 Faan, mae gennym ni'n ddigon i gael ddoch chi wneud yn ddigon i gael ddigon i'r pryd. Thank you for that end, the tropical question period. The next item of business is a debate on motion number 9915 in the name of Aileen Campbell on the national youth work strategy. Our ambitions for improving the life chances of young people in Scotland and I'll give a few moments for the front benches to sort themselves out. I thought that I will now call Aileen Campbell to speak and move the motion. Can I just say to members that theside message can be fairly generous in the amount of time that you take so if you wish to take intervention we would very much support you in doing so that it makes sure that you get the time back. So can I now call Aileen Campbell to speak to move the motion minister 10 minutes? Thank you President officer. Dyma y dyma ymlog o'r hynau i gweithio'r strategaeth oedd, ac rwy'n fawr, mae'n rydyn nhw'n gallu cydnogi'r rhaglen a fyddai'r cyfansiwyr llunedig iawn i gyfan Ramdellol i ddweud cyhoeddwyr i dwybonell iawn, a'u cyfansiwyr i'r rhaevu i gael sut yn Ysgrifennu Aelodau Aelodau i Gwllaldur Cymraegolraedd, ymgyrch ffast ydyn nhw'n cyフansiwyr. Felly, mae'r strategaeth i dda wedi i dyfodol i'r cyfansiwyr ymghell yn Scotland was developed in really deep collaboration and partnership in particular with YouthLink Scotland and Education Scotland. I also saw the input from a variety of youth work organisations from the length and breadth of Scotland culminating finally in the publication of the strategy on 3 April. I would like to place on record my thanks to all those who work tirelessly to develop the strategy and who will have a key role in shaping and delivering its implementation. We developed the strategy because, as a Government, we place a great value on the significant contribution that youth work and community learning and development are making in helping us to realise our ambition and vision for our country. That is to improve outcomes and to build a nation that is full of opportunity and aspiration for our young people. Youth work is happening everywhere, translated into real life. That means that in almost every village, town and city, youth work and community learning and development are happening across all of our communities. It is helping young people to make positive choices as they emerge into adulthood, building their confidence, capacity and skills for further learning and employability. It is empowering young people to take control of their lives, building on their assets and helping young people to deal with the challenges and adversity that can often happen in their lives by enabling and empowering them to build on what is positive to make their lives better. All of that is delivered because of the talents and skills of thousands of youth workers, many of whom are volunteers giving up their own time to support and nurture our young people. Indeed, some of those young people are young people themselves, supporting their peers to be all that they can be and giving back to their communities. I have said this many times before, but it is well worth repeating that youth work represents the ultimate form of preventative spend. It is, as Professor Howard Sercom suggests, provides the scaffolding of support for young people as they prepare to enter into the adult world and allows that entry to be positive and fulfilling. One of the fantastic parts of this post is getting to see examples of youth work in action up and down the country. Over the last few months, I have been privileged to attend a number of youth work projects and events across the country, real-life examples that better capture the importance of youth work and its transformative abilities. I have been impressed and humbled by the commitment, the passion and the dedication shown by many youth workers, each motivated by the desire to improve our young people's wellbeing and life chances. I recognise in Kezia Dugdale's amendments what she is trying to do within that, to recognise that in today's debate. Earlier today, I visited the Greenshoot programme that was working with young people in East Lothian. On top of meeting modern apprentices, primary sevens building din, dens and doing environmental art, and clearing ditches with a young guy called Antony, we announced that YouthLink will administer over £2 million of cashback funding to support the life-changing work that is delivered by youth work to organisations right across Scotland. I think that there is a lovely, nice, neat narrative around cashback. It seizes the proceeds of crime and reinvests it back into opportunities for our young people. Also at the recent youth work awards, the stories of all the finalists was an absolute inspiration through the tireless work that so many do to support our young people. Enter generational work, volunteering, music, arts, drama—the variety on offer by youth work is phenomenal and it is right that we celebrate it at the YouthLink's annual awards. Also at the 25th anniversary celebration of LGBT Youth Scotland, I listened to the young people's emotional stories about how LGBT youth workers had positively impacted on their lives over the years, providing them with the support and nurture that they require when coming out or just looking for a helping hand to cope. In my constituency area, I am also very aware of the breadth of activities for our young people—the uniformed organisations. I was pleased to see in the Sunday Herald just this weekend a positive story about the scouting movement, which is seeing numbers and diversity in terms of its membership growing and growing. If you have not had a chance to read that article, I would thoroughly recommend that you do. Oh, did you not? Ken Macintosh seemed to have missed the Sunday Herald. I have no idea why he would possibly have missed the Sunday Herald publication. I think that it was sold out across the length and breadth of the country, but nonetheless I am sure that it was because of the scouting article that he missed, unfortunately. On the issues of scouting, I have had various conversations with the scout groups in my constituency in Orkney, where they are very active and grateful for the funding that is available. Most of that seems to be concentrated on providing equipment and that sort of thing. Less is available for travel costs, which can be considerable in getting from Orkney to national events down in the central belt or overseas when meeting scout groups from across Europe. Is that something that the Government may be able to take a look at and see if there are opportunities for expanding access to those sorts of events to scouts in my constituency? I know that we support the uniformed groups through the strategic funding partnerships, and the specific issue that Liam McArthur raises about the groups in his constituency, I am happy to meet him to discuss those specific issues. She mentioned the strategic partnership funds. I wonder if she could comment on the funding arrangements for youth work in Scotland. In 2013, she operated two separate pots of money, and that caused some confusion in the sector. Do you have any plans to bring them together into the next financial year? We have held a number of events to further support the groups, whether they are third sector early intervention funding through the third sector early intervention fund or through the strategic funding partners, and those have been welcomed by groups in receipt of those organisations. There is a period of review that we will take, but also within the funds, there is also a period in which they can self-evaluate how they have found that support, and we will listen carefully to the groups that have been involved in funding mechanisms. In my constituency, yes, bigger youth project universal connections in the Duke of Edinburgh are some of the services that are being delivered in a positive way to contribute to young people's wellbeing, confidence and life chances. At the launch of the youth strategy, we heard from very articulate and confident young people talking about how they had been supported through youth work. One young man described how his conference had grown and how he had avoided a negative path and how he was now wanting to work in youth work. Another girl described how her conference had increased through being a member of the guides, and her words were incredibly powerful when she told us that she joined the guides as a girl and would leave as a woman. The common thread, though, from all of those young people's stories that I heard that day and witnessed through my visits, is that youth work provides opportunities to be with her friends and peers and have fun while learning and being active. Whatever the activity of youth work's purpose is to build young people's self-esteem, confidence and sense of wellbeing, develop their ability to manage relationships, help them to learn new skills and problem solve and improve their life chances. In thousands of instances, young people themselves are youth work volunteers, taking the lead, thinking creatively and supporting their peers to be all they can and make positive life choices. Through our funding for youth work and community learning and development, we have invested tens of millions of pounds in projects and facilities for young people and the communities that they live in. We also continue to work with the youth work sector to deliver programmes such as active girls, stand up to sectarianism, no lives, better lives and activity agreements. Through those projects, this Government seeks to empower young people as well as improve their life chances and wellbeing. That all fits within our aim to recognise, respect and promote children's rights and to get it right for every child. Youth work at its best recognises young people as equal partners in a learning process. It links them to their communities and engages them in local and national activities and decision-making processes. It helps young people to navigate the challenges of adolescence and recognises that some young people might need more help than others at particular times in their lives. Ultimately, youth work empowers young people, widens their horizons and builds their resilience and capacity to make the transition into further learning. Returning to the theme of partnership working, the Christie commission challenged government to deliver services that people and communities deserve. It challenged us to do so by working in partnership and mutual respect. The development of this strategy is very much in keeping with the Christie principles. It is very easy to talk about partnership working but it is much harder to do it effectively. Quite simply, the youth work strategy would not have been possible without everyone involved having a shared commitment to making it a reality. That includes the strategic partners, Youth Link Scotland, the Government that facilitated the national discussions that took place right across the country and the hundreds of people involved in voluntary and third sector organisations who took part in the national discussion that shaped the final strategy document. I am pleased that the youth work strategy has been very well received from across the sector. The feedback from the workshops and discussions that took place across the country has been incredibly positive. The launch is only the beginning and the real work in a sense starts now and indeed has already started. Our ambitions for young people in Scotland states that we will put young people at the heart of policy, recognise the value of youth work, build workforce capacity, ensure that we measure our impact and ensure that Scotland is the best place to be young and to grow up in. To realise those ambitions, Youth Link Scotland working in partnership with Education Scotland, the Government and key partners, including the CLD Standards Council, will implement the action plan that underpins the strategy, including raising the profile and promoting the benefits of youth work, developing strategies where young people's voices are heard and listened to, developing the youth work workforce to build a sustainable learning culture and improving performance to demonstrate more effectively how youth work improves young people's wellbeing and life chances. There is a lot to do, but together we can properly articulate the importance of this sector and to illustrate the benefits it brings, not just to young people themselves but wider society, our communities and of course our country. I thank everyone who is involved in the strategy's development and look forward to continuing that open relationship. With MSPs across the chamber, who I know equally value youth work's contribution, I look forward to working with each and every one of them to drive further forward our youth work workers to help more young people to emerge into adulthood with confidence and the ability to contribute to the future of our country. I now call Kezia Dugdale to speak to a move of amendment number 9915.1, Mr Dugdale, seven minutes. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I welcome the opportunity to debate the strategy this afternoon, welcome the strategy and welcome the cash announcement from the minister. Three welcomes right at the outset. I think that we are looking forward to a positive afternoon. I chaired the cross-party group on children and young people, along with Marko Biagi. We are very reliant on the help and support of Youth Link Scotland to operate the secretariat for that group. The advantage of having Youth Link Scotland so involved in that work is that we are able to get youth work's perspective on the whole education and children and young people's agenda at all stages. I think that that is a really important point to get across to the minister in light of the fact that perhaps the youth work sector does not always get the recognition that it deserves in terms of its contribution to public policy. I think that at least today we can mark that ourselves. What does youth work mean? What does it deliver? What does it do? I think that it is four things. I think that it is skills, a sense of self-confidence, a degree of resilience and a sense of community. To see those four things in practice, I can see every day in the part of East Edinburgh where I live, where you have the youth buzz or the buzzes that are called locally and lock-end rest of the rig. I encourage the minister to go and see that in work. That is a mobile youth work bus that goes round different parts of the east of Edinburgh. There is a direct correlation between where the youth bus is and anti-social behaviour calls into the police, because wherever the youth bus is, whether it is in lock-end or rest of the rig or a different part of the east end of Edinburgh, calls to the police dip, because young people are actively engaged in the service. There are things to do, there are Xboxes and computer games and all the rest of it, but there is also employability support there, too. Young people are helped and supported to develop their CVs. They can access sexual health advice and a number of other services that will come on to shortly. Elsewhere in the east end of Edinburgh, it is worth recognising the work of Kids in the Street, run by Kevin Finlay and the team in Craig Miller, who have a mobile football unit that they can take out and provide active services to the communities there. I am sure that we will hear more from Liz Smith as she is speaking, but the valuable role that sport plays with youth work in particular. Those two organisations just point to two examples of the tremendous dedication of staff and volunteers involved in youth work every day, and that is why the Labour Bench is sought to put that amendment to the Government. I get the sense from the minister that she is looking to accept that at the end of the day, which is good to hear, and I thank her for that. I think that it is worth recognising that staff and volunteers, certainly the staff in particular, are not motivated by pay. They are motivated by a much higher reward than that. The individuals that I know in the east end of Edinburgh have a driving passion for their community, but they also see the good in every single young person in their community and the ability that those individuals have to fulfil their potential with a degree of help and support. We underestimate the contribution that youth workers make to our communities at our peril. I say that they are not motivated by money, but that does not mean that we should disregard it as an issue. A lot of youth workers that I come across are very reliant on sessional pay. They do not know how many hours they are getting from one week to the next. They do not have a tremendous amount of job security. Much of their work is tied to the funding bids that those youth work organisations rely on, and it can be multiple sources of funding, multiple sources of short-term funding in particular, which means that even the smallest organisations need the brightest of accountants and the best people working in the books to make sure that there is enough money there year in, year out. I am grateful for that. That is taking me back a bit, but I do recall the days when I had to do with the kind of work that it was possible for those involved to spend far too much of their time raising money, and it could almost become its own activity rather than working with the youngsters. Has anything changed in the past few years? Is it a question that you might be able to address? I think that it is fair to say that some progress has been made, but not enough. Charities involved in all sorts of work, third sector organisations right across different policy portfolios, looked to the Government to try and address some of those funding challenges, to try and find mechanisms for providing long-term funding. Increasingly, I hear people talking about not just wanting three-year funding but wanting five-year funding so that there is at least more than one year in the middle where they can just get on the business of what they are doing rather than setting things up or closing down accounts. I think that there is a challenge to all Government ministers to think about how they can provide more sustainable funding options for groups that do such critical work. The Government motion focuses on positive choices, and I want to focus on that in particular in the time that I have got. Liam McArthur has already mentioned the scouts, and I mentioned the girl guides and the particular work that they are doing over the past couple of years, particularly around campaigning. They have now developed a campaigning badge for girl guides to undertake, and I think that they are doing some