 I'll move straight on as time is tight in this debate. The next item of business is a debate on motion 4493 in the name of Rosanna Cunningham in Scotland's biodiversity. Can I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press the request to speak buttons now? I call Rosanna Cunningham to speak to and move the motion. Cabinet Secretary, it's seven minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The natural environment is worth more than £20 billion per annum to our economy and supports more than 60,000 direct jobs. I welcome the opportunity to lead this brief debate in Parliament on something which too often we take for granted. We should celebrate our biodiversity but also be alert to and acting to address challenges and issues. I just want to highlight three key areas of focus in today's debate. I know that other members will have many other areas that they want to raise. Felly in respect of our marine environment, in 2014, 30 new marine protected areas were designated ensuring protection of some of the most vulnerable marine species and habitats in Scotland. They will contribute to an ecologically coherent network of sites and we are now midway through a programme to deliver the necessary management measures to protect that network. Last year, measures were delivered for 16 important locations in Scottish waters and, at the end of the year, proposals for 18 offshore marine protected areas were also published. That is an example of the level of ambition that the Scottish Government has for the protection of the marine environment. However, protected area status alone cannot deliver all conservation. There have to be wider processes so that nature outwith protected areas is not forgotten. The marine acts make provisions for marine planning as a means of delivering this. The national marine plan was adopted in March 2015 and it represents a significant milestone in improving management of our seas. The second area of success that I would like to highlight is peatland restoration. Protection, management and restoration of our peatlands are important to protect and promote biodiversity and to deliver a range of other benefits that are all highlighted in the draft climate change plan. To support peatland restoration, this Government has identified an additional £8 million in the budget and SNH will shortly open peatland action for new applications. This will help us to support land managers to deliver the public benefits that are associated with our peatland resource. Thirdly, I cannot ignore the reintroduction of the beaver. We had a very well-run official trial in Napdale but we also had unlawful and frankly irresponsible releases of beavers in Tayside, leading to problems with the beaver's landscape and engineering activities in some of the most productive agricultural areas in Scotland. Thanks to the efforts of a group of stakeholders, including the National Farmers Union, Scottish Land and Estates, Scottish Wildlife Trust and the Royal Zoological Society, working with me on recognising reality, finding common ground, we were able to find a way forward. I am grateful to them all and for their continued engagement on this issue. On the subject of reintroductions, we hear a lot right now regarding the links. One might get the idea that this is an imminent reintroduction, but the reality is that we have a long way to go. We have limited budgets and we have our hands full with ensuring that the Scottish Wildcat receives the necessary resources and support to ensure that it survives as one of our most iconic and loved species. We also have a long way to go with stakeholders. No single group has a veto on what happens in the Scottish countryside, and it is unrealistic to think that we could reintroduce a large carnivore without ensuring that we had the support of those who would be most affected. For anybody contemplating the sort of illegal releases that we saw with the beavers, take note that we have learned a lesson. We would not hesitate to take immediate action if further such releases occurred. I do not really have time to focus on wildlife crime today, but I want to say that the illegal killing of our raptors remains a national disgrace. I can advise Parliament that the review of the data from satellite tagged raptors in Scotland should be completed by the end of this month. I very much hope that this will get us past the claims and counterclaims around the disappearance of tagged raptors. What I am sure we all desire is positive change for biodiversity on the ground and in the sea, and I am pleased that we have far more positive progress to report than I can cover in the few minutes available today. That progress is detailed in SNH's recent reports on progress towards the international IHE targets and details of delivery against the route map to 2020 projects. The NGOs have also made a helpful contribution with the publication in the autumn of the State of Nature report. This describes change over time and some of the long-term trends. Those trends illustrate the importance of the targets and the work under way through the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy and the route map to 2020. Looking to the future and the issues that we need to address, I have made clear that the EU referendum result does not affect our commitment to maintain, enhance and protect our environment. European legislation and regulation offers vital protection for our environment and I have been pressing the UK Government to ensure that this will transfer in full after Brexit. I have also asked SNH to lead on delivery of our biodiversity targets and delivery of the biodiversity route map will remain a key priority for them in 2017-18. I understand that SNH has confirmed to the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee that it is increasing resources to support its leadership role for the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy in 2017-18. But enhancing, restoring and protecting our biodiversity is not the sole responsibility of SNH or indeed Government. Other public bodies play an important role, but we all have a role and responsibility to protect, nurture, sustain and enjoy our natural environment. That is why it is important to have an overarching approach to biodiversity and I will shortly be laying the fourth report to Parliament setting out progress across all aspects of the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy. That report will highlight the achievements over the past three years and will demonstrate the value of working together to achieve our shared aims for Scotland's wonderful biodiversity. I am minded to simply accept all three amendments as I doubt that there is much separating us on this issue. I will, however, listen very carefully to the Opposition's speeches and with great interest. Amazingly, 30 seconds ahead of schedule, can I move the motion in my name? I am very much obliged, Cabinet Secretary. If everyone does that, we will all be happy bunnies. I call on you as a target for you. I call on Maurice Golden to speak to your move amendment 4493.15 minutes, Mr Golden. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I will do my best to make you a happy bunny. I welcome the Cabinet Secretary's recognition that biodiversity is one of our most precious assets, and I share her desire to see its intrinsic value recognised. The range of benefits that we derive from Scotland's biodiversity is huge, from crop pollination to ecotourism, from carbon capture to flood prevention. Furthermore, there is increasing evidence that access to nature can boost mental and physical health. I was pleased to see the cabinet secretary's recent comments recognising and welcoming such evidence. The SNP Government has set ambitious environmental targets, and I offer my praise and support for those ambitions. I agree with much of the SNP motion laid today. My amendment seeks to clarify that, while progress has been made, there is much to be achieved, and we as a Parliament must help to deliver it for Scotland. Ambitious targets have been set, and they are important. They set the tone, narrative and direction. Although at times it can be difficult across the Cabinet, across the chamber and across Scotland to agree ambitious targets, it is even more difficult to then achieve them. That is my rationale for the amendment, which I now move in my name. I also believe that the Green and Labour amendments enhance and contribute to the original motion. They enrich and are consensual, where confrontation could have been sought. The IHE targets, which are defined in the national ecological network, which needs to be defined, are important and will help to support our biodiversity targets. However, setting an ambitious target is not the same as achieving it. The simple truth is that the SNP Government has come up short on its targets in many areas, and those shortcomings must be recognised. For example, 1 in 10 bird species face extinction, as do 13 per cent of plant species. There has been a 40 per cent reduction in seabird numbers over the past 30 years. 14 per cent of our ancient woodland has been lost over the past four decades. Woodland targets have been missed with barely more than two-fifths planted, and more than 30 per cent of native woodland is in a poor condition. Let's focus on urban biodiversity. We're seeing the steady erosion of our cherished green belt. Ask the people of East Renfrewshire where swathes of the green belt is destined to be destroyed. Places like Broom Park, where a concrete jungle could be poured over a precious community urban green space. Ask the people of Renfrewshire whose green belt has been attacked from five different planning appeals at the same time in Kilbarcon, Brookfield, Bridges of Weir, twice and Eldersley, as well as a host of other communities across the west of Scotland and Scotland as a whole. Yes, there is a need for new housing, but not at the expense of our green belt and our biodiversity. That's why we need to get grips with these sorts of issues by creating specially designated zones to protect our green belt and set up a green corridor network. We need to establish a biodiversity baseline to monitor and track conservation efforts. We need to restore seabird islands and provide support to those fighting the spread of invasive species. We believe that measures like these can help strengthen the common ground between the parties of this Parliament. We are here to offer critical enhancement because we want to push the SNP Government to do more. So let's build that consensus, let's praise what successes there have been and let's recognise the challenges that remain. The time for talking up targets is over, it's time for action from all of us. Thank you very much, I'm Hanigout Gold Star 70 so far and I'll call on Claudia Beamish to speak to and move amendment 4 490.25 minutes please, Ms Beamish. Right. Thank you, Presiding Officer. This is a very important debate, actually international biodiversity targets set us a considerable challenge as is acknowledged across this Parliament and it should be recognised that it will take redoubling of efforts if Scotland is to rise to this standard and contribute robustly to the UK contribution. The British Labour's amendment today, which I move in my name, highlights the need to appropriately embed biodiversity in all relevant land use decisions and the need to improve connectivity for habitats and species. We often focus on the land and so I too am going to start with the sea like the Cabinet Secretary today. Biodiversity should be a consideration in all marine activities and sectors. We all aspire to a healthier, sustainable, productive, biologically diverse seas and we cannot take a sectoral route. To reach this end goal we need open dialogue and a holistic ecosystems approach and I look forward to working with colleagues to reinforce this in the emerging regional marine planning system, proposed inshore fisheries bill and in whatever Brexit splashes at us. We all have some connection with the sea, be it food, employment, leisure and protecting and enhancing robust marine ecosystems serves all of our interests. Scotland has iconic marine species and the chamber may have seen the magnificent photos of the humpback whale who visited the forth this week. As the Cabinet Secretary highlighted, 16 per cent of our marine protected areas are now under protection and this is a very welcome achievement. The next step is to plug the network gaps, including nature conservation areas and special protection areas for colonies and feeding areas of seabirds, sea ducks, grebes and divers. We have the benefit of increasingly sound science within which marine management should be anchored and the Government's report into the first marine protected area management measures found no significant socioeconomic impacts of a significant kind and is absolutely welcome that, thus far, the NPAs are working for coastal communities and conservationists and our habitats. Continued monitoring, funding and resourcing is absolutely essential but biodiversity enhancement is something many of us can contribute to. It is important to do small things ourselves like leaving piles of leaves and cuttings for animals to hibernate in and planting wildflower seeds even in a window box. What is the Scottish Government doing to raise awareness of the opportunities that we can all take to support biodiversity? When we work in partnership, we can take far greater steps in developing awareness of biodiversity and generating action. I had the pleasure last summer of visiting Glen Lude near Innerleithan in my region, which is owned by the John Muir Trust. I took this opportunity to find out what great projects they have to involve schools and community groups to promote biodiversity. The staff do a fantastic job working with groups also who have had alcohol and drugs issues to take care of specific pieces of land that they can see regenerating. They also work with employability charities. A wonderful example of this partnership working in south and central Scotland is the Irvine to Gervan Nectar network. It is believed that Albert Einstein once said, if the bee disappears from the surface of the earth, man will have no more than four years to live and women of course as well. We must thank all those who work on the side of the bees. Scottish Wildlife Trust, who celebrated its 50th birthday here in the Parliament this week, is working with businesses, golf clubs and with the local councils to protect and crucially connect pollinator hotspots, sowing, planting and changing the management of the meadow areas, creating nectar pathways across Ayrshire. This is an encouraging model that should be adopted possibly across Scotland and even Ayr University hospital is involved in promotion of the benefits of wildlife and rich green space for communities, health and well-being and Sustrans yet another partner are also exploring how cycle paths can form ideal pollinator routes as well. This is encouraging progressive work and Pauline McNeill will later in the debate talk about the national ecological network, not framework as I inadvertently called it wrongly in my speech, in my amendment for which apologies. Dear management is another serious ecosystem issue that remains unresolved in Scotland and many areas are still without management groups and local authorities do not always have the training or systems in place to control and support. My earlier example of Glen Lude