I thank the minister for clarifying that. I have been involved in appeal processes against NatureScot or Scottish Natural Heritage, not only as an individual but through representing constituents in the Parliament. The system and the reasons around it are fairly opaque, so if that is the way that the minister goes—

Yes, I will.

I have listened to the evidence that the committee has taken, and I think that Karen Adam’s comments during our evidence taking were apposite in a lot of ways. However—let me be clear—the use of cable restraints and snaring is highly regulated in legislation, and it requires a great deal of formal training. That training has taken us away from where we were many years ago, when I was younger and there were no restrictions on where you could place snares. In those days, you could place them where animals could get hung up and where they could end up—inadvertently, in most cases—strangling themselves to death.

That is not where we are now. Now, snares are set in locations where that cannot happen; they hold the animal in place, and, because of the stops, the animal cannot be strangled. The stops also work if the animal is caught in the wrong place.

The snares that we have now also give you the ability to discriminate with regard to the animals that you kill. Once you have caught the animals, you can, before you dispatch those that you want to dispatch, release the non-target animals by cutting the snare to free them. The fact that snares are also required to be regularly checked and that every snare must be identified and subject to inspection means that the activity is highly regulated.

I understand why people take issue with this, but it is my opinion and my experience that properly set and managed snares hold the animal to allow its humane dispatch—or its release, if it is not a target animal. There is no reason why non-target animals should end up being killed. I believe that most—in fact, nearly all—people who use snares know that they are taking on a huge responsibility, and they want to ensure that the animals that they catch are not subjected to suffering.

As the minister has rightly said, there are other ways of doing this. For example, those of us who have been out at night with lamps know that foxes become lamp shy, and you can clear a massive area just by turning on the lamp. Thermal sights work, but they are not always appropriate, because you cannot always see the backdrop. Shooting does not always solve everything. Let us be honest: when you fire a gun, you do not always kill what you want to kill. We know that, with snares, you can hold the animal and dispatch it very quickly.

As for the minister’s comment that all of those things can be done at night, I am sure that Jim Fairlie knows that, if you are protecting a lambing field and looking after lambs all day and all night, you do not have the time to spend all night chasing foxes that are trying to work their way in. A snare or cable restraint gives you that ability.

I am grateful to the minister for clarifying the position, because that might get around the concerns that members of the committee have raised.

Just to clarify, without talking any more, I will press amendment 179, but I will not move amendment 18 at this stage. I will bring it back at stage 3, once it has been amended to address the minister’s concerns.

Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the fourth meeting in 2024 of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee.

The first item on the agenda is decisions on taking business in private. First, we will consider whether to take agenda items 3 and 4 in private. Under item 3, we will consider the evidence that we will hear under item 2, on the Scottish budget, and, under item 4, we will consider a draft letter on the Scottish biodiversity strategy. Do members agree to take those items in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Agenda item 2 is an evidence session with the Scottish Government on its proposed budget for the financial year 2024-25.

Last week, we heard from the Deputy First Minister in her capacity as Cabinet Secretary for Finance and from the Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy. For this session, I am pleased to welcome the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Net Zero and Just Transition, Màiri McAllan, and the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands, Mairi Gougeon, who is attending the meeting remotely. I expect to see her on the screen shortly.

We are also joined by Anna Densham, deputy director, land reform, rural and islands policy, Scottish Government; Simon Fuller, deputy director, rural and environmental science and analytical services, Scottish Government; Philip Raines, deputy director, domestic climate change, Scottish Government; Brendan Callaghan, head of operational delivery, Scottish Forestry; and Kerry Twyman, director, finance and corporate services, Transport Scotland. Thank you for joining us this morning.

I also welcome Graham Simpson, who has joined us for this session. I will offer him the chance to ask one or two questions nearer the end of the session.

As you will be aware, cabinet secretaries—I think that I can refer to you in the plural, although I cannot see Mairi Gougeon on screen—we propose to run this session by initially putting questions to both of you on areas in which you have a joint interest. We will then have a brief suspension before we take further evidence from Màiri McAllan on matters that are specifically within her ministerial portfolio. I expect the latter session to be the longer of the two.

Before we move on to questions, I would like to offer both cabinet secretaries the chance to make a brief opening statement. Màiri McAllan, do you want to start?

I am a bit confused. When you say that they are “relatively minor” errors, are we talking about thousands, hundreds of thousands or millions?

So, we are talking about millions. I am a bit concerned to get this information at this stage, because the committee asked a question last week—I think that it was Mark Ruskell—about annex J and the details within it. It now appears that we have based part of our scrutiny on something that is factually incorrect.

With respect, it is easy for you to sit there and make those comments, but until we have had a chance to scrutinise matters, we will not be in a position to say whether we agree or disagree with you.

I understand your point about the size of the Scottish budget, but using the term “relatively minor” to describe errors in the millions does not accord with my categorisation of money. The committee will want to reflect on the issue after the session and to see annex J when it is resubmitted. We may wish to take further evidence on it—that will be up to the committee to decide. We will leave that there.

I offer Mairi Gougeon the chance to make a brief opening statement, if she would like to.

Thank you very much, cabinet secretary. Some of your officials are here in the room, but I do not know whether you will be able to see them when you answer questions. If they indicate that they want to come in, I will try to indicate that to you and it will be up to you to let them come in, because that is not a decision that I can make.

The first questions will come from Jackie Dunbar.