Chamber and committees

PE2055, which was lodged by Ann Mulhearn, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to stop the exportation of live animals from Scotland to any country as a matter of priority and, until such time, to ensure that animals are treated humanely during transit and, where animals are to be slaughtered after arrival, that that is done in a humane manner and to a high standard.

The Scottish Government’s response to the petition states that it is committed to banning live exports of animals for fattening and slaughter. It welcomes the UK Government’s announcement that a bill will be introduced to ban live exports, and it states that it will work jointly with the UK Government and other devolved Administrations to implement that.

It appears that there is a UK-wide approach and that the Scottish Government expects and hopes to work with the UK Government on the way forward in respect of the aims of the petition.

Do colleagues have any suggestions for action?

I am slightly confused, Mr Choudhury. Are we talking about the same petition?

I think—in fact, I am certain—that you have jumped on to the next petition.

I withdraw your suggestion in respect of this petition.

We could also draw to the petitioner’s attention the fact that, over time, should they feel that those measures have not led to the issues being properly addressed, there would be an opportunity to lodge a fresh petition.

Are colleagues content with Mr Torrance’s suggestion?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you. Following on from the submissions and notes that we have received in relation to the Scottish Government’s view that the “golden rule” that obtains elsewhere in the UK is not necessary in Scotland, it would be good to ask the Law Society when we write to it why it feels satisfied that the current arrangements are sufficient. It is clear that, across the rest of the UK, that is not the judgment that has been reached. Individual circumstances can be very detrimental, and the current outcomes can be quite tragic.

Important issues have been raised in the petition, and I am not terribly satisfied with the brush-off response that we have received so far. I think that we need to drill down and interrogate a bit further in respect of all this. Do colleagues share that view? Mr Torrance, are you waving your glasses to say something, or are you just waving your glasses?

Thank you. We will keep the petition open and drill down a little bit further. We will write to the various organisations that Mr Choudhury suggested writing to, and specifically the Law Society. I would like to ask the Law Society whether it can give any indication to us of the outcomes of its operational practice as it currently stands. What can it point to that it believes means that the current arrangement is satisfactory, given that there is a much more stringent application of practice elsewhere in the UK?

It has been a long morning for our petitioners in the gallery. I hope that they are content that we are keeping the petition open and will be pursuing its aims. Of course, as petitioners, they will be kept abreast of any information in relation to the progress of the petition.

That brings us to the end of our public session this morning. Our next meeting is on 7 February. I hereby close the formal part of our meeting.

I see that our colleagues who are in the room are also content. Are we agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

Item 6 relates to the evidence that we are about to hear in relation to the inquiry and item 7 relates to our pre-budget scrutiny work.

I am sure that it would have a full agenda.

Grahame Barn from the Civil Engineering Contractors Association Scotland is joining us this morning. Good morning, Grahame, and welcome to our proceedings. Later this morning, we will hear evidence from current and former Transport Scotland officials.

As members will be aware, since we last considered the issue, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Net Zero and Just Transition updated the chamber on the Scottish Government’s plans for dualling the A9. The committee has also received material from Transport Scotland with information about the advice on the A9 dualling programme that was provided to ministers between 2012 and 2023.

As the Scottish Parliament information centre summary of evidence notes, the documents range from brief extracts of draft budget proposals for ministerial consideration to lengthy briefing documents for major parliamentary announcements—and, my goodness, there were plenty of them. There was certainly a lot of material to digest.

It is worth remembering that the committee is not only interested in the circumstances of everything that has gone before; it is also concerned to ensure that we deliver on the aims of the petition, which are that the A9 project is completed and that consideration is given to having a memorial for the people who have perished during this period due to road traffic incidents on the A9.

Mr Barn, are you content for us to move straight to questions this morning?