Chamber and committees

That is really helpful—thank you.

Thank you for bringing the petition to the committee. I am excited about being able to talk about a sign language. It is really important to note that, as you stressed, BSL is different from Makaton. I was brought up bilingual, so to speak, because my dad was deaf. I was brought up to be quite fluent in BSL, so I know the difference. BSL is a full and complete language in itself, whereas Makaton has a sign per word for someone who may already understand English or spoken language.

I have seen the communication difficulties for people who use sign language in any form and I know how incredibly frustrating they can be. There are different signs for different words, which is why it is important to have an interpreter who knows how someone uses the signs. There is some crossover with the idea of understanding. I completely get where you are coming from: communication is vitally important.

It was interesting that you brought up the signs for who, what, where and when. I always add why and how. We have who, what, where, when, why and how. When someone can make the signs for those words, as I have just done, they can begin to open up and really communicate with another individual.

The point about communication is key to the evidence that you are giving today, particularly when it comes to the justice system, because in that case we are talking about people who are already in a vulnerable position. Statistically, they are more likely to be taken advantage of, which is why it is so important that we get the communication right.

I am saying all this because I want you to know that I really understand where you are coming from. I have seen somebody with a learning difficulty start to use Makaton and it made a massive difference in their life. I could see it in their demeanour and how they could express themselves. Just to be able to show that they wanted something to eat, for example, made a massive difference.

We are focusing on communication in the justice system. Are there any other areas that you think should be opened up through use of Makaton or do you want to focus only on the justice aspect?

Good morning. I will follow on from what we have just been discussing. Jim Farish talked about people understanding their rights, and Eilidh Dickson talked about people generally knowing what human rights are and how they interact. In his opening statement, Ian Duddy, said that training is one of the commission’s remits. What does that training look like? Who does it apply to? For the benefit of the committee, how do you roll out that training?

That is interesting. It is crucial that people understand how the issue of human rights interacts with all policy and legislation. I remember that, when I was a councillor, we would read through reports, at the end of which would be a section on the equality impact assessment. It seems as though that approach should be flipped on its head and human rights should be a foundation of the approach to many things.

How crucial is it that all committees, not just the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, put human rights at the foundation of their policy making and scrutiny?

In relation to the impacts of Covid, I was struck by what you said about people’s ability to access resources locally. People might not think that the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee, for example, would have any obligation to underpin human rights, but rurality is a hot topic in the context of the debate about our neighbourhoods and people’s ability to access healthcare, for example. It is really interesting to hear your testimony on that.

That is fascinating.

Hearing your evidence has been really helpful. Committee members are now a bit more familiar with, and have a better understanding of, viruses and precautionary measures such as washing our hands and wearing masks than might have been the case two or three years ago. How effective are such things? How precautionary are they? How much depends on communication with poultry farmers and their ability to carry out the measures?

I was asking how much the effectiveness of the measures depends on communication and farmers carrying them out.

I, too, thought that last week’s round table was extremely helpful, and I was satisfied by the comments about how well the hunts are run, how seriously they take the safety of everyone who is involved and, in particular, how they have trained the dogs exceptionally well. It really comes down to what you said in your opening statement about the real concern being the risk of vexatious complaints that might be made that would disrupt hunts if there needed to be investigations. I asked DS Telford if he thought that it would be helpful to warn the police that a rough shoot was going to take place, and he said that it would. What are your thoughts on that?

The bill is mainly about animal welfare. Different types of hunt use different breeds of dog in different ways. We have heard how people manage and train those animals, and about how differently they behave. What are the differing concerns for animal welfare in different hunting scenarios? Does that make sense?