applies here too, where the John Muir Trust has developed an excellent circular economy model using brash waste to stop the road deer getting into circles of native saplins. On that we must conclude with the road deer. Right, thank you. Thank you very much. You have not moved your amendment. It is a good place to end. You have moved your amendment please. I did move it. You have moved it. I did move it. You have moved it. I now call on Mark Ruskell to speak to a move amendment 4490.4, Mr Ruskell. Thank you. Five minutes. Thank you Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I declare an interest as a councillor? Probably for not much longer, but can I also thank the Scottish Government for bringing forward the debate this afternoon? I think we've had a series of really thoughtful one-hour debates in recent months on biodiversity, but it's good to finally have one with a vote at the end and it appears that we're going to have a unanimous vote tonight, but that's good. Firstly, I think it is important that we recognise what the true state of our nature is and the saddening fact that over half of our species have been in decline since the 1970s, with one out of 12 species still at risk of extinction today. I think alongside the considerable success stories, we're still dealing with some of the catastrophes. Over a third of our seabirds have gone in the last 30 years, for example, and while it's welcomed that a fifth of our seas are now under marine protected area status, we've barely even begun to monitor their condition, let alone take the action needed for full recovery. This decline in key species and habitats is not something that any one single government should feel directly responsible for. Nearly every party in this chamber has had ministers governing Scotland's environment, agriculture, fisheries and planning system at some point in the last four decades, but we do need to realise collectively that putting nature first in decision making for both its intrinsic value and for its role in providing the foundation of our economic and social wellbeing has never truly taken place. Opportunities to act in a joined up way that challenge narrow economic interests and traditional management of land and seas have been passed up along the way and the environment has suffered as a result. So let me focus on one big positive action that is needed. It is time for a national ecological network that helps vulnerable species move between landscapes, secure high quality green space for communities and enhance the services that the environment provides for us all. And it's needed to plan for our green infrastructure in much the same way that we plan for our grey infrastructure and it needs the same status in decision making. So across the lowlands, a national ecological network could guide public funds towards enhancing and protecting habitats like hedge rows and woodlands while in the uplands it could guide catchment scale work to deliver peatland, native woodland restoration, species reintroductions or flood management. While in urban areas it would join up the vital green spaces, parks and pathways delivering a wellbeing shared between communities and nature. The land use strategy in turn should underpin such a network as a clear objective and place expectations on land managers, planners and communities to deliver it. So far the land use strategy has been largely pushed to the background of the climate change plan which is surprising given that it was a key tool in the climate act. But the need to line up land uses so they work together to deliver common goals is greater than ever. For example, further development, re-powering of onshore wind farms at the same time as delivery of ambitious targets for forestry and peatland restoration are vital for our climate change work. They can be creatively balanced together through regional land use strategies. And this approach should be at the heart of the government's upland vision. It should be a progressive vision of community empowerment and sustainable land use, not a degraded vision where cries of voluntary restraints from SNH are met with truckloads of dead mountain hares, spiralling deer densities and raptor persecution. Now I read from the cabinet secretary that SNH are starting the conversation this year what a national ecological network could look like and I very much welcome that. But given that it's taken six years for successive environment ministers to wrangle over extending the powers of the SSPC on wildlife crime, I'll be watching the calendar carefully. Putting nature at the heart of the way we plan as a society could drift unless we as a parliament put a firm marker down today. A national ecological network should be the jewel in the crown of Scotland's infrastructure, defining the value of our special places and the communities and nature they sustain. Let's take that first step to delivery today and I move the amendment in my name, Deputy Presiding Officer. Thank you very much, Mr Ruskell. I now move to the open debate, speeches of four minutes please. Call Graham Day to be followed by Finlay Carson. Mr Day. Thank you, Presiding Officer. In November of last year, the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee hosted a round table discussion with stakeholders about just where Scotland stands in the relation to progress on this hugely important topic. That session was sparked by differences both in the tone and the picture painted by the RSPB State of Nature report and SNH's first review of progress. It covered a wide variety of marine and land-based subjects and on the back of that the committee entered into quite detailed correspondence with the Cabinet Secretary. What the Cabinet Secretary's expansive response to the letter from the Environment Committee confirms, amongst other things for me, is that in some areas there is a disconnect between what normally well-informed stakeholders understand is or isn't happening and the reality. I say that not as a criticism of anyone but as a reflection of where we do seem to be. The concerns that were noted by the committee were all clearly articulated and widely supported among those who gave evidence. Those included progress in completing the Habitat map of Scotland and the fact that the high-level biodiversity strategy group had not met for more than a year. It turns out, though, that the former is on course for completion in 2019, as I understand was required to be the case. In terms of the latter point, a governance review completed before last year's election, but not taken forward as yet, appears to have placed that group in stasis, albeit that other consultative bodies are continuing. Witnesses, though, seem to have an expectation that the group ought still to be operational. It was also suggested to the committee that multi-wired reporting structures in relation to biodiversity, along with a number of strategies relating to this hugely important subject, creates an unnecessarily congested policy framework landscape. This may well be required by the need to report at a Scottish, UK and international level, but we wonder whether it might be possible, if not to streamline, to at least provide greater clarity around the strategic purposes and review whether the various strands are sufficiently joined up. We are about to have a ro-redendron strategy added to the mix, and however welcome that may be on one level, it was indicated to the committee when it took evidence in November that, even among those who have a firm understanding of biodiversity, some simplification would be welcome. I hope that the stakeholder meetings on land use and biodiversity planned for later this year, which the cabinet secretary noted in her response to the committee can