tremendous work around a No More Page 3 campaign. I am particularly drawn to the work that they are doing around body confidence and the body confidence revolution that they have. A recent girl guides attitude survey pointed to the fact that one in five primary school kids have been on a diet. Primary school kids, 38 per cent of all 11 to 21-year-olds have skipped a meal to lose weight, and 87 per cent of young women think that they are judged more on their looks than their ability. I think that we need to recognise the role that youth work, the girl guides and other organisations like that can play in tackling some of those endemic issues, trying to promote a better sense of wellbeing and a more positive outlook on body image. I think that that would go a long way to addressing the body image crisis that our country currently faces. Another part of that agenda is sexual health, and I would encourage the minister to look very carefully at the relationship between youth work and sexual health services. I am quite disturbed by what is happening in Edinburgh at the moment where dedicated sexual health services for young people are being removed, or at least the funding for them is being removed by the NHS, who are looking to mainstream it and to core services. I think that that is going to put young people off accessing sexual health and advice. I think that it will lead to an increase in STIs if we are not careful and we need to recognise the importance of dedicated services for young people. As I said right at the outset, very often, youth work services integrate sexual health services into all the other types of work that they are doing. I would ask her to look at what she can do within her Government department to work with the health department to make sure that young people access the services that they need. Organisations such as Caledonian Youth also receive money to provide sexual education in schools, and that money is currently under threat as well, again with local authorities looking to save that cash and deliver it themselves. I do not know if the minister remembers her own experience of sexual education in school, but getting it from her usual teacher was not the greatest thing. It is probably a better idea that somebody out with the school environment comes in with the expertise to talk about sex and relationships in a way that young people do. I think that that is sorely missed if we lose out on that, and I encourage her to look at trends in that direction. We need to be careful that we do not turn young people off accessing sexual health services and value the role that youth work plays in doing that, because ultimately it is the duty of youth workers to minimise risk-taking behaviour. I will just keep talking, because you are giving me the nod there. Caledonian Youth, although it is losing out on core services within the health department and core services in education, still provides important work in our prisons. I do not know if the minister is aware of education work that Caledonian Youth does in a number of prisons across the country, providing one-to-one dedicated advice for young people who have an experience of the criminal justice system—really intensive work that makes substantial change to lives. I know that Caledonian Youth would like to roll that out if the minister would like to comment on that. I am not necessarily aware of it specifically, but I am very excited about what more we can do with young people, particularly who are in prison and who know the work that families outside SPPA and others have done around parenting. They have had similar outcomes in building confidence and making sure that, once a person is out with prison, they can go on to lead much more positive lives and have much less likelihood of going back into the prison and stop that vicious cycle of re-offending. I agree with the minister entirely on that basis. It is about that transition into adult hood and the roles and responsibilities around sexual health, parenting, drug-taking and all sorts of risk behaviour that can be affected with the right approach. I repeat that call to the minister to work with her colleagues in justice and health and in other departments to make sure that it is joined up. In closing, the minister will hear from three Labour speakers this afternoon. Graham Pearson will talk a little bit more about youth work and the link with youth justice. Ken Macintosh will ask some hard questions about the strategy and the degree to which the monitoring and evaluation framework exists, and Siobhan McMahon will ask some hard questions about the money and whether the money matches the mission that has been set out today. That said, I very much welcome the strategy and look forward to the debate this afternoon. I now call on Mary Scanlon. Mary Scanlon, you have five minutes plus. Can I just say at the education committee this morning in relation to a petition that I put on the record that I support the Government? It was also heard from SNP members that they agreed with something that I said. I realise that it is very unusual in this run-up to 1 September 2018, but I feel that this afternoon is such a debate that it is consensual, and I would like to thank the two speakers before me for their very positive, constructive approach that they have given. At this stage, I would also support the Government motion, and I think that the amendment from the Labour Party is indeed highly valued, and it is well worthwhile, and we support that as well. I am very pleased to have the opportunity to put on the record the support of my party, Scottish Conservatives, for the national youth work strategy recently published by the Scottish Government in accordance with Education Scotland, YouthLink Scotland and many others. There can be absolutely no disagreement with the aims, objectives and outlines in the strategy. Improving social and health outcomes, deepening community involvement and understanding communities, and developing core skills, youth work has a hugely important role today. As I said last December, when George Adam selected YouthLink Scotland for a member's debate, for too long the terms youth worker and unsung hero have gone hand in hand. I think that that was really a very good debate, and it did put on record the value that we hold in youth work. Therefore, I particularly welcome the emphasis within the strategy on promoting the value of youth work and developing the skills of the workforce. I think that we often get caught up in skills in terms of qualifications, and I think that one of the great benefits for youth work and the benefits to youth is actually working in a team. It is about timekeeping. It is about getting on with people that are older than yourself, and it is about work experience. It is much simpler than saying that there has to be a tick box and a qualification at the end of it. However, to take the first of those points, a national communication strategy would not only boost the appeal of the sector, it would also alert more young people to the range of opportunities on offer. The national youth worker awards are a good example of that, but as the strategy recognises, we can, and we should do more to extol the virtues of the sector and make clear how it has the potential to develop and benefit our young people. I thought that Liam McArthur made a very good point about young people from the highlands and islands, and there are additional costs if we want them to, for example, the Scouts, Boys Brigade and others, if we want them to meet people in other areas. A stronger evidence base would certainly help in that regard. I fully support the ambition articulated in the strategy for a research project, which would establish how youth work helps to deliver strategic policy objectives. Just as I was listening to the minister, it is important that youth work be aligned as much as possible to the Government's economic strategy, given the recent concerns that were raised by the Auditor General with regard to modern apprenticeships, which in the Auditor General report modern apprenticeships were not aligned to the Government's strategy. I put that in as a positive suggestion. That is particularly true when it comes to those who have perhaps begun to disengage from mainstream society. YouthLink, for instance, provided evidence to the Parliament's Finance Committee, which cited research regarding how disadvantaged young people were engaging, as others have said, with youth work services. Research found that school attendance improved, temporary exclusions were reduced and antisocial behaviour fell. Those are hugely encouraging signs and point to the societal value of youth work initiatives. We are constantly being asked about school exclusions, and that is something positive that can be done in order to bring people back into engagement. Of course, to function these initiatives depend upon a large number of volunteers, and it is to this group that I now turn. Volunteers, it seems, are frequently taken for granted, as Kezia Dugdale has just mentioned, and not afforded the same opportunities to develop as workers in other sectors. To address this, the strategy appears to envisage a broader role for the CLD Standards Council for Scotland, with particular emphasis on working with YouthLink to develop support and training for volunteers. I welcome that focus and the drive towards establishing national standards for youth work. Those standards are due to be developed and implemented over the two years to March 2016, and, if done with due care, there is undoubtedly potential to bring more rigor to how youth work is organised and delivered. That can only be a good thing, especially if it convinces more young people to give up their time to become involved with youth work projects and initiatives from a core part of community learning and development with the potential to improve life opportunities for young people, their families and the wider communities that they are part of. In summing up, I very much welcome the strategy. I support its key goals and I look forward to perhaps digging deeper into the disengagement and exclusions from schools. I would trust that that is something that we will look forward to in future, and, in particular, the attainment gap and the dips in performance. I welcome the publication of the national youth work strategy and agree with the minister when she says that the opportunities that youth work can offer young people can make a massive difference in their lives. Youth work is making significant contribution to our vision of the kind of Scotland being the best place for people in the world for our children to grow up. Early intervention is extremely important because it has been mentioned by some of the other members about the fact that, if we manage to get to individuals at a certain time, it can make a difference in their lives. At this point, I will probably come back to that later on in my speech. There are many youth works working within all our communities, and they continue to do fantastic work. Paisley and District Boys Brigade made Derek Mackay and I vice-presidents not bad for two boys who were never in the BB to begin with. I was a scout and I was in the bushes cubs only because I was freakishly tall at the time and they needed a centre half for the football team. Effectively, that was the reason why I ended up, but that is an example of the kind of activities that draw people into youth organisations. During my time, there were people from all types of backgrounds and all types of different things that have been done with their life from then on. I think that we still, thanks to the power of social media, managed to keep in touch with one another just now. However, I think that it is important that we look at some of the things that have been made available in our own areas. Within Paisley, the modern street stuff programme has been extremely successful so much so that I have mentioned it before in various other debates, and there have probably won more trophies than the actual football club that they represent as well, although last year we did manage to win one. However, it attracts more than 15,000 young people each year, and it is running partnership with Renfrewshire Council, Police Scotland, Engage Renfrewshire, Summerden FC and West College Scotland. How it works is very similar to what Kezia Dugdale mentioned in Edinburgh is that they have identified hot spots where there is youth disorder and they have gone into those areas. In some areas of Paisley, in Paisley South in particular, in my old council ward, the disorder has been reduced by up to 25 per cent. Now, that is quite an incredible difference because those people have the credibility. The people of these community coaches are from St Murnau FC. They have the credibility that a lot of workers that work with the local authority or other organisations do not have when they are talking to these young people and are able to be approached and talk to them about various things. However, the beauty about the programme is that it gives young people the access to various other things. There is a bus and there is a fitness bus available in part of it as well. It is all about health and wellbeing, but St Murnau has not just done that. What they have also done is that they have made sure that they have had a music partnership, giving them an opportunity for young people to get involved in music. They are taking the whole idea of being a community football club to the next level because people would rather go to the football club. Another example that I heard the other day was about some fathers who could not cook in Fergusley Park in Paisley and their children going together to St Murnau. The children played football for a while and the dads were taking up the hospitality area and taught how to cook a meal. The children came back and they all sat together and they had a meal together. That might seem like a strange thing for someone to do, but when we have record numbers of parents not being able to cook a fresh meal for people, that can make a difference. My idea would be how we would take that to the next level, how we would take the ideas that we have in our local communities like this in St Murnau and take it to the next level, because they are currently doing employability and training as well. Why do we not look at that as a potential hub? It is an opportunity for us to be able to use the credibility of that local asset and make sure that we can make a difference in those young people's lives. In my area, St Murnau football club is in Fergusley Park, one of the areas of multiple deprivation in the whole of Scotland. I would say that if we can use and work together with them and take those ideas and take them to the next level, I am working with all the partner groups there, it is about access to education, it is about access to health and wellbeing, it is about access to employability. If I can get all that together locally, I think that the important thing for us is to look at how we can do it. It is not just all about national government putting money down the way, it is about us trying to find other ways to make ideas like that work and take them to the next level. As Kezia Dugdale already said, we have a situation where some of those groups are looking for funding on a yearly basis, so why do we not look at a way of making those projects larger locally? I would say that we have a situation where it is up to myself and other elected members in our area to work together to get that ideal. In closing, I would say that there is an awful lot of great work going on out there in youth work, but I think that we are at the stage now that we have to take it to the next stage to look at a way in which we can all work together to make sure that we can make a difference to those young people's lives in our community. I congratulate the Government, the Minister, on being able to bring forward such a positive motion, one that achieves the support of those benches together with the amendment from Kezia Dugdale. Secondly, as others have mentioned, we should acknowledge the Youth Link Scotland, Education Scotland and the Scottish Youth Parliament together with Caledonia Youth and many of the unnamed third sector and voluntary groups who work tirelessly with young people day in, day out, week in, week out, year in, year out. A lot has been said about the necessity of youth support in terms of youth work, and I would support all that has been said in the chamber. I do not suggest that the particular focus that I will place in my contribution is more significant or less significant than the others have mentioned, but my experience in a previous life with Pullmont and Cormill prison meant that I felt it right that I should focus particularly on the youth work that is done in those establishments. Only this morning I received a letter from a mother that I have not seen in seven years, and by a complete accident the letter arrived today, indicating that seven years ago I met her and her son at Pullmont prison. The son was involved in voluntary work at the prison in connection with choices for life, the drugs education programme at the time. Along with 20 other prisoners, they self-organised themselves on to three shifts, including a night shift within the prison, to organise goodie bags that were necessary across Scotland and provided to all the children who attended the event. Seventy thousand bags created and delivered within three weeks and all elegantly packed and properly delivered. The pride that that young man took in being involved in that event, along with much other work done within the prison, has meant that in the seven intervening years he has not been involved in crime again, he hasn't been back in prison again and he has a sense of self. In that one example leads me to believe that the outside-in service that is currently delivered, previously known as the Scottish Prison Service, youth work service, is absolutely necessary in adding to the quality of work that can be done in prisons. Both young men and young women within our prison suffer from low self-esteem, an absence of confidence and knowledge of where they fit into the world and how they can have a future. Youth work, conducted within those establishments, helped to deal with issues of skills, of confidence, of bullying, difficulties in terms of health, sexual health, difficulties in terms of peer group pressure, equality, diversity and anti-racism. All those issues need to be tackled, but particularly in circumstances where, for any amount of reasons, no one else is there to give you that kind of support. The kind of work that is offered by those who are