, the bill makes a commitment to enhancing biodiversity and strengthening environmental stewardship, particularly in areas associated with driven grouse shooting. There has been substantial debate about the management of grouse moors, and the committee heard from witnesses who spoke about the economic importance of grouse shooting. It is imperative that that is conducted responsibly and sustainably. I noted during our evidence sessions that, contrary to some opinions, the bill seeks not to condemn the practice but to evolve it, making it more fitting for a modern and conscientious world. The aim is to ensure that grouse moor management can contribute positively to our biodiversity goals and our efforts to mitigate climate change.

One aspect of the bill is the prohibition of glue traps. The potential impact that a ban on glue traps might have on public health and on business was highlighted and noted during discussions with the British Pest Control Association. Although some pest controllers may employ those traps in line with strict guidelines to minimise suffering, enforcement and oversight are still matters of concern.

I acknowledge that some pest controllers who employ glue traps have strict policies to mitigate unnecessary and prolonged suffering, but I, along with many animal rights and veterinary organisations, still have serious and unresolved concerns about the enforcement and oversight of those policies. Instances of non-target species, including birds and domestic pets, being trapped and subjected to agony emphasise the need to outlaw those devices. I have heard horrific stories of animals chewing off their own limbs to escape traps. We cannot turn away from such agony, so I wholly welcome the Government’s plans to outlaw glue traps.

No. I want to make some progress.

In a similar vein, the Government’s plan to ban snares has been the subject of extensive discussion. I wish to bring a personal dimension to the issue. A couple of months ago, my beautiful wee ginger tabby cat, Tabitha, went missing. Over a week passed and I feared the worst. I was at the point of rehearsing how I would broach with the kids the subject of her possibly never returning. She had never been missing for that long, and it had been almost two weeks. While I was out at a surgery, my son texted me to say that she had returned, and he sent a shocking picture. She was so thin that her bones were protruding, and she looked in shock. He said that she was incredibly thirsty and hungry. The most distressing part was that the fur round her neck was missing. Her neck was not just bald—it was raw, with open sores. My family and I were heartbroken at her state. When she was examined, we were told that the wounds inflicted on Tabitha looked like those inflicted by snares, and that such a trap might explain her absence from home for so long.

I will never forget the suffering of my animal, but I stress that my pet is no more valuable or entitled to compassion than a wild animal just because she has a name and a human family. I hope that that incident illustrates the broader implications of such traps for pets and wildlife. I am delighted that the bill sends a clear message that the inhumane treatment of animals through the use of snares is intolerable in Scotland.

Alongside those actions, the bill also introduces a comprehensive licensing regime for muirburn. That practice, if unregulated, poses risks to our delicate peatlands and diverse wildlife populations. A new licensing system will ensure that muirburn can be conducted in a manner that prioritises environmental sustainability and safety.

The bill is testament to Scotland’s resolve to protect its natural heritage and it represents our commitment to future generations. It will ensure that Scotland is a place where wildlife thrives and our rural practices are in harmony with nature. By endorsing the general principles of the bill, we are taking a significant step towards a Scotland that is an exemplar in wildlife management and environmental stewardship.

Will the member take an intervention?

The member says that I did not say what would be a better solution. We know that there are alternatives, but perhaps it is because we are consistently using glue traps and not the alternatives that we cannot get a better bearing on that.