provide clarity with what it seemingly needed and progress around some of these points, not least of all because the cabinet secretary, stakeholders, MSPs right across this parliament have the same shared ambitions here. Biodiversity, as it should be, will continue to be woven through the work of the Environment Committee, and we await with interest publication of the three-yearly update on progress, anticipating that it will be more encompassing in its reach than the SNH Six Big Steps report was and offer us a real insight into just where we are and responding to the challenges that climate change, amongst other things, is posing our natural environment. Presiding officer, having started my contribution by highlighting concerns being identified by stakeholders, let me finish by looking at some of the indoubted progress that's been made. There are very often two ways of looking at a situation, perfect case in point, concerns of protected area management, areas management. Eucude, as the RSPB have highlighted, pointed out that we still have one-fifth of our best sites for nature in unfavourable condition. On the other hand, between 2007 and 2016, the number of features reported as favourable rose from 76 per cent to 80.4 per cent. So we are on the right track, even if we would all wish the pace of improvement was greater. The introduction of marine protected air has been another positive. Personally, I'm also very much heartened by the developments around peatland and forestry. On the subject of good news, wasn't it great to hear in the last few days that the Scottish Wildlife Trust has secured almost £2.5 million from the Heritage Lottery Fund for the Saving Scotland's Red Squirrels project? Yes, Presiding Officer, still some way to go and we'll see what the three-yearly Scottish Biodiversity Strategy tells us in that short way and potential challenges to be faced around Brexit. Progress is being made and in terms of building upon that, we're seeing some encouraging signs of reaching out to find common ground in agreement. The newly produced SWT land stewardship policy document being just one good example of this. Thank you very much. I call Finlay Carson to fall by Paulie Menial. Mr Carson, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to take part in this important debate on biodiversity. Biodiversity is vital to Scotland in so many levels. It boosts the ecosystem, productivity, contributes to the maintenance of a healthy planet and contributes to healthy communities and people. Indeed, the benefits of enhancing Scotland's biodiversity have the potential to affect each and every one of us. A boost to a farmer's crop pollination can create a potentially greater yield. Healthier marine fisheries contribute to more sustainable stocks, securing the future of our vital fishing industries. Increased air, water and soil quality bring health benefits for us all and enhance what I believe is the most stunning scenery and landscapes in the world. Nature-based tourism is estimated to generate at least £1.4 billion per year and brings around 39,000 full-time equivalent jobs to the Scottish economy. There is really no limit to the potential to create value from enhancing and protecting Scotland's biodiversity. The Scottish Government has taken some important steps in recognising the importance of biodiversity through committing to the European Biodiversity Strategy for 2020, and the UNHA targets through the 2020 challenge for Scotland's biodiversity. Indeed, I think that the only contentious issue today could be the pronunciation of HA, HA or ackee. I would like to take this opportunity touch on a couple of areas where I think further progress can be made. Look at the peatland restoration programme that is currently under way, contributing to a 15 per cent degraded ecosystem restoration target. In 2013, 10,000 hectares of peatland have been restored. However, Professor Robin Matthews of the James Hudson Institute estimates that restoring 21,000 hectares annually, a figure that he calls modest, will contribute to 8 per cent reduction in total Scottish carbon emissions. We in these benches welcome this ambitious commitment to restoring degraded peatland, which will help to protect against flooding and act as a natural carbon sink. That would not only benefit the climate, but the economy too by providing long-term investment and security to those projects that has potential to encourage the creation of jobs, local jobs in. Presiding Officer, colleagues will not be surprised to hear me mention national parks as part of this debate. Scotland's national parks are the area of very high value in terms of landscapes, wildlife and cultural heritage. They provide positive management and additional resources to safeguard and enhance and ensure sustainability for the long term. They also provide opportunities for the public to enjoy special nature and natural cultural heritage. We currently have two designated national parks in Scotland. I believe that there is a great deal of scope to create more. There is a campaign in my own constituency for the designation of a Galloway national park, one that I have been active in for many years and will continue to push for. Joan McAlpine The member for taking the intervention, I am aware of the campaign that he cites. Does he agree with me that it is really important that you have real community buy-in to those kinds of campaigns and that no national park should go ahead unless you were absolutely sure that the whole community was behind it? Finlay Carson Absolutely. I think that that is fundamental to the whole project. I encourage the group in Galloway to ensure that every stakeholder is involved in every part of that process. The Scottish Government has made good progress on the designation of marine protected areas. However, we need to ensure that the aim of each NPA is defined and that there is full involvement of Scottish national heritage, local groups and, importantly, the fishing industry, which might be affected by that. It is a regret that I learnt that the Scottish Fisherman's Federation had to learn from a journalist that the NPA's social economic monitoring report had been published having received no notification from Marine Scotland. That is totally unacceptable and I hope that the cabinet secretary will ensure that in future proper consideration is given to all stakeholders. Deputy Presiding Officer, to conclude, I think that we can all agree that enhancing Scotland's biodiversity brings many benefits and I support an ambitious programme to achieve this. However, we must always ensure that we follow an evidence-based approach with full engagement from all stakeholders at every stage in the process. Thank you very much, Mr Carson. I call Folly McNeill to follow by Liam McArthur. Miss McNeill, please. The importance of biodiversity to Scotland's wildlife cannot be underestimated and it is certainly not a side issue. Three quarters of people in Scotland think that our landscapes are in good condition, but, according to the RSPB, the state of nature report says that there are several habitats and species in Scotland that are in decline, an alarming fact, I think, for our world. Like many members, Environment Link asks us all to champion a species and the species that I chose to champion is the sea trout, so I hope that members do not mind if I do my job today. Sea trout are a migratory form of brown trout, a 75 per cent of sea trout. Go to sea to feed and then go back to the river to spawn. For that reason, they stay in coastal areas close to the river that they were spawned in and, when they re-enter the river from the sea, they are very similar in colour, similar to salmon in fact. Once in the river, for a while, they look like the