engaging in youth work across Scotland is vital to enable those young people to get the chance, the opportunity to participate in the future. To that extent, only a fool would want to resist Eileen Campbell's motion and acknowledge the amendment that is part of our discussions today, and hopefully I am not a fool. The stresses that those young people face, particularly in circumstances where the economic environment that we live in makes life so very tough for us all, is such that we need to invest in the future. To that extent, I would first of all acknowledge the key role of youth work. I would want that all of our young people should get access to the support of youth workers because we do not know at what time and in what circumstances young people need that support, no matter their social background, no matter the circumstances that they face. I also think that although the strategy is enormously positive, as you would expect, I would want it to be more ambitious and provide the real bridge that is so necessary to bring these young people into the mainstream. The long-term funding has been commented previously. The last thing that I would say is that we need measurable outcomes so that we know that the money invested in those circumstances is positively used. I am happy to support the motion and the amendment and I am pleased to be a part of the discussion. I thank the Scottish Government for bringing forward this debate. I know that the minister is driven by her ambition to make Scotland the best place in the world to grow up, and that is surely an ambition that is universally shared across this chamber. Clearly, formal structures of the state education and health services in particular have an obvious huge role to play in that regard. Clearly, those bringing up children have the greatest pattern in my position, the most important role that I have in life as a father to my own children. I know that the children and young people's bill was a hugely important step in the direction of improving the lives of Scotland's young people, particularly in regard to early intervention to improve outcomes for youngsters. In that regard, towards the ambitious drive towards making our country the best that it can be for young people, the work that is done by those involved in youth work. Often through informal and third sector organisations, it is vital, because we know that the developmental learning experience that young people gain are long lasting and can have a positive impact, which is lifelong, and youth work can offer young people options to help them to make positive changes in their lives through initiatives such as training, youth award programmes, literacy and numeracy projects, anti-violence initiatives, information participation and citizenship services. The publication of the national youth work strategy is very welcome, particularly if part of it I find welcome as its partnership approach, the fact that it has been developed jointly by the Scottish Government Education Scotland and Youth Think Scotland. I think that Graeme Pearson was right to place on record her thanks to those organisations for having come together and worked together to devise the strategy. It is obviously vital that organisations involved in youth work are involved in that. I want to mention a few organisations in delivering that youth work. I want to talk about the boys' brigade, unlike George Adam. I was once a member—perhaps that might be why I have not been offered an honourific role, unlike George Adam—but I have been very happy to work with him in sponsoring events here at Parm to enable him to showcase the work that he is doing. He has helped me to provide me with a bit of background information in advance of the debate. I come to the position of scouting organisations. The BAB's membership has increased and has had 10 new starting groups since the beginning of 2013, so there is clear growth and activity and demand for the services that they have offered. They also want to make place on record the fact that they have benefited from cash back for communities' small grants, having been awarded last year some £40,000 to 40 local BAB groups. In my own area, I have been able to see first-hand the positive role that they play in coming on site. There are a number of different BAB companies locally. They promote active participation and engagement with young people in schemes such as the George's sixth youth leadership course and young people taking the lead. Of course, they offer other developmental opportunities to provide the youngsters their work with the ability to make decisions, take responsibility and make a difference in the lives of others through initiatives such as the Queens badge. In 2013, some 410 youngsters had their efforts recognised through the award of a Queens badge. In the short time left me, I mentioned a few other organisations in my local area that are engaged in youth work. We have a local squadron of the air cadets led very ably by Flight Lieutenant Stevie Kearns. I have been very impressed whenever I have got to see them there, equipping young people with skills and confidence that will see them through. The rest of their lives are also very engaged with the local community. We also have Cymru, YMCA and YWCA, who are undertaking a range of good work. However, one of the areas that they are involved in this regard is providing decent after-school care, which is invaluable to many families. Recently, I was very happy to attend and was very privileged to be asked to hand out the awards for a Duke of Edinburgh awards ceremony to new college lancers coming on the campus. It was positively inspirational to see the young people who had given so much commitment to bettering themselves and their community by having that commitment awarded. Indeed, there was one really positive case where one youngster had a placement at a local employer and ended up getting a job out of that placement. There are many other examples of good youth work locally. All those organisations lie in those who volunteer time to them. I think that I would work place on record. I thank those who do so and come on all sides. I very much welcome the amendment from Kezia Dugdale on that regard. I am hoping that the main message that emerges from today's debate is to go back to those people who have volunteered at their times to support youth work. I hope that that can be one of the strongest messages that comes from this debate today. I very much welcome it, Presiding Officer. Many thanks. I now call on Liam McArthur to be followed by Christian Allard up to five minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I start like Kezia Dugdale by welcoming the debate, the strategy and the money. I can also happily confirm that we will be supporting the motion and indeed the amendment, which I think, as the minister rightly suggested, does lay particular emphasis on the role of volunteers and others in supporting youth work. I think that every speaker so far has articulated the benefits of youth work, and I wouldn't disagree with any of them. I mean youth link and their briefing point to the way in which it equips young people to deal with what life throws at them for better or for worse. It changes lives overall for the better. I think that it delivers across a wide range of public policy objectives within health, education, culture, youth justice, et cetera, but youth link also, in their briefing point, to some of the challenges. They suggest that changes in structures to take account of young people's needs is necessary. I have been told on many occasions by John Lawton, the former president of the youth Parliament, and the inspiration behind there to lead that young people are not the future, they are the present, their voices, their views, their needs need to be taken into account now. They also point to the need to link funding to the meeting of those objectives, and I think that Kezia Dugdale made the point about the long-term nature of funding, which does help those decisions to be taken about how youth work can be developed and sustained over a period. They also point to the need to win hearts and minds, which I have to say I found slightly odd. The tone and the content of the debate today suggests that there is no need to win hearts and minds certainly in this chamber. I think that there have been examples of good work right across the country so far, and I think that all of those echo my own experience in Orkney where volunteering, for example, goes from strength to strength. I was invited to present the awards at the Orkney Youth Awards recently, and, like the minister, I found the experience very humbling to see the volume, the variety, and the quality of what goes on in my constituency laid out, presenting 228 Soltar certificates to young volunteers from challenge certificates right up to those doing 500 hours. I also awarded to two young volunteers summit awards on outstanding achievements and contributions to volunteering. I do not think that there is any need to sell volunteering to young constituents in Orkney, and it is also borne out by the 2012 Scottish Household Survey, which suggests that people aged between 16 to 39 recorded a 55 per cent rate of people volunteering over the last 12 months in Orkney compared to a national Scottish figure of 29 per cent, which I have to say struck me as a surprisingly low, not least given what other members have suggested is going on in their own constituencies and regions. Leaving that aside, I certainly take a great deal of encouragement and a little pride in what the Scottish Household Survey says about what is happening in my own constituency. Volunteer action, Orkney, has provided some examples of the work that is going on. Friday Friends, for example, brings together young people from Cwpwell Grammar School with older residents in the unions and close sheltered housing scheme. Pulling together an intergenerational approach, which other members have alluded to, breaking down some of the barriers, some of the preconceptions between young and old. Having visited the project myself, it was very evident to me that the benefits were felt on both sites. Similarly, the memories project with pupils from Stromnes academy are bringing together younger people who are then able to interview older members of the community, recording their experience of the war history, their work, their family life, etc. Recording that, editing it and presenting a copy to the individuals themselves, but also placing copies in the Orkney library and archive, which I think will be hugely beneficial going forward. There are other opportunities for volunteering around the Orkney Folk Festival later this month, the St Magnus Festival next month, and the Strength of the Duke of Edinburgh Awards in Orkney is one of those idiosyncrasies that pop-up from time to time. Girlguiding was referred to by Kezia Dugdale, and some of the campaigning work in relation to young women and mental health issues has been phenomenal. I should declare an interest as a guiding ambassador. Like George Adam, I should make it clear that this was not borne out of my membership with the Girlguides back in the day. However, there are issues that are facing voluntary groups and those working in the youth work sector in Orkney. The cost of PVGs can act as an obstacle for placing volunteers. I also understand that developing the partnerships so that young people's achievements can be recognized and recorded. The point about funding, which I referred to earlier, is helping to support the additional costs of travel. So Deputy Presiding Officer, I welcome the debate. I pay tribute to those involved, young people and those who help to support them. There are undoubted benefits to young people, but, as others have referred to, it is hard to imagine what Orkney would look like without the work that they contribute to the community that I represent. I am delighted to take part in the debate and recognise, promote and celebrate the value of our fantastic youth workers improving young people's life chances across Scotland. We have much to learn from each other, sharing our own expertise and experience, as we must not only value our achievements, but young people's achievements too. I want Scotland to be the best place in the world for my children, my grandchildren, and all young people to grow up, just like some minister said earlier on. The role of public and voluntary services is pivotal in achieving this, to ensure that our services for young people are fit for the 21st century Scotland. This youth work strategy is for me the best way to build a fairer society. We already have a strong youth work sector, one that empowers young people to improve their own well-being and life's chances, one that needs funding, of course, like some members have already did too. I do welcome, for example, the announcement today of the 2.1 million cash back funding for Scotland's youth projects. It's Youth Link Scotland that administers its funding, presenting officer, to build the capacity of young people and the youth work organisation who work to support them. In the north-east, as the region I represent, cash back for communities youth work awards made a real difference last year. In Aberdeenshire, we received a total of £30,530 of which Aberdeenshire Youth Council received £2,580. As much as happening in Youth Council, it's a different part of what we are talking about today. I would like to emphasise the fact that a lot of people who are agreeing into this Youth Council originated, first of all, from youth work. It's people who have been attending this organised, volunteer organisation and who have given this great help from youth workers. I've seen that in Inverity on 14 September 2013, where a lot of organisations came together and supported Aberdeenshire Youth Council that organised an anti-bullying awareness period. This kind of period was very, very important. It shows the community in Inverity that it was an opportunity to stand up to bullying and provide an occasion to showcase services that are available to young people for support and advice. We should always remember this. This is a lot about empowering young people and making themselves being the focus of what can be done, how it can be done and how it can be delivered. Cashback for community youth work awards was very important in Aberdeenshire as well, with £21,000. Some of this money short of £3,000 went to the Youth Outreach bus trust. We talked about that. I think buses are quite important and they can help very much reaching those young people. They are a great place for youth workers to work in. I happened to have visited one in Aberdeenshire and I think they were quite fantastic. I really enjoyed using some of the device that they had. Angus had a total of £9,000 last year. I had done the total of £13,000. In my own community in Westfield, Presiding Officer, in Aberdeenshire, I can say that as a past member of the Westfield Community Development Group, I witnessed at first hand the invaluable contribution of our youth workers past and present. I recall our pivotal of the way in having our young people involved in the making it real planning exercise, an exercise which was a community effort to plan for the future of our own community. This is again very important, Presiding Officer, to have young people very much involved in our future and contributing on how we should build our own community. This effort, so generation working together for the benefit of all. I like to say at that point that Westfield volunteers, youth workers and young people visited all the communities across Aberdeenshire and one of them being Peterhead. We visited in Peterhead the hotspot community hub for all. I just noticed that young people from P7 or Peterhead Central Schools joined us today and I'm sure they know very well about the hotspot. As a vision from this government is clear, early intervention and preventative spending deliver better outcomes for our young people. We want all young people to have the skills for lifelong learning and work. There is another aspect to this vision, greater integration and partnership at local level is bringing our communities together. Presiding Officer, there are many examples of community groups opening up to our young people, helping generations working together like the member Jan Mark Arthur talked about for the common good and for the development of individuals. As you draw to a close please. Yes, to closing Presiding Officer, every day an army of youth workers and dedicated volunteers across Scotland are helping our young people to be successful, confident, effective and responsible individuals that Scotland needs in order to flourish. I welcomed the opportunity to participate in this afternoon's debate on the national youth work strategy 2014-2019. Although the document has many good examples of youth work and practice and has a lot of warm and friendly ambitions for the future, incidentally I agree with them all, there is very little in the document that sets out the clear objectives for the ambitions. The document does not set out a clear strategy on how those ambitions are likely to be achieved and there is no mention of how we will measure the implementation of the strategy or indeed measure the success of the ambitions. For instance, I was surprised that in the 36-page document there is not one reference to the financial implications of such a strategy. I do not think that I am the only one, given that YouthLink Scotland has stated in a briefing for this afternoon's debate, that there has been some movement on the funding front and that we are working hard with the Scottish Government to make funding more sustainable. YouthLink Scotland wants core funding to be made available as opposed to short-term project funding so that the ambitions of the plan and other services that meet local needs over the long-term can be met. I wonder if the Scottish Government will be able to comment in their closing speech as to what funding will be available or whether it is already up to local authorities and their partners to deliver the funding to enable the ambitions of the document to be achieved. The minister will be aware that the First National Youth Strategy was published in 2007 and the financial package to support that strategy was also published at that time. The money that accompanied that document helped to support the ambitions of the strategy, particularly in supporting those in charge of the vision volunteers and the capital investment projects needed in order for the strategy to be achieved. The distance travelled report, which commented on what had been done between 2007 and 2011, said that