People will not be surprised to hear me mention this, but the other issue that I want to ask about is Gaelic. In your summary, Dr Hopkins, you say that younger people are more likely to use Gaelic. I would love that to be true, but it is not. It might be important when considering the results in relation to Gaelic to be clear on the distinction between the very welcome increase in—the question referred to this—the opportunities for the minority of younger people who speak Gaelic to use Gaelic in reading and writing and the prevalence of Gaelic use among younger people. Those are two different things.

Given the sensitivities around the issue and the amount of misinformation out there about Gaelic, I am very keen that whenever the report is summarised that it is made clear that those are two different things. Anyone who lives in the islands will be able to say that, as I am sure that you realise, Gaelic use among younger people is, sadly, less than among older people.

I appreciate that we are running out of time, so this will be my final question. The other issue that was alluded to in the report was that in some, though not all, places on the islands it is becoming increasingly difficult—indeed, impossible—to buy a house. The housing market is obviously influenced by second homes and short-term lets, and I know that there are some measures in place to address the latter issue. Again, this question is for Derek Logie. What do we have to do in this respect? Are there any examples from other parts of the country or the world that we can learn from? What can be done to get around the impact of second homes not just on the availability of housing but on the prices of all the other houses in certain places? After all, without rehearsing the obvious, I can tell you that there are places in my constituency—and, I am sure, other member’s constituencies—where it is not really possible for a young family to buy a house.

I think that we are talking slightly at cross purposes. What you have said is very true and welcome, but it is important that, when we present these results, we do not skew the picture by suggesting that on the islands Gaelic is being used by younger people more than by older people. That would skew our understanding of what we need to do to revive Gaelic, and it is, by any objective measurement, not the case. I am not a prophet of doom about Gaelic—quite the reverse, in fact—but it is important to be factual when we present data about it. To be honest, some of the way in which this has been presented risks conflating the prevalence of Gaelic use and the opportunities for reading and writing Gaelic amongst a minority. We just need to be clear about what the data means.

The report is an interesting and valuable piece of research, but I am keen to know whether some of the questions were road tested on people from islands before they were asked. A couple of questions come to mind, the first of which is the one about fuel poverty. The people who are most likely to suffer from fuel poverty are older people in certain parts of the islands, who are also—I would have instinctively thought—culturally the very least likely to answer the blunt question, “Can you afford to heat your house and eat?” and the least likely to be convinced about the anonymity of the results. There may be no way around that, but did you consider it?

I certainly concur with what the member says about the efforts of all those organisations. Does he feel that those efforts around the world are helped or hindered by a UK Government whose stated ambition is to cut the money that the UK spends on international development and potentially to redirect some of what is spent through other Government departments?

I appreciate the member’s point about the importance of counting costs. Will he concede that the money that the Scottish Government expends on such offices is an almost imperceptibly tiny fraction of the amount that the UK Foreign Office spends on some of its more palatial residences and other offices around the world?

I want to build on the point that Jamie Livingstone just made about the nature or shape of COP26. We often talk about COP26 in quite abstract terms, without much of an idea of what the agenda and format look like and who is allowed to attend what. Given the concern that we have heard expressed about ensuring that the voices of the global south are heard, will you talk about how your organisations or the organisations that you are affiliated to engage with COP26 and what bits of it?

In the interests of time, I will address my question purely to Mr Nhlema. For the benefit of people who are watching, can you give an indication of how dramatically the landscape in Malawi has changed over the past 40 years? Deforestation was mentioned. The problems are all connected. When I was in Malawi, two ladies came up to me and very politely but very forcefully pointed out that I had come in a car, that they had to walk an extra 2 miles every day to get water and that there was a connection between those two things. All these things are connected, but can you give an indication of how the landscape has changed?

My first question is about the voice that people in the developing world have in all this. You have mentioned and referred to that. I am keen to know what can be done to bring that powerful voice to the fore, specifically at COP26. Is it likely to be heard?

Mr Nhlema, you mentioned that the average age of the population in Malawi is young, and you mentioned accountability and the need to promote accountability. I know that the Scotland Malawi Partnership and the Malawi Scotland Partnership work together on such issues in Scotland and Malawi. Can you offer some perspective or predictions on how you feel that accountability will develop in the future as that generation comes to the fore? Will it have new ideas or new expectations about accountability? What can we do together to work through those issues?