Seòmar agus comataidhean

Our next petition is PE2035, which was lodged by Alex Hogg on behalf of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, and calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to officially recognise the legal control of abundant generalist predators as an act of conservation to help ground-nesting birds in Scotland.

The committee will recall that we took evidence from the petitioner last year and that, at our subsequent meeting on 17 April 2024, we agreed to write to the Minister for Green Skills, Circular Economy and Biodiversity. Due to ministerial changes, the committee wrote to the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands, and has received a response from the Minister for Agriculture and Connectivity. The committee’s letter asked about the proposed ministerial statement, research into different conservation methods, funding, zoning and education.

The minister’s response reiterates that the Scottish Government agrees that predator control can be an important component of species conservation, alongside other techniques such as habitat management and translocation. The response states that there is no specific information available on the costs and outcomes of each conservation method. The response notes that the efficacy and costs of each method or approach to conservation of a particular species depend on a variety of factors and therefore cannot be easily compared on a like-for-like basis.

The Scottish Government is currently reviewing the financial support available for agri-environment and climate schemes and, as the review develops, the Government will be considering the funding available for predator-control activity.

Members will recall that the petitioner suggested the use of zoning to allow for targeted predator control while preventing widespread removal of species. The minister has outlined work on a generalist predator population survey, which aims to better understand the size and impact of predators on capercaillie conservation and native pinewood restoration. The minister explains that the outcome of that work will allow further consideration of whether zoning will be useful to allow targeted predator control while preventing widespread removal of predator species.

The petitioner has provided a written submission, which states that he agrees with many of the points that have been made by the minister and is satisfied with the answers that have been provided. However, he reiterates his call for a ministerial statement.

The next petition is PE2058, which was lodged by Julie Louden, and calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to improve fire safety in dog boarding kennels by mandating the installation of smoke detectors, smoke alarms and sprinkler systems.

We last considered the petition at our meeting on 21 February 2024 and agreed to write to the Scottish Government, COSLA, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, Edinburgh Dog and Cat Home, Dogs Trust, and other relevant stakeholders. The committee has received responses from all of them, as well as from the Pet Industry Federation and the petitioner.

The Scottish Government is considering revoking the act that currently regulates animal boarding and bringing boarding under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (Scotland) Regulations 2021. Its response to the committee states that the Scottish Government will consider how to address fire safety under any future licensing scheme.

Dogs Trust stated its support for bringing animal boarding under the scope of the 2021 regulations, noting that it hopes to see the creation of guidance under any new legislation for boarding establishments which mirrors the animal welfare establishments guidance, as a minimum.

The Scottish Government’s submission also states that, in light of the incident that is highlighted in the petition, animal welfare officials will seek to engage with colleagues in the fire protection and safety unit to identify appropriate enhanced fire safety measures and how best to incorporate those measures into any future licensing scheme for animal boarding.

Stakeholders raised concerns about the practicalities of requiring sprinkler systems to be installed in dog boarding and rehoming kennels. The Dogs Trust consulted a contractor, which gave a rough estimate of tens of thousands of pounds to install a sprinkler system at one of its centres.

The Pet Industry Federation sought views from kennel and cattery members across Scotland. All respondents said that they had smoke detectors in addition to the fire extinguishers that are required, and none had sprinklers installed. Respondents were open to the suggestion that sprinklers be installed. However, some raised concerns about the cost and economic viability of installing sprinkler systems in commercial boarding premises and said that, in some cases, it would be practically impossible to do so. The federation concluded that the cost of installing such systems was likely to be too high for many and that it would be difficult to support an additional requirement that could put its members out of business.

In its response, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service provided figures for the number of fire incidents since 2009. Twenty-four fire incidents were recorded under the relevant category for animal boarding and shelter kennels for dogs. Four of the premises involved in those incidents were noted to have had smoke alarms present. The SFRS noted that, under fire safety law, measures need to be taken to address risk, but not to the extent that the cost, effort and other disadvantages associated with the provision of fire safety measures would be disproportionate to the risk to life.

Do members have any comments or suggestions?

Do other members want to add anything?

Do members agree with the proposed action?

Members indicated agreement.

Are you suggesting that we close the petition under rule 15.7 of the standing orders?

Before we draw this item to a close, does anyone want to add anything that we have not covered?

I have a final question for Mr Dickson and Professor Majid. How are less-common stroke symptoms currently considered when patients are assessed for potential strokes?

Just to let the witnesses know, the technical staff will operate the microphones.

We move to agenda item 3, which is consideration of new petitions. Before I introduce the first new petition, I highlight to those who are following today’s proceedings that a considerable amount of work has been done in advance of the consideration of a petition. Before a petition is first considered, an initial view is sought from the Scottish Government and a briefing from the Parliament’s impartial research service is provided.

The next item on our agenda is consideration of continued petitions. The first of those is PE2048, which is a review of the FAST—face, arms, speech, time—stroke awareness campaign. It was lodged by James Anthony Bundy, who joins us in the public gallery this morning.

The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to increase awareness of the symptoms of stroke by reviewing its promotion of the FAST campaign and ensuring that stroke awareness campaigns include all the symptoms of a potential stroke.

We previously considered the petition at our meeting on 9 October 2024, when we agreed that, in addition to seeking written evidence from national health service regional health boards, we would hold a round-table discussion on the issues that the petition raises.

I am delighted to say that we have two panels with us this morning to explore those issues. Our first panel includes Sophie Bridger, who is policy and campaigns manager at Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland; Michael Dickson, who is chief executive of the Scottish Ambulance Service; Professor Arshad Majid, who is a professor of cerebrovascular neurology at the University of Sheffield; and John Watson, who is an associate director of the Scottish Stroke Association. I extend a warm welcome to you all.

With the exception of Professor Majid, who joins us remotely, our first set of witnesses have previously had an opportunity to provide written evidence to the committee. If participants are content to do so, we will move straight to our discussion, which will broadly focus on the public awareness campaign on stroke.

How would less-common stroke symptoms be incorporated into a public awareness campaign?