all targets had been met and many of them had been surpassed. I do not doubt that a lot of those targets had been met, but, due to the hard work and determination of those individuals leading on the project, the volunteers and the communities who wish for the project to succeed. However, I also do not doubt that the funding that was made available at the very start of the process would have played a major part in that. Therefore, I repeat my request for the Scottish Government to come up with a financial plan and package to support the ambitions of the current strategy. The document sets out five ambitions that I agree with entirely. However, the strategy does not give a lot of detail on how the ambitions will be met. I wonder if the Scottish Government will be publishing an accompanying document that will set out a more detailed plan on how the five key ambitions will be met. I understand that some of the ambitions will be implemented through curriculum for excellence and GIFRIC. However, no further details have been given on how that will happen. Who will be responsible for the implementations of the ambitions through those policy areas? Will it be the Government, local authorities, teachers, social workers, all of them, or will there be a lead person appointed? I also wonder if the Scottish Commissioner for Children and Young People will have a role in the development of the strategy. I presume that that will be the case, but, given that there is no mention of it in the document, I would seek clarification on that. I would also ask that a more detailed timeframe be published that will measure the ambitions of the strategy. I know that there is already a timeframe published within the strategy, but that only sets out what the partners are aiming to do over the next few years. It does not say how the strategy will be measured and how we will know if the ambitions will be met in the timeframe given. I understand that 2018 will be the year of young people in Scotland. I, like many people in this chamber, would like to see the ambitions contained in the strategy achieved and surpassed by them. We all want to see our young people achieve their potential and move all the barriers that may be in their way at the present moment. The strategy that we are debating today will go some way in achieving that vision, but we should go further than that, and I hope that the Scottish Government will address the real concerns that I and others have in relation to the document, and that we can all work together to achieve the ambitions that are set out before us today. Can I start with an apology? I missed the first few minutes of the minister's speech at the start of the debate, and my apologies for that. I will go back and read every word in the official report, Ms Campbell. I assure you. Can I start off by mentioning a local youth group in North Glasgow and some of the good work that they do and tease out some of the wider issues in relation to youth work? The minister has already visited north United communities and a visit to Weinfeld a few years ago in relation to the good work that they do. Well, north United communities do not just work on Weinfeld bottles in Maryhill, Rutkull, Somerson and Cader and in Milton. Indeed, their name used to be the Rutkull youth project, but to get away from territorialism and bring communities together, they winded out the work that they do across north Glasgow. However, if you ask me, do they use football as a medium to do their youth work, or do they use drama, or do they use apps, or do they use computer games? I could go on none of that. What they use is relationships, and that is the key to any good youth work. That is some of the things that I want to tease out during this debate, because getting young people to play football might be fine, but it is talking to the young male before the game and talking to him after the game, noticing when there is a particular issue with him, maybe having a word with the family member, that is proper youth work. Youth work is not about activities, it is about relationships, and the activities are a medium towards developing those relationships and helping young people. I think that that is something that needs to be put on the record here today. Let me just give you a couple of examples in relation to that, Presiding Officer. When there was issues in Somerson and Elaine behind John Paul Academy on the large secondary schools there, the approach from north United communities was not to seek the police to ground and see what was going on. It was to hang out with the young people that were in the lanes behind John Paul Academy, just hang out with them and chat with them, and a few weeks later they developed a programme of youth activities to engage with those young people. I can tell you that the first few weeks they did it, they were not particularly welcomed by the young people, but they persevered with them, they hung out with them and they gained their respect. They did something very similar in Glasgow-Milton, it is about relationship building with young people, those young people who are hardest to reach. You do not give up on them, you build relationships with them, and local grass-roots-based youth organisations are very much best placed to do that. I am sure that this youth strategy is something that will be developed. If it is brief, Liam, of course, yes. Liam McArthur. I am very grateful to the world leaders. Would he agree that that rather underscores the point about getting as long-term funding as we can to allow those relationships to be built up and sustained over a period? I want to say a little bit more about long-term funding as well. There is a dichotomy with long-term funding because I know sectors that have asked for it before. If you are giving for a grant for long-term funding and you are unsuccessful, sometimes you are locked out for a long period of time as well, so there is a balance to be struck in relation to long-term funding that I think sometimes goes awry when the discussions are held, but I take on board the point that you make. Let me tell you about a couple of issues that north-centred communities have. Quite often, when they bid for projects, certainly in straightened financial times, the local community planning partnership, for example, no longer gives a budget line for management costs for the youth organisation, and they merely want to get cost recovery for the youth work hours for sectional work in the community. I understand why the community planning partnership is doing it, but I feel that it is rather short-sighted, and that is something that has to be taken into account. I am only talking about the local community planning partnership, because that is what I get direct experience of. I am sure that those issues and issues can be replicated in other areas. Once an area sees good success with youth work so cadder in the north of Glasgow and north-centred communities, where we saw a reduced crime rate, a reduced vandalism rate, because of the success that north-centred communities did there, it becomes de-prioritised. As it becomes de-prioritised, that means that all the successful things that we are taking cadder forward as a community stop happening. What needs to be sustained long-term commitment to that community after it achieves successes is not to remove it because it achieves successes. I want to finish in a positive way. There is a huge opportunity in relation to youth work, and that is in relation to European funding, and that is Erasmus+. I think that some members may not be aware of that. That is a European Union programme between 2014-20 and €14.7 billion, a 40 per cent increase in Erasmus funding. It is a new way of looking at Erasmus exchange, which in the past perhaps wrongly has been stereotyped as very able young people, middle-class young people with comfortable backgrounds, get an exchange. Erasmus+, and I quote, are a bit grants, will more strongly target specific needs such as living costs in destination countries, targeting those from less privileged backgrounds. It is long-term funding, billions of euros, young people from disadvantaged backgrounds, and I wonder if that is something—as you draw to a close, please—as a specific minister, I wonder if that is something that he is keen to meet and engage with me on to see if we can develop a way of maximising youth groups from deprived areas across Scotland, accessing some Erasmus+, because that would be a major opportunity for our deprived communities. As with everyone in the chamber today, I welcome today's debate and the launch of the new national youth work strategy. I have no doubt that it is very well intentioned. The sector itself is full of good people doing very good work. In fact, in some cases, it is inspirational work. However, I have to admit that I do find the strategy a little bit on the vague side, a little lacking in specifics and without wishing to be overly critical or to break the consensus this afternoon. It is written in that kind of opaque management speak that I find it drains any real sense of drive or purpose, and while today's announcement and funding is welcome, there are few challenging targets. Of course, we all want Scotland to be the best place for a young person to grow up, and for many it will be, but unfortunately, for too many others, it is also the most likely place to get stabbed, to develop a drink problem, to become obese or to start smoking. There are so many areas that we should be tackling directly, but with limited time, the issue that I want to focus on primarily today is smoking or rather vaping. Vaping is the new term for the use of e-cigarettes, which give off a cloud of vapor rather than tarry smoke. It is a term coined by advertisers promoting a new and what they hope will be an attractive product. I cannot say that I paid a great deal of attention to e-cigarettes until a very helpful discussion that I had with the Royal Pharmaceutical Society last week. If anything, I thought that there was a safer alternative to smoking, a way of encouraging smokers to give up the habit. That probably is still true for the majority of adult smokers, but there is also a very real danger that they are quite the reverse, that they could be a way of encouraging young people in particular to take up the habit. So far, that does not seem to be the case in the UK, but the evidence from the United States where their use is even more widespread points in that very direction. The most recent study of 40,000 young people revealed that e-cigarette use amongst high school pupils doubled between 2011 and 2012 from about 3.1 per cent to 6.5 per cent. Some members will have read the briefing from the anti-smoking group, Ash, before today's debate. Ash makes the point that the ages covered by youth work services are crucial. 90 per cent of all adult smokers begin while in their teens or earlier, and a tiny minority of smokers start after the age of 24. In a separate survey that was published last week, Ash highlighted that the use of e-cigarettes in the adult population has increased fivefold over the past four years, with an even more dramatic rise in the number of people who have tried them. However, vaping, unlike smoking, is unregulated. It is not covered by the ban on smoking in public places, and perhaps the most worrying of all, there are no age restrictions on the sale of these products. In fact, vaping is now being advertised on the telly in the cinemas and through social media. I cannot speak for other members, but my main motivation in voting the ban on smoking in public places in Scotland was that it would help us to denormalise smoking. We would no longer see people smoking in our pubs, cafes or most other work-a-day or social situations. We and our children would no longer see smoking as a normal activity, and I believe that the ban has been very successful in doing exactly that, but I worry that we are about to undo some of that good work. The Advertising Standards Authority has just finished its consultation on the advertising of e-cigarettes, and I hope that they treat them as they would any other cigarette, but there are steps that we can take here in Scotland. The UK Government, for example, has announced its intent to ban their sale to under 18s, and the Welsh Assembly have said that it will restrict their use in enclosed public spaces. Here in Scotland, the minister is undoubtedly making the right noises and seems to be indicating our intention to follow suit, but so far, announcements have been limited to considering the next steps. Ash is clear that, to minimise the risk of drawing the next generation into nicotine addiction, we also want an under-18 age restriction on the sale of e-cigarettes in Scotland, as has already been planned for England and Wales, and we need restrictions on how those products are promoted. The Royal Pharmaceutical Society is equally strong. In order not to undermine recent advances in public health policy, e-cigarettes should be treated in exactly the same way as any other form of smoking, including the same age restrictions that are applied to tobacco products and restrictions on their use in public spaces, advertising and displays. The danger signs are here, and we need to act quickly as quickly as those promoting those products. However, I also want to conclude on a positive note, and with what I consider a real success story for young people in Scotland. Quoting from Ash once more, From the high smoking prevalence of around 30 per cent when surveys began in the mid-1990s, there has now been a reduction to around 3 per cent for 13-year-olds and 13 per cent for 15-year-olds. Amongst young adults aged 16 to 24, there is also a declining trend, with smoker numbers now at a record low of 22 per cent. Pass initiatives such as bans on tobacco advertising smoke free public places and raising the age for purchasing tobacco to 18 are working. Let's build on that progress rather than undermine it. Thank you. Thank you so much, and we now move to closing speeches. I'll call on Liz Smith up to five minutes, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and can I continue the positive theme and just reiterate the Conservative support for the Government motion and for the Labour Party's amendment? I think that this has been a good debate where we are very supportive of a national youth work strategy and the stated aims of raising the profile of the sector and building the workforce capacity, providing that pays very careful attention to the views of those who are most involved. I think that that was a point that was made very strongly in the excellent briefing that we were provided with by YouthLink Scotland, where I think they made us think very carefully about the role of a strategy and the clarity of the objectives that must be contained within it. Just to pick up the interesting point that I thought Bob Doris raised, it is about building relationships rather than just about specific projects. I think that you are absolutely right that that is true, but as a result that makes it even more difficult because it is unmeasurable, but we have to be very careful when we are setting the objectives for the strategy. I share the concerns of Siobhan Macdonald and also of Ken Macintosh, so we just need to do a little bit more to focus on those objectives within the strategy. We have had several excellent presentations this afternoon about people who have managed to involve their constituency work, as well as their own personal work. Graham Pearson, Kezia Dugdale, Bob Doris, Jamie Hepburn and George Adam have all spoken about the excellent work that we would not survive without all those volunteers. That is very clear, so anything that is promoting that has to be very good. Can I just turn attention to highlight two of the principles that I think underpin the Scottish Government's strategy document? The first is about the wider issue of breaking down some of the barriers. We were very conscious in Scottish education about some of those barriers and the focus that needs to be put on that. In this particular case, I think about integrating youth work much more closely with the elements of curriculum for excellence. The second issue, which I will come to in a minute, is about the notion that the minister mentioned of preventative spend, both laudable objectives. When it comes to breaking down barriers, the document outlines plans to strengthen the links between volunteers, school staff, youth work practitioners, which I think has particular resonance for many of the teachers and the volunteers who are looking at the development of the senior phase of curriculum for excellence just now. That is something that is important in that wider context. As I see it, Scottish education and the development of youth in Scotland just now is at a very interesting stage. That is something that is being brought up by Ian Wood in his consultations. Perhaps it is seen very much on employability skills, but that also has to be seen in the connection with a lot of the volunteering that goes on. A lot of what is taught by volunteers are some of the soft skills that can be so helpful, and they complement everything that is required for the labour market. Let's be honest about it. The clear embodiment of that is very much in the desire for us to have greater flexibility within the institutions of this country who are working with young people, because there is much better interrelationship with them than perhaps there has ever been before. That is something that we have to pay some kind of cognizance to when it comes to developing the strategy. Although there is that closer collaboration, and it definitely commands a lot of support right across the Parliament, it is to go back to the point that Youth Link Scotland made. It is about ensuring that those on the ground share in that idea and that they have the commitment to that strategy and that they are aware of where they are financing and how the timetabling will come into play. We have had some interesting debates in the joint public bodies bill in this Parliament about the difficulties of having to integrate health and social care, and I think that there will be some issues about the same thing in education and perhaps some of the youth work. Could I turn to the issue of preventative spend policy-wise? That is not a new idea and it is laudable. I think that the Government has tried hard to bring that to the forefront of a lot of their policy ideas. However, as my colleague Mary Scanlon noticed, there is evidence that suggests that if we have a risk of disengaging from youth work and from education, such services can increase school exclusions and attendance. I think that