resident brown trout, which is only a little bit bigger. Ensuring continued access to their migration routes is clearly essential to this species being able to flourish. Where would we be without the sea trout? Biodiversity corridors or wildlife corridors are areas of habitat connecting wildlife. Biodiversity corridors are essential in order for ecosystems to function properly. Some species need to travel long distances to survive without safe corridors to move around. Animals are exposed to all kinds of dangers. That must be taken seriously, not just the protection of wildlife, but also in urban and rural areas of planning where we put buildings up. We must ensure that we comply with protecting species and animals. They also help to protect genetic diversity. Genetic diversity is essential if it is reduced and breeding raises the risks of disease and genetic defects. There are many good examples of biodiversity in Glasgow that I represent. I support Maurice Golden and what he talks about in his contribution about protecting green space, particularly in urban areas. I would like to just mention the new public park, which is going to be no main feat to be built over the M8 at Charring Cross, giving the people for the first time in that area a very nice green space. Glasgow has some good examples of where it has worked well. Possil marsh near Bishop Briggs is a freshwater lodge surrounded by marsh and swamp areas. These areas support rare plants and the reserve itself is an important visiting place for water birds during their spring and autumn migration. The reserve was at one time part of an extensive system of locks and marshes in the west of Scotland. There is also a Glasgow and Clyde valley gate network, one of its main aims is to create strong and diverse habitats. We know that the UN Convention on Biological Diversity agreed to stop the fall in global diversity by 2020. Maintaining and developing areas of biodiversity is essential if the UK is to meet its biodiversity targets by the United Nations. I just wanted to finish presiding officer with just a comment on the need to have environmental officers who are essential to increasing diversity across biodiversity across Scotland. My colleague Claudia Beamish had asked Aileen Campbell in 2015 if she would outline the number of officers that we have lost across Scotland due to local government cuts. I wonder if the minister in her closing remarks was able to update us on that or give us any comment about any concerns that she might have about losing biodiversity office from local government, which is absolutely essential if we are to meet our United Nations targets. Thank you very much. I call Liam McArthur to follow the Angus McDonald. Angus McDonald will be the last speaker in the open debate. Mr McArthur, please. Thank you very much, everybody. I declare an interest as a species champion, in my case the Scottish primrose, which itself is under threat from habitat destruction. I am delighted to take part in this very brief but welcome debate. I support the motion and all three amendments and in passing can I also welcome the comments from the cabinet secretary in relation to raptor persecution. In the limited time available to me, can I focus on a couple of local issues that I think underscore the importance of the interaction between different species and the impact that that then has on biodiversity in this case in anorkney context. As the cabinet secretary, we well aware from my joint work a number of years back on the wildlife and natural environment bill, the parliament chose to adopt a zero tolerance approach when it came to invasive non-native species. I think it was right to do so, but I have a tale of woe. I have a tale of stoats and of geese. While in anorkney we pride ourselves on providing a warm welcome to most visitors, we do draw the line when it comes to stoats who were first spotted in the islands back in 2010 as RSPB observed stoats on ornay pose perhaps the greatest risk to priority species on these islands. It is predation on ornay voles, the impact on hen harriers and short-eared owls as well as on ground nesting birds. I think it could be dramatic. The initial volunteer trapping exercise unfortunately didn't prove successful, but I'm delighted that SNH, working alongside RSPB and other local partners, now is in a position to put in a bid for funding under HLF auspices to put in place a more ambitious stote eradication programme. I think in the meantime I very much hope that the interim measures to stop an expansion out to the outer aisles, to develop the skills of some of the local volunteers that may be involved in that programme can stop a bad situation from deteriorating further. Turning to the issue of grey-like geese, these of course are indigenous. There's an indigenous grey-like geese population in Orkney, but those are swollen exponentially by the numbers of migrant geese coming in at certain parts of the year. I think the Scottish Government is to be commended on its introduction of an active goose management scheme around five years ago. I think this was extremely helpful in containing numbers. Unfortunately, it hasn't had the desired effect in terms of reducing those numbers, which are now upwards of 25, possibly 30,000 in total. The scheme is now in concluded last summer, and there is a concern that we now see the gains that have been made lost and the objectives of the scheme that was introduced, not being achieved. Therefore, I would urge the cabinet secretary to look again at how we might be able to maintain the momentum and in the interests not just of avoiding damage to land but also in terms of protecting many of the ground nesting birds that are affected by that explosion in the geese population. In conclusion, can I, like others, welcome the fact that we're having this debate? I'm sure we'll have an opportunity to return to this issue in due course. Likewise, I would wish to note and acknowledge the collective commitment that there is across the chamber to up our game in this area. I think that that is just as well, because I think that all of us are not in any doubt about the scale of the challenge that we face, not just an environmental challenge but, as a number of speakers have pointed out, the social and economic impacts that that would have as well. Deputy Presiding Officer, thank you. Thank you very much. Mr MacArthur, I call Angus MacDonald. I am pleased to take part in this debate this afternoon and thank the Scottish Government for giving us the opportunity to highlight the benefit of biodiversity once more in this chamber. Biodiversity, as we know, is the key building block of our ecosystem, so it was with a degree of concern that the State of Nature report 2016, which the cabinet secretary has mentioned in her opening remarks and which was discussed in my member's debate in November in this chamber, presented a mixed picture of Scotland's biodiversity. The report presented a number of warnings about Scotland's biodiversity, which has certainly made people sit up and think. However, it's important to note that it's not all doom and gloom and it's not too late for Scotland to become a world leader in biodiversity and environmental protection. The Scottish Biodiversity Strategy route map interim report highlights good progress with regard to the 2020 IHE targets in areas such as peatland restoration, taking learning outdoors, restoration of fresh waters and an increase in the environmental status of our seas. However, as has already been highlighted this afternoon, lack of progress is reported in the creation of a national ecological network, also native woodland planting and restoration, invasive non-native species prevention and application of ecosystem health