Chamber and committees

Are colleagues content with that?

Members indicated agreement.

Are members content with those proposals?

Members indicated agreement.

In making that suggestion, I should declare that I, too, am a supporter of Mr McArthur’s proposed bill in principle.

Agenda item 2 is consideration of continued petitions. The first builds on the visit to Parliament of Stanley the golden eagle, which we enjoyed a fortnight ago. Therefore, we are discussing petition PE1859, which is entitled, “Retain falconers rights to practice upland falconry in Scotland”. The petition was lodged by Barry Blyther, and it calls on the Scottish Parliament

“to urge the Scottish Government to amend the Animals and Wildlife Act 2020 to allow mountain hares to be hunted for the purposes of falconry.”

The committee will recall that we heard directly from Barry Blyther at the meeting on 7 December. Once again, I thank Barry, Stanley and—I think—Roxanne for their contributions and assistance.

This morning, we are joined by Màiri McAllan MSP, who is the Minister for Environment and Land Reform. Welcome. We are also joined by Hugh Dignon, who is the head of the wildlife management unit at the Scottish Government, and Stan Whitaker, who is a wildlife manager for NatureScot. Good morning, and thank you all for being here. We have a lot to get through today so we are making an early start. Members would like to explore a number of questions. Do you want to say anything before we move to questions?

At a previous evidence session, the petitioner clarified that the petition relates to upland falconry, and that there are different practices and different types of falconry. Upland falconry is what is relevant to the committee’s consideration of the petition. What is your understanding of upland falconry, and in what way do you understand it to differ from other falconry practices?

You talked about a distinction that you said we cannot make. The petitioners’ argument is that there are natural behavioural characteristics. There is clearly a difference in behaviour between someone who shoots hares with a gun and a bird that is displaying the natural characteristics that it has exhibited here in Scotland for an estimated 5,000 years, but that have now been made illegal.

I appreciate the fact that you are here in good faith. It has been testy because we have become quite exercised across all parties in the consideration of the petition and the evidence that we have received.

You talk about the evidence from NatureScot but I am trying to understand the circumstances. This was a stage 3 amendment. You said earlier that none of the normal practices or procedures were carried out. From Mr Ewing’s questions, we have established that there was no outreach, no evidence taken and no mention of falconry whatsoever before the amendment. In what circumstances did the amendment to the legislation at stage 3 arise? Did somebody pick up the phone or push open the door and say, “Heck! We have just realised that we forgot all about falconry in this legislation. We had better rush through a stage 3 amendment”? You talk about the advice from NatureScot, but it was not received at any point during the progress of the bill through Parliament. It was received as an afterthought so that you lodged a stage 3 amendment with no consultation, consideration or discussion.

In his evidence to the committee, Mr Whitaker said that he was unable to tell us how many mountain hare had ever been taken by birds of prey in any given year. What then was the substantive underpinning of the evidence that you received from NatureScot?

PE1928 calls for free rail travel for disabled people who meet the qualifications for free bus travel. The petition was lodged by David Gallant, and the committee heard from David and from Nicoletta Primo of Sight Scotland earlier this month, when we discussed the accessibility issues that disabled passengers face when using rail travel versus bus travel and how an extension of the national entitlement card scheme to provide free rail travel might be financed.

We heard about a lack of consistency in the way that discounted fares or companion travel are applied in different areas and the confusion that that creates for passengers and rail staff. We heard of individuals boarding a train where there is a concessionary scheme in place but getting off the train where there is not a concessionary scheme in place and then being asked to pay for a ticket.

As a result of that discussion, the committee has written to the local authorities that offer discounted fares for companion travel to find out more about the scheme and how it operates in practice. Members might also be aware that the issue of free rail travel for blind and partially sighted people and their companions was the subject of a members’ business debate on 13 December. During the debate, the Minister for Transport indicated that Transport Scotland has been commissioned to look into the costs of a national scheme and that it will review the approach to companion travel as part of the fair fares review. In the light of that information, certain questions might present themselves as a way to proceed. Would colleagues like to recommend any?

Was there a proposal for us in there? I know that you support the petition.