what I would like to see when it comes to preventative spend is the hard and fast evidence about what works. Therefore, if we are going to spend a great deal of money on developing youth work, I think that it would be preferable if we could see the hard evidence where we know things work. However, I commend the Government for bringing forward this debate and we are fully supportive of the strategy. Can I agree with Liz Smith that it has been a very positive debate and it has been good-natured, and I think that we have all learned something, whether it is the dangers of vaping or the fact that Liam McArthur used to be a girl guide. We have all gone away with a little bit of knowledge from today. I recognise that Jim Sweeney and his colleagues from Youthlike Scotland are actually in the public gallery and invite members to read to his article this week in TfN, Third Force News, where he points to the fact that every £1 spent on youth work services saves 13. From a number of speakers this afternoon, we have learned a lot about the requirement for more sustainable funding options. I think that there is a loud and clear message to the Government benches that youth work organisations would very much like to be in a firmer financial footing, that their jobs would become considerably easier if that was the case. Many of the youth work organisations that I work with would benefit from that. They do not necessarily all have accountants either. It tends to be that there is one particular youth worker that is good at the books and gets the job of making sure that sums add up, and that particular worker would much rather do the day job of doing the youth work rather than sitting in front of an Excel spreadsheet. We could ease the job there with just a little bit more thought. Of course, it is not just all about financial saving. We touched a little bit on that in the debate this afternoon. It is the educational journey that some young people go through whilst involved in youth work. I mentioned earlier the work of the cross-party group. We have two Princess Trust young ambassadors sitting on the cross-party group for children and young people on a permanent basis, and they make a very valuable contribution week in, week out. Both of those young people have had an expansive experience of youth work services. Both of them are now on their way to becoming youth workers themselves. I am surprised by just how many young people I have met who have had a really positive experience of youth work, who then want to go on to be youth workers and to give back, because they know what a transformational power it has had over their own lives, and they want other people to benefit from that too. They see it very much as a career. It does not have to be a career for everybody, though. I think that a few people have also touched on some of the pure educating work that is done through youth work, which is all about giving young people the skills and the personal skills to teach what they know to other young people and the strength that comes from that. I thank the minister in particular for highlighting the work of LGBT Youth Scotland, and although it would be possible to highlight a number of individual groups who provide very targeted youth work support, I do not think that we can underestimate just how important dedicated services for young LGBT people are, particularly to young people who feel very isolated when they are coming out, who are just desperate to meet more young people like them, and that LGBT Youth Scotland provides in many ways that sense of community that they need. For some young people it is a lifeline, for other young people it is a place just to meet up and hang out, and we have got to recognise the broad spectrum of services that go from that, from crisis to the social aspect of just a few young people coming into a room together and meeting and greeting. I have also need to recognise how often youth work services are at the front line of some of the big social challenges that we face, and I spoke at length at the beginning about sexual health services, but it is also important to recognise the role that youth work plays around the drugs agenda. I am sure that the minister will be very aware of the work that Crudeau and Edinburgh Crude 2000 in working with young people's attitudes towards drugs, and she might be aware at the weekend that a number of music festivals across Scotland, including Tea in the Park, said that they would not be allowing legal highs to be sold to any of their festivals or concerts this summer. I think that that is a very important move in one that we should welcome across the chamber. However, it does not avoid the fact that many young people buy legal highs online, and just because they will not be sold at Tea in the Park does not mean that they will not be taken at Tea in the Park. We should recognise the role that youth work plays in helping young people to know the score, as we have so often talked about, giving young people the skills to reduce the risk of drugs if they insist on taking them, making sure that they know things about not to mix with alcohol, know how much water to drink, to think about who they are buying from and the dangers associated with that. Youth work is absolutely at the front line of that work, and it is not just the only public health agenda where it does such work. Ken Macintosh pointed to vaping as another example. It is not just about educational, Presiding Officer. Youth work goes into health, it goes into justice, it goes into communities. The minister mentioned the Christie commission in her opening remarks about breaking down those silos. I would challenge her again to think about how we can ensure that every barrier to participation is broken down to help youth work fulfil its potential. It is not even just about breaking down barriers, as George Adam pointed to. It is trying to find mechanisms where other youth work organisations can collaborate together to widen the types of work that they do, yes, to reduce costs in some regards, but to be more imaginative and varied in the services that they provide. I think that Bob Doris nailed it when he said that youth work is not about activities, it is about relationships and that I cannot think of any youth worker I know in the country who would disagree with that statement, and the value of those relationships is absolutely critical. In conclusion, Presiding Officer, the minister knows that I have a very strong interest in care leavers and the care-leaving agenda. I think that we did some really good work together around the Children and Young People Bill and there is a lot more that we could do around that agenda. I called Who Cares Scotland this morning to ask them what they thought of the youth work strategy and whether they had anything that they wanted to contribute. They had a lot of very strong and positive words to offer the minister with regard to the youth work strategy. In fact, they wished that many other Government services had the same principles at their heart, the principles of partnership, of collaboration, of co-design and co-production. They believed that if social work worked in the same way, if education departments worked in the same way, if the police worked in the same way, we would all be better off, so nothing but good words from Who Cares Scotland in that regard. I once again congratulate all the staff involved in youth work organisations and all the volunteers who are very much reliant on week-in, week-out. I thank the minister for the opportunity to debate those issues and look forward to her remarks in closing or indeed the minister. I am sure that the cabinet secretary will address some of the points that we have made about long-term sustainable funding in great depth. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. I now call on the cabinet secretary to have until 3.40. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I say at the outset that this has been a debate of reasonable and sometimes in this chamber remarkable consensus, and we will of course accept the amendment that is coming from the Labour Party. This is a debate that MSPs particularly enjoy, an opportunity to blend local and national, to talk about their own constituencies and concerns, as well as national concerns. In starting, Presiding Officer, I will mention my constituency of Argyll and Bute and the HELP project in Dynun, which is a project with whom I recently sponsored a jobs fair that does a great deal of work with young people moving from school or other activities to employment. I also want to echo what Kezia Dugdale said and welcome Jim Sweeney and his colleagues to the debate and to hear what I am sure that even they will realise is an unusually united chamber this afternoon and a chamber of positivity about the work that they do, as Mary Scanlon has pointed out. That is not what we do every day or every afternoon, but it is good that we do it sometimes. Let me, for a moment or two, just talk about some of the contributions to the debate before I widened out into the key issues, including funding. Jota Adam was absolutely right to say that what we are talking about this afternoon is making a difference to lives and communities. That is exactly what we are engaged in. There is a key role for volunteering and for community support, but there is also a key role for young people themselves. The strategy is focused on how young people lead the process of making a difference to their own lives and communities. I am not a patron of any youth organisation. I was not in either the scouts of the BBs, and I have not even heard Labour talk this afternoon about the woodcraft folk, which I also was not in. However, I was active in a number of church groups when I was young. One of the things that we need to recognise is that there is a great variety in provision still and a great many different ways in which youth work is undertaken. We need to recognise and celebrate that. Bob Doris indicated how that variety can work in informal and formal settings. That is a very rich landscape and a very rich tapestry, and it is important to recognise that there is no single piece of work or help, piece of help, that would make all the difference. There has to be a strategy that is varied, that is broad-reaching, but it also has to have, as the strategy does have, an implementation plan attached. That is about individuals as well as organisations, as Graham Pearson's very touching story showed. That is about what individuals want to do and feel they can do to make a difference. Therefore, it is not just about resources. I will address the resources question that Siobhan McMahon raised in a minute. I will talk about the way in which this Government is bringing forward resources and will continue to do so. Resources are always important, but the strategy is about how we work together. The implementation plan is clear on how we do that, but we need new ideas as well. To go back to Bob Doris's speech, his idea about Erasmus funding is an interesting thought that we can take further. It is also not about what we cannot do. Sometimes, in Scotland, when we start talking about money, we end up talking about the things that we do not feel we can do. It is about what we can do and about finding the imaginative ways of doing it. Kezia Dugdale was right to link that to the key issues in individual lives—legal or illegal high, sexual health, alcohol and tobacco. It is right for Mr McIntosh to raise vaping. I am quite sure that the health ministers will bring forward their plans and will have noted Mr McIntosh's contribution. However, it illustrates, as other speakers have illustrated this afternoon, the fact that this is about a holistic view of individuals and how individuals learn and change. The final point that I would then make about the speeches relates to something that Liz Smith said. She linked what we are talking about this afternoon to Wood Report and others who have linked it to CFE. This youth strategy does not stand on its own. It integrates with all other aspects of education and, indeed, with the personal learner journeys that this Government has been so keen to support in every part of its legislation and its activities in education. Let me turn now to funding. The Government not only values the significant role at youth worker agencies and organisations play but has indicated that with the funding support. Over the years 2013 to 2015, children's rights and wellbeing division have and are providing around £6.9 million directly to national voluntary youth work and youth citizenship organisations through the third sector of intervention fund, strategic partnership funding, the national voluntary organisation support fund and programme grants. Since the inception of cash back for communities, we have invested or committed over £70 million in projects and facilities for young people and the communities that they live in. As Elaine Campbell mentioned in her opening remarks, we announced a further £2.1 million awarded to Youth Link Scotland for the cash back programme. Cash back has been an extraordinarily successful programme in helping the ambitions of this country and this Government. We see the results through programmes such as a green team project in East Lothian. That project, which is funded by cash back, identifies young people from areas of multiple deprivation who are at risk of becoming involved in antisocial behaviour or dependency on drugs and alcohol. Just the points that Kezia Dugliaw was raising in terms of the learning experience about avoiding as well as being involved in other things. The project provides opportunities for young people to take part in community-based environmental volunteering, developing new skills and outdoor activities. That is just one example of how cash back flows into the system and sustains and now is continuing to sustain an enormous variety of activity. It is underpinned by the type of regular funding from Government, which makes a difference. Could there be more? Of course, there could always be more. There is no organisation in Scotland that does not say that there should be more. Over a period of time, there are ways in which that can sometimes be found. However, we are committed to supporting national youth work agencies and organisations and committed to supporting projects and continuing to work with strategic funding partnerships, just one moment, Big and Youth Link Scotland, to support funded organisations to measure—this was a key point this afternoon—and to measure and demonstrate the outcomes from the grants provided, which allows us to build on best practice. Grateful to the cabinet secretary for taking an intervention. Returning to the point that I raised with the minister earlier on, I think that the complaint from the Skype group when I spoke to them was that there was a lack of funding. It was what they were able to do with the funding that was available, so they could buy any number of tents of which they had plenty. However, they could not support sending members of the troupe away to events in the central belt or, indeed, further afield. I think that we are still sometimes guilty, and organisations are still sometimes guilty of overprescription. If I go back to the start of what I said, if we are encouraging young people to lead their own activities and, essentially, to be the guide of their own activities, they should also be saying what is most useful in the funding. We should learn from that experience. I have a particular sympathy with what Mr MacArthur said in terms of travel to the central belt, which is an issue for all of us who represent rural and island constituencies. There are synergies across Government in those matters. We are bringing together issues such as the initial wood report, and other activities, including the new statement of ambition in adult learning, which will be launched on 21 May, and which sees adult learning as being lifelong, life-wide and life-centred. Just as curriculum for excellence is personalised, deep, linked and progressive, all the initiatives that the Government takes are joined together in the view that learning is not something that we do once. We want the country to be the best place to grow up, but we also want Scotland to be the best place in which we go on learning, and we learn in a variety of different ways, in a variety of different places, in a variety of different contexts, and we always learn, no matter where we are. Presiding Officer, this afternoon has been a unifying event. I think that it has shown that this chamber and its best can come together and can look very carefully at what is best for Scotland. That is what we have done this afternoon. By taking forward the strategy, which I hope will be endorsed unanimously this afternoon, with the additional statement and volunteering from the amendment, we are doing something that will help young people in Scotland. What will help them even more if we go on funding them and supporting them to ensure that the strategy becomes reality? That concludes the debate on the national youth work strategy, our ambitions for improving the life chances of young people in Scotland. It is now time to move on to the next item of business, which is a debate on motion number 9916, in the name of Paul Healhouse, on wildlife crime eradicating raptor persecution from Scotland. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press the request-to-speak buttons now. If you are ready, I will now call on Minister Paul Healhouse to speak to and move the motion. Minister, 10 minutes are there by please. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I move the motion in my name. Today's debate offers Parliament the opportunity to unite in condemnation of all forms of raptor persecution and to show our resolve to eradicate it from Scotland. I hope that I speak for us all when I convey my own feelings of anger, revulsion and utter frustration that these and other wildlife crimes persist in Scotland in the 21st century. I hope that today we send the clearest possible message to those involved that what they are doing has no place in Scotland and that they should expect to be pursued with the full weight of the law. Persecution of raptors in Scotland must stop. It is cruel, it is barbaric, it is outdated, it is selfish and it is dangerous. It threatens the survival of some of our rarest wildlife and poisons, it risks livestock, domestic pets and conceivably even children too. Wildlife crime stains Scotland's reputation as a country that values and respects its nature and wildlife. We are, after all, the land of John Muir. Through its impact on wildlife tourism and Scotland's brand, wildlife crime threatens our economic prosperity. It is certainly against the law, but it is also true that the vast majority of Scots both in rural and urban Scotland detest the practice and have contempt for those who carry it out. I acknowledge the sincere views of Opposition members and in the spirit of unity we will be supporting the Labour amendment today. I hope that members will appreciate that we will need to consider how best to undertake such a review and that we do not want to deflect effort from current measures and reviews that are under way. I wish to recap briefly on some of the steps that the Scottish Government has taken so far since 2007. In 2007, in this Parliament's first debate on wildlife crime following the poisoning of a Golden Eagle in the Earpeables, the debate was opened by the then Solicitor General and now Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland QC, who gave a strong signal when he said, that it is essential for the economic health and successful biodiversity of our nation that we have protected thriving wildlife. Wildlife is an inheritance to be cherished and the criminal law has an important part to play in its protection. In 2008, a review of how we tackled wildlife crime led to the natural justice report and setting up a new and strengthened partnership for action against wildlife crime in Scotland, which I am honoured to chair. The Wildlife and Natural Environment Act 2011 strengthened our existing wildlife legislation and introduced a new concept of vicarious liability into the protection of wildlife, including birds of prey. The Wayne Act, as it is known, also triggered the first ever annual report on wildlife crime to be laid before the Parliament last year. Law enforcement agencies have strengthened their resourcing of wildlife crime prosecutions with a dedicated Crown Office, Procurator of Fiscal Service, Wildlife and Environmental Crime Unit, with experienced fiscals who are providing consistency and focus to a complex and diverse area of law. The new Police Scotland structure has maintained and, we believe, improved the wildlife crime officer network. It has added new central co-ordination roles as well as more senior officer oversight to ensure consistent professional standards of investigation of wildlife crime. We now have internationally recognised and outstanding support services for law enforcement and we have committed a further two years of funding to the national wildlife crime unit that is based in West Lothian. I am particularly grateful for the strength of the words that he has said today. In relation to Police Scotland, he will be aware of concerns that, when approaching incidents in South Lanarkshire, it was suggested that Police Scotland's response was that it was not a police matter. Is that something that he has been able to investigate and get to the bottom of? In respect to the member's point, I have had a discussion with officials about this and we do believe that the proper procedures were followed, but I am happy to deal with that matter further later. Science and advice for Scottish agriculture or SASA, as most of us know it, have a state-of-the-art facility and hugely respected team who carry out postmortems and undertake toxicology testing and suspected poison wildlife cases. SASA provides undisputed data on the extent of the abuse of pesticides and other poisons to kill wildlife in Scotland. Evidential trails are often hard to develop and we are fortunate that SASA is also home to the development of a world-leading wildlife DNA forensic lab, providing services and advanced forensic techniques for wildlife crime investigators here in Scotland and indeed around the world. We believe that robust laws are in place and we have professional and determined investigators, yet we do know that more needs to be done as recent events demonstrate so clearly. Last year, given early signs of criminals changing their modus operandi, I announced three new measures in response to continued evidence of other raptor persecution cases. Firstly, Professor Mark Poustie from Strathclyde University has agreed to lead the review of wildlife crime penalties. We need to be assured that penalties available to courts are a sufficient deterrent amid concerns that they are insufficient. Professor Poustie will report in December. Second, I also announced that Scottish Natural Heritage charged it with initiating a measure to restrict the use of general licences in areas where there is good reason to believe that wildlife crimes may be taking place. The general licence in practice has been a very light-touch piece of regulation. It allows a user to shoot or trap certain species of birds, such as crows, without any reference to or control by SNH. The general licence is based on trust. We know that it can be used as a cover for committing wildlife crimes, and I think that it would be utterly wrong to allow its continued use in circumstances where, on the balance of probabilities, SNH's judge's wildlife crime is taking place. SNH has introduced an enabling paragraph into the general licence and will soon bring forward a scheme to allow for any restriction to be implemented. In the final measure that I announced, I recognise that it very often appears that those who kill raptors do so in a determined and organised fashion, taking advantage of operating in remote areas often at night, with little chance of being spotted by witnesses. Modern policing has tools to address that, and although we cannot interfere in police operational matters, as I am sure members will agree, I am very grateful to have the clear and explicit support from the Lord Advocate and from senior police officers in encouraging police to use all investigative techniques at their disposal, including video surveillance. We are at appropriate. Christine Grahame I shall definitely keep it brief. I just want to say that concern that has been raised with me is to have specialised wildlife policing throughout Scotland and that they are pretty thin on the ground. Do you share those concerns and could you intimate those to Police Scotland if you do? It is an important issue that Christine Grahame raises. I certainly have heard similar concerns expressed to me. What I would say is that we have expanded the number of wildlife crime trained officers from 8 to 14. Obviously, we are undertaking a consultation on investigatory powers for SSPCA, which I will refer to later in my closing remarks. I would like to say a few words now about the recent and appalling events that have prompted this debate today. The chamber will appreciate that I cannot go into any details that run the risk, the remotest risk, of prejudicing criminal investigations or prosecutions. The poisoning incident in Rossshire has seen the loss of 16 red kites and six buzzards. That is a horrendous loss. The death of so many birds in a single incident is very likely to have a significant impact on the population in an area where huge efforts have been made to reintroduce them. Many of those kites were established breeding birds that would have contributed to the population around the Black Isle. That is reflected in the very well community of condemnation of the incident by all local stakeholders and a joint reward of £26,000. However, this incident is only part of the story. Members may be aware that the red kite population in this area was reintroduced at the same time as a similar number of red kites were released in the Chilterns in England. Now, though, there are roughly six times as many birds there as in the north of Scotland. Although there may be other factors and accept that, the difference is most likely, if not entirely, due to illegal killing here in Scotland. I regret that, if toxicology confirms suspected poisonings, we have probably now passed a shameful landmark, the recording of 100 illegally killed red kites in northern Scotland since 1989. We have also, of course, had reports of other separate incidents, involving Perrigan falcons in Stirlingshire and Lanarkshire and, most recently, a missing satellite-tagged sea eagle in Aberdeenshire, the first chick to be born in the recently reintroduced sea eagles to the east coast, something that we all celebrated last year. Frustratingly, we may never know what happened to that eagle, but it is perhaps highly significant that the bird and its transmitter have disappeared in an area where other raptors have disappeared in suspicious circumstances. In this context, I can now understand why some are calling for further legislation now. However, although that may prove to be the end game in due course and frustrating as the current situation is, I want to sign a note of parliamentary caution, and I will explain why. The three measures that I have mentioned earlier have not been fully implemented and take effect—I am sorry, I am running out of time, Mr McGeager—I stated earlier that we are yet to see the effect of restricting the use of general licences or of any increase in penalties. Similarly, while proceedings have commenced in the first vicarious liability case in Strannar Sheriff Court, we have not yet seen what impact such a case will have on the actions of some owners and managers in the areas where those problems occur. However, let me be absolutely clear that the Scottish Government is determined to stamp out this deeply unpleasant and pernicious criminal behaviour. If and when we judge it necessary, I am committed to taking further action. If that involves licencing certain types of businesses, then we will do so. Although I am not committed to licencing of this kind, it is not unreasonable that we undertake a death study of measures deployed elsewhere, particularly in the EU, and I will ask officials to advise on next steps. All those who might be affected by tougher regulation should take note that it is they who are unnecessarily bringing a threat down in their whole sector. They must hear that these crimes have gone much too far and that Parliament's patience is rapidly running out. In my closing speech, I will address the current important consultation on SSPCA investigatory powers, and I will cover the wider work of Paul Scotland. I will also address what additional steps we propose to remove toxic substances from our countryside. In conclusion, we are implementing measures that I believe will have an impact, but our patience in that of Parliament is not infinite. This Government, and I believe this Parliament, are determined to rid Scotland of a blight on her reputation. I hope that we will stand together for Scotland's wildlife, and I look forward to hearing members' contributions. Thank you very much. Before I call Claire Baker, can I say I have a little bit of time in hand at this stage of the proceedings for interventions? I call on Claire Baker to speak to him of amendment 9916.37, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I would like to begin by commending the minister for bringing this debate to the chamber. I have tried to be selected for topicals over the last few weeks, so I am glad that the ministers recognise the significance of the situation and use parliamentary time to debate this subject. This is clearly an emotive subject that has gathered a significant amount of attention from organisations and the wider public. I am pleased that we have today the opportunity to discuss wildlife crime and how we can work together to ensure that we do not continue to be faced with the unacceptable deaths or for our iconic birds, and I fully support the minister's opening comments in his speech. The reaction to the latest raptor deaths from the demonstration on the vernet to the donations that were received by RSPB should make everyone in the chamber pause and reflect on the impact that those deaths are having, not just on our wildlife but also on the image of Scotland and the value that we place on our environment. Nature-based tourism is worth some £1.4 billion a year to our economy, and SNH said that the recent deaths detract from that value and diminish Scotland's appeal as a major wildlife tourism destination. It is vulnerable raptors that are often being targeted, so, while overall numbers might be small, the impact on that population can be significant. I appreciate that this is a very difficult crime to tackle. The remote locations, the length of time that it can take for the crime to be detected, and the lack of witnesses. We have recently passed legislation, and the Government has announced some welcome additional measures. However, the recent cases and the lack of prosecution—December 13—and the poisoning of a golden eagle, February 2014, the poisoning of a peregrine falcon, April 2014, the killing of a peregrine falcon—display a crime that is evading the law. If we can identify areas of legislation that can be strengthened or reviewed, we must give serious consideration to take that option forward. We must also look critically at the resources that are being deployed, and we must challenge this culture where it is acceptable. I am confident that everyone in the chamber today believes that the important deaths of the 22 raptors last month are unacceptable, and that the perpetrators should be found and prosecuted, but again and again we come back to the difficulty of detection and evidence-gathering, and I believe that there is more that can be done in those areas. I am pleased that the Government is now consulting on the greater powers for SSPCA officers. That consultation was due last year, and in light of delays, the minister might be able to say more—I know that he was going to speak about this in his closing—about the reason for why we are having such a long consultation process, which will run from March through to September, and when he believes in extra powers will be granted to the SSPCA. Our proposal to increase penalties is also very welcome, and they must be fixed at a level that will provide a strong deterrent. However, deterrents will only work if there is a realistic prospect of prosecution. That is why the SSPCA consultation is so important. As highlighted in RSPB's briefing, the expertise, specialist equipment and facilities of the SSPCA will benefit the work of the police. We need to ensure that the powers granted to inspectors are sufficient enough to contribute towards securing convictions. I have previously raised concerns over the role of wildlife crime officers within Police Scotland. Speaking to people who work in this area, there are concerns that this is often a part-time role or that the officer is frequently moved around and changed. There is also an issue about commitment and expertise. The effectiveness of the role is dependent on the commitment and knowledge of that officer. There is a need for officers to gain the trust of the community, to know the community well, to be able to gather intelligence and to work in partnerships with others. Can the minister say what discussions he has had with Police Scotland over operational matters on wildlife crime? This is the issue that Christine Grahame raised earlier in the debate. Although the amendment today acknowledges the work that the Government is taking on SSPCA and wildlife crime penalties, it also calls for further action. I recognise that the Government recognises that and is given a commitment that, if that action needs to be taken, it will do so. I appreciate that it is not long since the 2011 passing of the Wain Act, but last year there was a rise in confirmed raptor poisonings, and this year's incidents combined with a lack of convictions, which would only encourage others that it is an acceptable crime to carry out. It is a crime that they are likely to get away with. That suggests that there is a need for us to go back to the legislation to scrutinise its measures and consider additional action. There is also a belief that the detected crimes are perhaps not the complete picture. There will be undetected crime and unreported crime, so the figures could be more significant. When the act was passed, there was an indication that the Government would be prepared to go back and look at other options if that was not successful. Although the introduction of vicarious liability was welcomed, there is a belief that it initially read to reduction in poisonings that it has not yet been tested in a Scottish court, notwithstanding the current case in Strunar. The lack of convictions for wildlife crimes also seems to indicate that it is failing to work as a vehicle for holding those responsible to account. That is why, in our amendment, we propose that the Government conducts a study of wildlife legislation from outwith Scotland, particularly of licensing and game bird legislation in other countries. I am very pleased that the Government has indicated that the ministers indicated that he will support our amendment. For example, the RSP briefing highlights that Scotland lacks any regulation of game shooting, and my colleague Peter Peacock brought forward amendments in this area to the bill at stage 3. However, we cannot eradicate this type of crime without changing the culture. It seems to come from a place where there is a single focus on what that one sector believes suits their needs, regardless of the consequences on other interests. That place is a huge responsibility on land managers. I fully accept that it will be a small minority who are involved in any kind of criminal activity and fully acknowledge the contribution that NFU Scotland and Scottish Land and Estates have made to the reward fund that was established by RSPB. However, there are still elements of land management who think that this activity is acceptable, maybe even necessary, and we must all work together to challenge and change that culture. That challenge must come not just from politicians and conservationists, but from land managers themselves. It is a small minority, but by perpetuating those acts, the subsequent negative press and public reaction impacts on all landowners across Scotland and land users, their businesses and tourism as a whole. Would she accept that, at this point in time, there is not one shred of evidence that links the appalling losses in Russia to land management or land ownership? That is of less of an on-going police investigation, but the minister referred to that we need to look at the science and look at where bird population has been affected. I think that we need to be honest that there are people who are involved in land management who think that this practice is acceptable. I accept fully that it is a minority, but to change that culture and make it clear that it is unacceptable. I spoke to Scotland and Estates last week, and I recognise the work that they are doing to try to address that, but as