indicators at the landscape scale. The Scottish Wildlife Trust, and I thank them for their briefing in advance of this debate, has called on the Scottish Government to make a lot more progress towards creating a national ecological network and increasing native woodland planting, both of which would increase Scotland's biodiversity and help to restore ecosystem health, which will in turn make Scotland's wildlife more resilient to climate change and resistant to the threats of pests and diseases. In previous debates on biodiversity in this chamber, I have, as you'd expect, highlighted the great work going on in my Falkirk East constituency, which has a varied terrain ranging from prime agricultural land next to the river force to hill farms and moors in the south, with a wide range of habitats in between from mud flats and salt marsh to lowland raised in intermediate bog, marsh rivers and streams, not to mention canals and coelbings. The local biodiversity action plan that has been developed and delivered by Falkirk Council and its partners has identified 20 primary habitats and 112 priority species that have particular national and local ecological value and as such should be conserved both locally and nationally. Of course, for any biodiversity action plan to be successful, education, awareness raising and understanding of biodiversity is essential to their success, and I'm glad to say that in Falkirk district there's been excellent participation and joint working by local groups, NGOs and individuals with regard to conservation measures. Sadly four minutes limits me to how much I can rave on about what's going on in Falkirk district. So in closing, it would be remiss of me not to mention the consequences of Brexit on Scotland's biodiversity. The nature directives, water framework directive and marine strategy framework directive are perhaps the most important tools we have for safeguarding Scotland's natural capital against degradation and loss. Now, while the cabinet secretary's assurances last summer following the EU referendum in June that there would be no weakening of a raft of Brussels legal measures regarded as crucial for conserving plants and animals and keeping air, water and land clean and healthy, there are still concerns that if the UK Government gets its way and these directives are repealed or diluted, the health of our fresh water, our wildlife and our seas will be severely compromised. We cannot allow the dismantling of all those acts of this Parliament that have transposed EU environmental directives and we should continue to implement them fully whatever the situation we find ourselves in in the next few years and decades. As the RSPB puts it in the briefing to us in advance of this debate, as the Scottish Government moves forward in the light of the EU referendum result, there is an opportunity to secure world-leading protection for our species and restoration of our nature. I, for one, as I am sure we all do, look forward to working with all the NGOs out there, our local communities and the Scottish Government to ensure that that is the case. Thank you very much. I move to closing speeches. I call Mark Ruskell to close with the Green Party. Please, for minutes, Mr Ruskell. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I think it's been a short but enjoyable debate. Cabinet Secretary kicked us off perhaps with putting up a big yellow warning sign around the reintroduction of the links in Scotland, but I took from a comment the need for due process around this and also strong partnership working. I think that's also an issue when we come to national parks as well, and I think the comments made by Finlay Carson absolutely supportable, but yes, we do need to see that strong partnership working. We need to build a case with communities as well, and I think we can point to great successes in our national parks, the two national parks that we have already. We do need a clear focus, though, and I think that's why we're bringing forward these motions now on the national ecological network. Part of that is around governance. Graham Day raised the issue about the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy delivery group. We need to have some certainty about the status of that group and its work going forward. If I can just turn briefly to the national ecological network, and I think we had contributions on that from my fellow Watermelons, Claudia Beamish, Pauline McNeill and Angus MacDonald, I'd like to say just a little bit about the urban context of how this network can work, because what we find in these networks, in the urban context, is the importance of our parks and our green spaces, and yet the Heritage Lottery Fund last year came out with a report into the state of UK parks, and there is good news in there. It's quite clear that there are communities getting increasingly involved in the management of our parks and that visitor numbers are increasing, and that's good. It's meeting one of the targets under our 2020 Biodiversity Action Plan, but the bad news is that the quality of many of our parks and the investment in maintenance is unfortunately going down. I think it does relate to the point Pauline McNeill raised about the officers, the number of officers we've got local authorities actually working on this, is going down, and that's a point again raised by the improvement service just a couple of weeks ago in a report showing a reduction in council staff. I think the danger is we could be at a tipping point in terms of the quality of our parks, a hugely important part of this national ecological network that we're trying to create. I'd also like to just focus briefly on the nature of planning as well, because of course we have an ecological network. We've got the central Scotland green network and 17 out of the 19 councils that are involved in that network have incorporated it into their local development plans, and indeed across Scotland 25 out of 34 planning authorities that we've got recognise ecological networks in their planning guidance. But in a letter that we recently received at the committee from the cabinet secretary, you know, these networks are there to protect the environment unless material considerations dictate otherwise within the planning system, and I think, you know, this goes to the point that was being made by Maurice Golden about the need to protect green belt, the need to protect precious places within our planning system, and my own experience of this directly in relation to the central Scotland green network, which is part of the national planning framework, it's a key infrastructure priority. It's in relation to planning hearing that I was involved in in the Stirling council area, where a plan to put 600 houses on the green belt, a completely inappropriate part of that network at air three curse, was being pushed through. And yet the argument that this is part of the national planning framework and therefore should be protected was, let's say, had a lot less status than the bullied any power line, which is again another part of the national planning framework, but it's something which assumes much far greater weight within the planning system than biodiversity does. So I think we have had a good consensual debate here this afternoon. I'm glad that we're able to put a strong marker down in relation to the national ecological network and I very much hope as Angus McDonald's already articulated that Scotland in time can become a world leader in the way that we protect our biodiversity. Thank you very much. Can I remind Mr Goldman that it is courteous to be in here when members rise to give their closing speeches, notwithstanding you were only about a minute late? I give you plenty of warning. I now call David Stewart, please, to close for Labour four minutes please. