Seòmar agus comataidhean

We congratulate those who have been associated with the petition’s aims and note its achievement.

Primitive Goat Species (Protected Status) (PE2151)

The first new petition for consideration is PE2151, lodged by Kenneth Erik Moffatt, which calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to help ensure the survival of primitive goat species in the Scottish Borders by granting them protected status. I believe that the petitioner may be with us, and I invite any colleagues who wish to address the committee in relation to the petition to come forward.

The Scottish Parliament information centre briefing for the petition highlights NatureScot’s position regarding what the body terms “feral goats”. Although NatureScot has indicated that some Scottish feral goat herds have been established for a long time and might be described as naturalised, it considers feral goats to be an invasive non-native species that has the potential to cause serious damage to habitats by way of overgrazing, for which reason they have to be managed. However, NatureScot recognises that feral goat herds are held in affection by people and often have strong local cultural links.

In its initial response to the petition, the Scottish Government makes it clear that it has no plans to provide full legal protected status for primitive goats. The Government echoes NatureScot in supporting the reduction of feral goat numbers to prevent damage to habitats or forestry, in a similar way to how deer populations are managed. Regarding the specific circumstances in the Scottish Borders, the Government submission states that it is for landowners to consider how any reduction in the feral goat population should be achieved in practice.

It is worth noting that the Scottish Government acknowledges that feral goats might have some positive benefits for biodiversity, such as providing food for eagles and carrion feeders and, more important, preventing open habitats from scrubbing over, with goats having already been used for that purpose in Tentsmuir in Fife.

We have received a submission from the Wild Goat Conservation Trust in support of the petition. It argues that granting protected status to wild goats would enable regulation of numbers through licensing, so that there would always be a healthy herd of wild goats in balance with the rest of the upland wildlife.

In additional submissions, the petitioner provides extensive evidence on primitive goat herds’ unique nature, and he objects to NatureScot and the Scottish Government’s use of the terms “feral” and “invasive” as opposed to “wild”. In his view, those terms mischaracterise the importance of an endangered species and make it easier to oppose the granting of protected status. The petitioner also deplores what he calls the “overzealous culling”—his words—of wild goats in the Langholm and Newcastleton hills, which he sees as unethical and unsustainable.

We have received a submission in support of the petition from our colleague Emma Harper, and we are joined by our colleagues Rachael Hamilton and Craig Hoy. I invite them to offer the committee any pearls of wisdom ahead of our consideration of the steps that we might take. I take it that Rachael Hamilton will go first.

That is the dead hand of NatureScot—sorry, my prejudice has been provoked again. At times, I find it difficult to understand what the connection is between NatureScot and the people on the ground and in communities. Do colleagues have any thoughts or suggestions?

We could couple that with a reference to the fact that the petition has attracted an unusual degree of public support and we could draw attention to the number of individuals who have supported it. We could also reference the fact that some of the evidence that the Scottish Government apparently believes NatureScot has acted on has been directly challenged by those in the communities, who I imagine know more about the subject than NatureScot does.

PE2153, which has been lodged by Lisa Williams, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to reduce council tax by 50 per cent for single persons.

The SPICe briefing for this petition explains that most single-person households receive a 25 per cent council tax discount, which is also available if only one person living in a property is liable for council tax. Additionally, the Scottish Government’s response explains that, apart from the single-person discount, there is the council tax reduction—or CTR—scheme, which is designed to reduce the council tax liabilities of any household based on an assessment of income, capital and other circumstances. The Government indicates that currently more than 450,000 households in Scotland benefit from the scheme, and it encourages the petitioner to reach out to their local council to check their eligibility for CTR.

The Scottish Government and COSLA are undertaking a joint programme of engagement to consider potential council tax reform, aimed at improving fairness and sustainability. The Government suggests that the evidence gathered as part of that engagement work will form the basis of a Scottish Parliament debate in early 2026, with a view to informing the Parliament in the next session of the findings and potential directions for reform of the wider council tax system. However, I note that the minister concerned has already suggested that there will be a revaluation of council tax for properties in the next session, which, I would have thought, might have its own consequential issues.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

We thank the petitioners and I hope that they will have noted the accompanying remarks that have just been made.

Yes, I have heard of that first hand.

I thank you and your colleagues for your attendance.

Cabinet secretary, do you know whether those new powers have been deployed? Have they been used?

I want to turn the conversation around to the victims. I should say that one thing has changed over the lifetime of this Parliament—well, actually, two things have changed. First of all, the fact is that, since we began to consider the petition on youth violence in 2022, the committee itself has evolved, and not everybody who is on it now was on it then.

However, I was a member at the time, and I was able to go out to various places and hear from people who were victims. The other thing that has changed in the lifetime of my being a member of this Parliament is the use of smartphones and digital technology. What everybody thought at one time would be a great asset to life is, in all the cases that I heard about, now being used by young people to glorify the violence that is perpetrated. They feel free of prosecution, because of their age, but victims find that the humiliation, grief and suffering that they experienced are permanently accessible, and they feel that no weight gets attached to their on-going suffering.

I am interested in getting a general sense of the support, protection and information that are currently available through both the criminal justice and children’s hearings systems for victims of offences committed by children, and in hearing what you think will change as a result of the 2024 act. Secondly, do you think that the protection of victims in the longer term is keeping up with the way in which the digital environment and, indeed, the world in which they operate and live are moving forward at pace?