I will go on to say that there are some people who perhaps are not involved in any of those structures or involved in any of the big organisations, we need to make sure that we reach those people. As well as having robust legislation and an effective wildlife crime unit, we need to make sure that we properly resource education and training opportunities. As I said, not every land owner or manager is a member of a formal organisation, and we need to make sure that they still have the opportunity to interrogate their practice and make sure that they are compliant with the law. I look back at the passage of the Wayne Act for this debate, and Peter Peacock closed his contribution by saying that the issue has not gone away, it will come back. We should all be hugely disappointed that those words have come to pass. We must continue to strive to create a culture where raptor of persecution is unacceptable and the practice will not be tolerated by anyone who has an interest in our countryside and our wildlife, and we must be prepared to take measures to make sure that that happens. I move the amendment in my name. I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate and I thank those organisations who have provided briefings. I want to begin by emphasising that the Scottish Conservatives, along with other parties across the chamber, condemn without hesitation the recent poisoning incident in Roshsa as we would condemn any illegal poisoning of any animal or bird. It is important that we are united in sending out this very strong message. The Scottish Conservatives are clear that there is enough legislation in place to allow the police to investigate wildlife crime, catch those responsible and to bring them to justice. The proper enforcement of this legislation is vital. The rule of law must be upheld and this is what we must focus on. We support Police Scotland in the efforts to investigate and find those responsible for the Roshsa incident, but there has been much side briefing by many organisations which is not necessarily a good thing as it can cloud a straightforward issue. There are many rumours now circulating amongst the local inhabitants in Roshsa of how this disaster may have come about. I am reliably told that red kites are hand-fed in the area at the Tolley feed station on the Branagh State. It has been muted that maybe there might have been some contamination in what they were fed to cause such a sudden mass death. I repeat this is only rumour and speculation by an imagined minister that the first thing anyone investigating such an incident of this kind would check out would be the food source for possible contamination and I asked the minister to confirm that this was done in the early stages of the investigation. Police Scotland should have the adequate resources to allow it to investigate all wildlife crime in the appropriate way. Is there any reason why the public still does not know what type of poisoning these birds died from? Answer to that would surely establish possible sources, but it seems that we are all in the dark on this unless the minister can now enlighten us. I am grateful to the member to give an intervention. I hope that he will forgive me for pointing out that there are very sound reasons in terms of the process of this particular investigation, why details of what has been used and how the investigation has been revealed. Therefore, I am afraid that I cannot enlighten him further on the detail, although I know some of it. I am sorry that you cannot, minister. I am sure that all the reasons are signed, but we would like to know what they are. We also support the good work of the partnership against wildlife crime and congratulate the participants, all of them. A partnership approaches is necessary to resolve all types of wildlife crime. We too recognise the very significant economic importance of wildlife and ornithological tourism to the Scottish economy, which should cover all birds that ornithologists come to see from songbirds to the golden eagle. I warmly welcome the SGAs, the Scottish Gamekeepers Association's new conservation project, the Year of the Wader, which aims to help halt the very alarming decline of wading's bird speeches such as the curlew, the lapwing and the golden plover. As a farmer for a long time, I can remember the time when these birds were very plentiful in large flocks at certain times of year in the highlands, but now in most places they have become scarce and we must find out the reasons for this. I want to commend the Scottish Gamekeepers Association's briefing for today's debate, which calls on the Scottish Government to seek to tackle some of the possible causes of wildlife crime at its root and to act to ensure people understand they do have genuine legal alternatives to taking the law into their own hands when they are faced with conflicts which may affect their livelihoods. The SGA have repeated their call for proper guidance to be published in relation to a functional science-based licensing system for businesses which might be affected by the impact of raptor species and I ask the minister to respond to this in his closing speech. The motion mentions sea eagles and the impact of sea eagles on crofters and farmers' livelihoods is another genuine issue of concern, which has been widely published lately and one that I have spoken out now for a number of years. It was discussed at a recent meeting of our cross-party group on crofting, which I chair, and I welcome the NFUS's recently published sea eagle action plan and look forward to ministers responding positively. I am also very clear that Government agents in future must do more in terms of environmental impact studies before reintroductions of raptors or predators in order that damage to livestock and our indigenous wild bird populations, which is already there, is minimised. In terms of Labour's amendment, we're not convinced that we think there's enough legislation already, but we won't be voting against the motion. In conclusion, Presiding Officer, today's debate is useful as this Parliament sends out a unified message that we condemn illegal raptor persecution and all wildlife crime, but in this particular instance it is important that we rapidly find out if this poisoning of this huge number of hand-fed red kites was in fact a crime and not an awful accident. We look to the Government and its agencies to enforce the legislation that exists to bring those responsible to justice and to work constructively with all stakeholders to tackle some of the underlying reasons why some people say they may commit wildlife crime. The minister says that he is going impatient and proposes further legislation, but may I suggest that wildlife crime is being perpetrated by a very few individuals rather than any section of the Scottish countryside. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. I now open up the debate. A speech is at this stage of the debate of up to five minutes, including interventions. Can I also urge caution if any of these matters are subject to see? Rob Gibson, to be followed by Elaine Money. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I'd like to welcome Scottish land and estates briefing, which states that the attempt to keep a record of all recorded confirmed raptor incidents, but I believe that there is only information on just over half of these officially confirmed incidents in the public domain. Very few of those raptor investigations lead to charges being brought, let alone convictions, they say. That makes it difficult for anyone to draw reasonable and informed conclusions, but it is likely that there are a wide range of causes, including the protection of game, sheep, poultry, racing pigeons and recreational disturbance. That points at land managers to a great extent, but not entirely. It seems that the 19th century culture of kill all predators to game and livestock has not passed into history, more the pity. The reason for the bird poisonings used to be better understood in today's land management needs to be much better understood in today's land management climate. Motives for grousemoor protection are reduced by the RSPB. What motives would prompt poisonings on farmland and forest properties, I ask? Can ministers analyse motives from convictions secured? That is very difficult. Few of those are compared to the bird deaths in the statistics, as we know. That is why I think that the list of bird deaths ought to be combined with a map of the existing estates and farms that are in the area where the carcasses are found, not in order to blame people there, but to see whether people other than members of the NFUS and Scottish land in the States are in fact perhaps in the firing line, as the birds have been. The birds that have been shot, poisoned, trapped, disturbed, nest destroyed, which all suggest that land management is at the root of this problem in particular. With the 2012 surveys of 52 breeding pairs of red kites in the Black Isle, we shouldn't forget that there is a history of the destruction of 166 red kites between 1999 and 2006 in the Black Isle. Therefore, there is a pattern of behaviour that we need to see on paper, on maps, to find out just exactly where those birds have been picked up and in what detail they have come. However, I am very disappointed in those who suggest that tourists will be put off from coming to our beautiful countryside because of the current news. Really, tourism is something that is on the rise, it is strong and in fact I have to say that weather plays a far bigger part in tourist decisions about where they are going to go than anything else and I think that we should take that into account. I do have far greater concerns over the ill-informed, the mal-contents in our communities, perhaps on farms, forests and estates, who practise or condone these poisonings and someone somewhere knows the culprits. This wall of silence must be broken down. Proof of intent is essential. An amnesty for chemicals begs the question about cross-compliance and good practice. The curious liability has yet to be applied and perhaps once we have seen a case like that, we will know whether it goes far enough in terms of the law. However, biodiversity and support for its application through the SRDP need to be appropriate and well publicised and leave land managers and users in no doubt about their duties in response to raptors. While sheep farmers and crofters claim that sea eagles predate their flocks, financial compensation is required and should be based on proof that such attacks have been happening and needs to have a much more credible evidence base than has been provided so far. Again, the default position in our countryside and communities should be do no harm, live and let live, but a clearer picture is needed across Scotland for MSPs to be sure that a culture change is truly embedded in the respect for raptors and their place in our ecosystem. I support the Government motion. Many thanks. Ilein Murray, to be followed by Graeme Dey. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I was very privileged back in 2001 to be asked by the Environment Minister of the Timeline of Brancain to stand in for her when the first cohort of red kites was reintroduced into the Galloway Forest. It really was an extremely exciting event to see these beautiful birds at close quarters and see them gain their liberty. They had come from up north, some from colonies in England, but I know that there was quite a lot of anxiety at the time because of the history of the persecution of these beautiful birds that they might not thrive and survive and that they might become victims of the sort of persecution that we are hearing about. I visited the red kite trail in Galloway on a beautiful sunny day this year, and I could observe periods of kites riding the thermals above the roads in several locations. We stopped outside Bellarmac farm near Lawson just after 2 o'clock when the kites were fed, and I observed dozens of red kites circling and swooping to pick up food. I think that it really was one of the most spectacular wildlife sites that I have ever witnessed. In that comment on Mr McGregor's point, from what I could see of the feeding at that location, I think that it would be very doubtful that any sort of contamination would be likely to take place. It seemed to be extremely well organised. A report by the RSPB in 2010, and it estimated that at that time the red kite trail in Galloway had brought £21 million in new sped into the area at a period of six years. Certainly, on the occasion when I observed the kites feeding from the side of the road, the viewing gallery on the farm was absolutely packed with bird watchers. The kite trail clearly is an established tourist attraction in the area now. The visit drove home to me the shocking nature of the recent poisonings in the highland, 16 red kites and six buzzards. We have discussed and debated the issue of wildlife crime in this Parliament on many occasions, and it is so disappointing that this illegal and disgraceful activity is still going on. The wildlife and natural environment bill was passed through Parliament in the last session in 2010-11. My colleague Peter Peacock, as Claire Baker has said, suggested that perhaps a licensing scheme could be introduced for sporting estates, and that would mean that those estates where raptor persecution persisted could lose their licence and the source of their income. It was not felt that that was appropriate at the time. As far as I recall, at that time, Scottish land and estates were progressing some form of voluntary codes. I am not quite sure how that has progressed since then. The Environment Minister, Roseanna Cunningham, brought in clauses providing for vicarious liability, which would enable landowners to be prosecuted for poisoning on their estates. Labour fully supported that measure and was happy to do so. However, we have always believed that, if it does not work—maybe it is due out as to whether it works so far—we should reconsider whether other measures were necessary. One of the measures that I promoted at the time of the bill was the extension of the powers of the SSPCA to enable officers to retrieve evidence relating to wildlife crime. The Animal Health and Welfare Scotland Act had conferred powers to SSPCA officers to search and enter home to retrieve evidence relating to animal cruelty, and those powers were deployed, for example, in 2011, when the first conviction for dogfighting was skewed under that act. That is a possible parallel in terms of powers. At the time that the Wayne bill was under consideration, it was felt that there had not been enough consultation on those proposals to go for them to be taken forward during that bill. I did ask the Scottish Government back in 2012 whether it was going to be giving consideration to the extension of the SSPCA's powers. Originally, that was supposed to be launched in the first half of 2012, but it did not happen. I asked again in 2013. At that point, I think that it was supposed to be coming out in 2013. It is a wee bit disappointing that the consultation has not appeared until the end of March this year, but I am glad that it is under way, and I look forward to its responses. The issue really needs to be tackled urgently. I think that a lot of us are in agreement on that, because it is, as you have said, Minister, a stain on Scotland that we cannot respect and seem to respect our wildlife. When you see these beautiful animals close, as I did recently in Galloway, it really is such a privilege. I totally condemn anybody who takes part in poisoning and persecution of these creatures. We should value them, we should treasure them. They are becoming part of our heritage. They are back in our countryside again, and it is tremendous to see them. When the minister appeared in front of the rural affairs committee back in November of last year, he was able to report a downturn in incidents that recorded raptor poisoning, noting the figures that improved from 30 in 2009 to 3 in 2012. Interestingly, however, he said that it goes without saying that we cannot afford to be complacent on how prophetic those comments have proven to be. For hostilities, it seems, have been resumed in big style. 