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and could I thank all members that have taken part in what has been for me an interesting and very informed debate. This, of course, is an opportunity to do a report card on biodiversity in Scotland, an assessment of are we making the grade? As the great environmental thinker Wendell Berry once said, the world is not given by his fathers but borrowed from his children. However, out of 218 countries, the UK is 189th in terms of biological intactness. Members will know that this index is the measure used by the UN Convention on Biological Diversity to assess progress towards their targets, but, of course, it's not too late to change that, but, of course, we must act now. We all know that climate change already has had a severe damaging effect on our native species and biodiversity. Changing climates have disrupted, mating patterns, hibernation, adaptation, lean to decline in populations, and changing and intensifying land management and land use have also led much to decline in damage to our biodiversity. As the species champion for the great yellow bumblebee, I'm very aware of how the intensification of farming and grazing and the decline in traditional crofting practice has meant that a species that used to be found across the whole of the UK is now found on just a few Scottish islands with a tiny population in the north highland mainland. However, it's not just about declining species, Presiding Officer. Scotland is broadly ranked in the lowest fifth of countries for our biodiversity intactness index, as I said, and our ecosystems have fallen below the point at which the rally will meet society's needs. The maintenance and restoration of our ecosystems are vital to halting that decline, to supporting our flora, fauna and human population, and to balancing our carbon budget and ensuring us that we reach our greenhouse gas reduction targets. To do that, we need to support the recovery of the species' populations, improve habitat quality and develop green corridors between fragmented areas of natural land. I think these were points that were echoed by all speakers, and the Cabinet Secretary I think had a very good three-point plan when she mentioned marine, peatland, and I'm very pleased she mentioned the Beaver reintroduction, something that's dear to my heart. But it's a very key point, what happens after Brexit, and I was pleased to hear that the Cabinet Secretary was pushing the fact that European protections will continue post-Brexit after her discussions with the UK Government. I think Maurice Golden made some excellent points about the importance of biodiversity to ecotourism, flood prevention and mental and physical health, and Claudia Beamish made a very strong point about embedding biodiversity, and I know the point she was going to make, Presiding Officer, until she was cut off very unkindly, was that, from our side, I'm very pleased that every single Labour member is now a species champion. I'm sure other groups are looking towards that being concluded as well. Mark Ruskell made a very strong point about putting nature first in support, his comments about the natural ecological network. In the very brief time I've got less steps, Presiding Officer, I want to mention the other members, but the truth is that we already know how to restore and support our biodiversity and ecosystems. We know what the main threats are. We need to ensure the policy and regulation in place and that firm decisive action is taken to prioritise the health of our natural environment. This is urgent, and the sad truth is that the damage has been going on for years and decades, and our nation is much poorer in nature because of that. In my view, this debate is much more than about biodiversity. It's about what sort of Scotland we want in the future. It's a Scotland that's clean, green and sustainable, a Scotland that is recognised around the globe for the quality of its natural environment, its standing hills, glens and locks, and its multi-culture workforce. We need to focus on our route map from 2020 and, indeed, to 2030, and we need to build up the ambition in our environment to protect Scotland's habitat and wildlife for generations yet unborn. Finally, as Barack Obama said, our generation may not live to see the full realisation of what we do here today. I would tell the member I'm firm, I'm not unkind. I call on Peter Chapman to close the Conservatives, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I refer members to my register of interests. We have heard much today on how we must do more to secure the long-term future of biodiversity in Scotland. I would say that there has been a great degree of agreement across the chamber today. I am mostly talking about land in my speech today, but, of course, healthy seas are equally important. The Cabinet Secretary, Claudia Beamish and many others mentioned how important marine protection areas are to the health of our seas, and I fully concur with that. However, another excellent example of how we can enhance biodiversity is new forestry schemes, specifically put in place with accessibility at their core, to allow for folks to get out there and enjoy nature first hand, even when they live in towns and cities. However, those schemes rightly cater for wildlife to flourish as part of a widely recognised desire to boost biodiversity. My colleague, Finlay Carson, mentioned how we might benefit from a new national park in the south west. Somebody else mentioned that. I totally agree that there is room in Scotland for another national park. Mark Ruskell mentioned how land use strategy was one way to drive biodiversity, and he says we need to put nature at the heart of society, and I can't agree more with that. But, undoubtedly, farmers must and do play a crucial part in securing our future healthy biodiversity. Farmers are custodians of our countryside and care personally about it. Miles of hedges have been planted, millions of trees have been planted, ponds have been dug, as well as grass and water margins put in place, which are all contributing to the success of biodiversity in Scotland today. There is, of course, more that can be done. For example, the restoration of peat bogs damaged by inappropriate drainage schemes and tree planting in the 60s and 70s are very important, and these are also a vital carbon sink in our fight against climate change, and many other speakers today mentioned the importance of restoring the peatlands. But if I could be as a farmer myself, I hope you will permit me to provide some examples of what we have done in our own farm. In my farm over the past 10 years we have created four ponds, planted three miles of hedges, created two miles of grass and water margins, as well as putting in place about 10 acres of native trees. After harvest, we also leave winter stubbles in the fields to provide feed for birds over the cold months, and we do not plough until March. I should emphasise at this point that our farm is not unique in this regard. All across Scotland, mixed farming and environmental measures, similar to what we have put in place, are absolutely common. That said, we should look again at some of the less than helpful regulations. For example, as I have discussed before in this chamber, greening regulations need to be reformed to make them a contributor to a rural landscape instead of a hindrance. The idea that harvesting of ecological focus area lands should not happen until the end of August because of ground nesting birds ignores the fact that the ground nesting birds are gone well before then. Similarly, two crop regulations designed to let bees have more options assumes that bees are confined to only one field, a truly bizarre basis for policymaking. In addition, we must be wary of the introduction of new species without proper thought for how they will impact on the rural economy in their areas. The illegal release of beavers in the take casement is an example of how things can get out of control. Again, our cabinet secretary mentioned that. I was glad to hear that, in her opinion, the illegal release of links would certainly not be tolerated. Liam McArthur spoke of it. No, you have not got time for Mr McArthur. You have to conclude. I am finished. I would love you to say something about him. Thank you very much. I call on the cabinet secretary to close for the governor and cabinet secretary at five o'clock. I thank all members for their contributions to the debate. As anticipated, we have certainly seen a huge breadth of discussion. I am only sorry that I will not be able to refer to every single issue raised. Maurice Golden and Pauline McNeill and Mark Ruskell referred to urban green space. No doubt, Mr Golden has raised his particular planning concerns with the local councils involved. However, I remind everyone that it is this Government that has ensured the existence of the central Scotland green network, Europe's largest green space project, covering 19 local authority areas across the central belt over 10,000 square kilometres. There are 3.6 million residents in the CSGN area. It includes 86 per cent of Scotland's most deprived communities, equating to around 641,000 residents. By any measure, that is a huge achievement. Both Pauline McNeill and Leah MacArthur snuck in references to species champions, quite rightly. In my job, I am a champion for all species, but I do urge anyone who has not already signed up to do so as soon as possible. Claudia Beamish referenced the pollinator strategy, both it and the implementation plan are currently being finalised. I do hope to have it published in spring of this year, so it is coming very shortly. I agree with her comments through the importance of deer management, but I am sure that she will understand if I wait to receive the committee report on this before making comment. The issue of the national ecological network was raised by Mark Ruskell and one or two others. SNH is leading on the development of proposals for this network. It has asked several environmental NGOs to develop a collective view on what a national ecological network should comprise in practice. A response from the NGOs is expected soon, with a view to reaching a conclusion on this topic and agreeing further action. Things are happening. Regarding the governance issue raised by Graham Day and one or two others, he is correct that a governance review was completed but not considered by ministers before the Scottish Parliament election in May 2016. The review concluded that revised arrangements should be introduced under the ambit of the Rural Affairs, Food and Environment Delivery Board, the RAFE delivery board, which brought together the chief executives or equivalents from public sector environmental and agricultural organisations under the joint chairmanship of the then cabinet secretary for rural affairs, food and environment, and the then minister for environment. Since May 2016, the RAFE delivery board has continued to meet informally at official level to work on issues of common interest. We have yet to consider what formal arrangements we wish to see in place of the RAFE delivery board and how we wish to deal with biodiversity and land use governance. However, I can confirm that the delivery support structures in the form of working groups and the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy Coordination Group, chaired by SNH, have continued to meet regularly to support and coordinate the delivery of the 2020 challenge and the 2020 route map. Now, as many members have said, Scotland's biodiversity is one of our nation's most precious assets. Of course, it has an intrinsic value and we should respect it for its own sake, but it also contributes significantly to our economy and helps to create the conditions for healthy and resilient people and communities. You don't take risks for the most precious assets and it follows that we cannot and will not do that with the environment. Good progress has been made towards the international aichi targets, and SNH has also reported good progress on the project-based route map to 2020 targets. I accept that some areas are not progressing as quickly as we would like, but the value of the interim reports from SNH is that we can identify those areas where we do need to step up our efforts and not wait until 2020 when it is too late. In conclusion, I firmly believe that we should all shoulder responsibility for improving and maintaining Scotland's biodiversity. That means getting together and finding practical and workable solutions to problems, being willing to work in partnership—I think that that is very important issue that was raised by Mark Ruskell right at the end—and where necessary putting aside sectoral differences. We saw the practical consequences of that in the decision about the beavers. The Scottish Government is committed to meeting our international obligations for biodiversity. I will work across portfolios and across the chamber to ensure that we protect and enhance this most precious aspect of Scotland. Today's debate has shown the level of commitment across the chamber for biodiversity, and while I cannot get drawn into all the conversations around national parks, Stoats and other things that were raised tangentially, I look forward to seeing that commitment translated into action and further progress on the ground and in Scotland's seas. Thank you very much. That concludes our debate on Scotland's biodiversity. The next item of business is consideration of a parliamentary view of motion. I would ask Joe Fitzpatrick to move motion 4529 on substitution on committees. We move to decision time. The first question is that amendment 4472.1 in the name of Alec Rowley, which seeks to amend motion 4472 in the name of Derek Mackay on the local government finance order be agreed. Are we all agreed? We're not agreed. We'll move to a vote and members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on the amendment in the name of Alec Rowley is yes, 56, no, 66. There were no abstentions. The amendment is therefore not agreed. The next question is that motion 4472 in the name of Derek Mackay on the local government finance order be agreed. Are we all agreed? We're not agreed. We'll move to a vote and members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on the motion in the name of Derek Mackay is yes, 66, no, 26. There were 31 abstentions. The motion is therefore agreed. The next question is that amendment 4493.1 in the name of Maurice Golden, which seeks to amend motion 4493 in the name of Roseanna Cunningham on Scotland's biodiversity be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. The next question is that amendment 4493.2 in the name of Claudia Beamish, which seeks to amend the motion in the name of Roseanna Cunningham be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. The next question is that amendment 4493.4 in the name of Mark Ruskell, which seeks to amend the motion in the name of Roseanna Cunningham be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. The next question is that motion 4493 in the name of Roseanna Cunningham as amended on Scotland's biodiversity be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. Our final question is that motion 4529 in the name of Joe Fitzpatrick on substitution on committees be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. That concludes decision time. I close this meeting of Parliament.