2013 saw a doubling of the number to six, and this year has been even more depressing. Of course, other criminal non-poisoning recorded incidents involving raptors have been on the increase as well, going up from 10 in 2012 to 17 last year. Ironically, that comes against the backdrop of a marked increase in police resources being deployed across Scotland for the purposes of tackling wildlife crime. It is worth noting that an area like Angus, which sadly is a hotspot, those dedicated resources are further supplemented by the community or police officers who are operating in rural parts assisting the work of the designated wildlife crime officer, PC Blair Wilkie. As we all recognise, however, by its nature, getting on top of an issue such as raptor poisoning is hugely challenging. The Scottish Wildlife Trust, the RSPB, both want penalties for such offences to be toughened up. I think that we all have some sympathy with that view, along with who are relevant to the case and where convictions have been achieved, implementing the vicarious liability provisions of the Wain Act, to send the message to landowners that they are responsible for the actions of those who employ them. However, first of all, we must catch those criminals, and the difficulty is that those barbaric practices are mostly, although they are not always carried out in remote rural parts where there is unlikely to be anyone around. Isn't it the case that they will continue down the path that they do, not because of the nature of the punishment that they risk necessarily, but because they believe that there is little chance that they will ever actually be caught? There is a £26,000 reward and offer for information leading to a successful prosecution of those who are responsible for the Black Isle incident. The fact that police thus far have failed to charge anyone possibly illustrates the fundamental difficulty in catching those criminals. That said, when hotspots emerge and there are one or two of those in the north-east of Scotland, then surely those should become the focus of intensive attention and consideration of general licensing arrangement, as mentioned by the minister. However, I think that we also need in the interests of fairness and balance to acknowledge that we aren't talking here about every estate being involved, nor a sizable number of gamekeepers being caught up in those barbaric practises. The reality is nothing like that. There is undoubtedly a problem and an acceptable problem out there, but it is important to get this in an appropriate perspective. The Scottish Gamekeepers Association has demonstrated that when its members are found guilty of this sort of behaviour, it will act. Three SGA members have been expelled from the organisation for wildlife crimes involving raptors in the past 18 months. I know that Scottish land and estates have made crystal clear to their members that there is no place for raptor killing within their ranks. However, of course, that is a serious problem, a serious matter, and we need to find a way to catch the perpetrators and make an example of them. I therefore welcome the measures that are announced by the minister today. However, I wonder also if we perhaps need to consider the introduction of a brief amnesty on the chemical carbifurin. Over the past eight years, some 28 eagles have been found dead on or have disappeared from Scottish grouse moors. I understand that of those 15 were poisoned either by carbifurin or through a lethal concoction involving carbifurin, which is of course illegal in Scotland and highly dangerous to humans as well. Such a measure would undoubtedly prove controversial, and perhaps it is naive to think that people who have gathered such poisons would be prepared to hand them over. However, we have reached the point where any measure, which has the potential to reduce the threat to Scotland's birds of prey, needs to be considered. Having had such an amnesty, we could might I suggest then greatly increase the penalties for being in possession of carbifurin and let alone using it. This debate is timely, as we are in the grips of what would appear to be a serial bird poisoned in a small area of Rossshire. It appears to be an overt act of cruelty, and the perpetrator needs to be caught and feel the full force of the law. It is even more destructive, given the work that has taken place to reintroduce those magnificent birds into the area. That reintroduction has provided many people with a great deal of pleasure, and I for one have really enjoyed watching those birds in Easter Ross. I would ask the Scottish Government to assess the barrier to detection and prosecution in this case, and, if need be, amend the law accordingly. I would also ask for consideration of an amnesty for pesticides and poisoning, and I understand that the minister in his opening remarks talked about removing toxic substance from our countryside. I look forward to hearing what he has to say about that in closing, because a lot of those could be lying about in ouses and barns and disturbed for many years. When they are there, they could fall into their own hands, or indeed the packaging could disintegrate and the poison could become open to birds and animals. An amnesty would make sure that we remove them from circulation altogether. I have the privilege of being the species champion for the Golden Eagle and have, through my work with that species, been given an insight into the value of those birds, not just to our tourism industry but to local people alike. If we look back in history, raptor killings in Scotland, we can trace them back to the 18th century when these birds were deemed by landowners and farmers to be vermin. It was also around this period that game hunting became really fashionable and all birds became a victim of this sport. Displaying such birds as stuffed ornamental pieces was also fashionable during the Victorian era. As a result, in many of those birds became extinct. It was not until the introduction of the protection of birds act in 1954 that poisoning, trapping and shooting of raptors was made illegal. I think that the vast majority of people now recognise the beauty of these birds and really appreciate the protection that they are given. In recent years, police have set up wildlife crime units and they have worked in partnerships with organisations such as the RSPB, SSPCA and the NFU to try and address the issue. The main difficulty in identifying offenders is that those crimes take place in isolated and remote areas. Usually, poisonings are uncovered by pure chance, by hill walkers, by people engaged in outdoor activity and the like. That is why the poisonings in east of Ross are so rare in that a huge amount of birds have been found. Donald Dure said that raptor killing in Scotland was a national disgrace. I think that it is something that we should all be ashamed of and do our utmost to stop this horrible crime. Wildlife is a key element to our tourism industry and with it comes the obvious boost to the economy in sparsely populated parts of the country where scattered communities live. Wildlife tourism is in the increase when we see programmes such as the Hebrides really portraying to the best our wildlife and encouraging people to come and visit the area. We desperately need to come up with a strategy that stops wildlife crimes in our hills and glens. If we do not, the image of Scotland as a land of wildlife, tranquility and beauty will be damaged beyond repair. While we have to protect those iconic birds for their own survival, we also have to act for the good of our wildlife tourism and the natural heritage of our countryside. The offence of, and a few folk have mentioned this before, the offence of Vicarious liability in relation to the persecution of wildlife. It should have provided additional protection for birds. However, again, we see that it is a very difficult crime to prosecute. There is a defence that they did not know that an employee was engaged in such activity. The other defence is that an individual took all reasonable steps to prevent an offence being committed. This legislation should also be reviewed to ensure that it provides the maximum protection. In conclusion, people involved in wildlife crime are criminals, plain and simple. They are seldom people who farm or care for livestock because they have a natural affinity to living creatures. Although I recognise that a minority do that, others are just bad. They act out of badness with activities such as egg collection, badger baiting and the like. Things that we should all be deeply ashamed of and do everything to stop. The people who commit those crimes also break down the working relationships because they cause suspicion between land managers, conservationists and the community as a whole. There is a duty on us all to stop those crimes and work together to bring criminals to book. Many thanks. Speeches have up to five minutes. Dennis Robertson to be followed by Liam McArthur. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I think that, like all members in the chamber, I think that we are all disappointed and saddened by the recent activity around the wildlife crime, especially within Roshire. I think that I would probably want to begin by endorsing every sentence that Rob Gibson actually made in the chamber this afternoon. It is difficult to follow in some respects because it has been said. However, it is not new, it has not gone away and the criminals are fairly innovative sometimes in how they try and deceive. Only last year, Presiding Officer, a golden eagle was trapped in the Angus Glens, a hotspot, as Graham Day has mentioned. However, that bird was then transported. It had to be transported because its transmitter was on and it was at nighttime and the golden eagles do not fly at night. That bird was transported and then dumped in my constituency in Aberdeenshire West near a Boeing. The bird's legs had been broken. The bird was left to die. Presiding Officer, I cannot for one minute think why someone would do such a thing and why they would not even, why they would try and then take a bird from one area to another to dispose of it. Recently, we have just heard that the sea eagle and my own constituency, the sea eagle chick, has disappeared without trace. We do not know what has happened to the sea eagle. We have no idea, but we do know that there has been activity in that area in the past. Quite rightly, the minister has said that when there is on-going investigations, we should not presume. However, we have to ask why and what has happened to that chick. Last year, a red kite was shot near a Boeing again in my constituency, a female bird who had successfully reared three chicks the year before. It was shot, it was deliberate. I have read the submissions from many of the briefings and the ones from the Scottish Gamekeepers Association that Jamie McRail referred to. Yes, they say that they are doing all they can to try and encourage their members to act within the law. Why should we try and encourage people to act within the law? Surely, we know to act within the law. They have said that about three quarters of the time that when they have their meetings is dedicated to this issue, but they also say in their letter about the general licensing. It does make me question, are they spending more time talking about the licensing and how to obtain it, or are they actually spending time on how to eradicate the well crime, and are they talking to their members to try and ensure that they are acting within the law and trying to ensure that everyone knows about the consequences if they don't? Scottish Landing States have done, I think, a fantastic job in trying to ensure that they members are aware of what is going on. I think that the partnership agreement between the RSPB, the NFUS and others is testament to the fact that we want to eradicate, we want to eradicate, we want to see the end of this apparent crime against our wildlife. Presiding Officer, there may be a case for new legislation, but I think that with the consultation that is coming for the SSPCA to have enforced powers, new powers, I think that we will probably enable better detection. With the DNA in terms of our detection, I think that we will probably catch more criminals, but we need to try and be as innovative as the people committing these crimes. We need to try and ensure that, where those crimes are being permitted enough, if there are hotspots, like Graham Day has suggested, that perhaps we have CCTVs, perhaps we try to ensure that we can actually get the information that we need and that that information is recorded to effect prosecution. Presiding Officer, I support the Government motion and I endorse the motion from the Labour Party. Many thanks, and I now call Liam McArthur to be followed by Dave Thompson. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. There has been a timely debate, I think that the mood throughout has been fairly somber. Can I start by welcoming the Minister's motion, can I also welcome the unequivocal words of condemnation in his opening speech and also his acceptance of Claire Baker's amendment, all of which enjoy the whole hearted support of the Scottish Liberal Democrats? I perfectly understand why he cannot comment on detail on the case in Russia that is perhaps prompted today's debate, but as he himself acknowledged, it's clearly prompted public revulsion and anger, including amongst members of the land and business estates, NFU and SGA, as others have acknowledged. It is also, I have to say, tested the patience of this Parliament, as Zaraf's PB pointed out in their briefing, it's on an unprecedented scale, but it is far from unusual and what we are seeing is maps emerging of hotspots around the country. It leaves us with the question of what more can be done. I firmly believe that the Wayne bill back in 2012 was a very significant step in the right direction. A range of measures that I think will prove beneficial over time, much consideration was given in this debate and previously to the introduction of vicarious liability. I understand that it has not yet been fully tested in law, but I wholeheartedly welcome that move by the minister's predecessor, Roseanna Cunningham, who acknowledged that it was not a panacea. It would not be straightforward to prosecute, but I still think that it was a move in the right direction. The bill left open opportunities to look at other areas where I think that Parliament wasn't yet ready to take a view and wanted further work to be done, penalties available to the courts being one such example. However, there were three areas that I'd like to address where I think we suspended judgment. One was in relation to licensing, one in relation to the SSPCA's role, which is now subject to a consultation, but also the capacity and expertise within Police Scotland, which Christine Grahame alluded to earlier. On the issue of licensing and not the general licence where there's a review, which I very much welcome, I think I was of the opinion last time round that the concerns around the bureaucracy, the penalising of good estates were well made. I was not persuaded at that stage that this was a route down which we wanted to go, but the words of Peter Peacock I will recall from that stage three. I think my own conclusion at that point was that not now, but if and when we have this debate again, the point of departure will be that some form of licensing will almost inevitably be required. I think that the minister appears to have come to very much a similar conclusion at this stage. In terms of the SSPCA's role, again others have pointed to the potential benefit of increasing resources and improving the chances, both of detection and bringing successful cases. I remember back in the consideration of the Wayne Bill, it was pointed out that the SSPCA was able to be involved up to the point of death, but not thereafter. Again, while I saw difficulties with extending that role back at that stage, I am increasingly of the view that this is probably now essential. Finally, to the issue of Police Scotland, we heard evidence at the time that there were areas of good practice, I think up in the north-east was most often referred to as one such example. Ministers promised that, in the creation of Police Scotland, what would be delivered was greater targeted resources and expertise. However, I very much share the concerns that Christine Grahame was alluding to in her intervention. There does not seem to be any evidence of that. The example that I cited in relation to South Lanarkshire is but one example. I have ones from my constituency. I think that there is a pattern building up that this does not necessarily have the priority within Police Scotland, we might hope. In conclusion, as Grahame Bay suggested, there have been recent signs of improvement, but those appear to be on the reverse. Police Scotland is struggling to cope or failing to prioritise. The disincentives in place appear to be inadequate. Meanwhile, public anger is rising and the reputational damage is increasing. I very much acknowledge the steps taken by the Scottish Government today and the strength of the Minister's remarks this afternoon, but we need to up the pace and the intensity and ensure that the worthwhile work that is underway at present is brought to a conclusion and changes are implemented without delay. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Persecution and killing of raptors in Scotland is, as we know, a crime punishable at law, but it is also a crime against God's law. Those beautiful creatures are innocents that God requires us to nurture, support and steward, and it ill behoves anyone to do them damage. The debate is certainly timely, and although the Government is doing much to support wildlife, we must consider what additional measures and resources are required to eradicate for good these moronic crimes, but we must also look at this carefully before taking any action. The mass killing, which has prompted this debate, is very close to home for me, as it occurred exclusively around Conanbridge in Seaforth, which is in the east of my constituency of Skylechabba and Badenoch. The news of the killings, which broke over several days as more bodies were discovered, prompted a meeting on Monday 21 April at the Dingwall Mart, where I and Rob Gibson MSP met with the NFU Scotland, Highland Regional Chairman Jim Whiteford, senior officers from Police Scotland and Farmers from the Conanbridge area to discuss the situation at that time regarding the deaths around the village. The police were not able, like the minister, to tell us too much about their investigations or how the birds died. As a former animal health inspector, I can fully understand why that is the case, but the meeting was nevertheless a very useful meeting. I am also very pleased that a group of local farmers and landowners from the area have come together and have pledged over £12,000 towards the reward fund for information about the deaths of these birds of prey, which I think shows just how seriously they also view this matter. I think that it is important to note as well that all of the birds that were found to have died appear to have died round about the same time. Although bodies were discovered days and weeks afterwards, it was not an on-going continuous poisoning that was running on. It seemed to be one incident and we were only just finding the bodies of the birds. I think that it is important to note that. I am also pleased that the minister has put out the consultation on the SSPCA, which went out on 31 March, with a view to looking at whether it would be wise to extend their investigative authority. However, I would also ask the minister if he has considered, and he may well have done, using the Government and the local authority, animal health inspectors. There is not a huge number of them, but local authorities do have responsibilities under the animal health laws, mainly in relation to animal disease and so on. I was actually in charge of the… Sorry. Jamie McGregor. I thank the member for taking intervention. When he was at the meeting in Dingwall, was it raised that it was some considered it odd that, while there were 16 red kites and six buzzards had been found dead, there apparently weren't any other fatalities such as crows or seagulls? Dave Thomson. Well, there are all sorts of stories and rumours and suggestions about what has happened, flying around. Many, many of them, the member has mentioned another one earlier as well. I think we're better to let the police and the authorities get on with their investigation without speculating on these matters. That's good information that has been passed on to the police, I know, but the best way is to let the police carry out their investigation. As I was saying about the animal health inspector, I hope that the minister will have a look at that. I was in charge of the Highland Council co-ordination in relation to Foot and Mouth back in 2001, where we co-ordinated all the different bodies. So there is a resource there that we could possibly use. Maybe we need to look at consolidating enforcement between the police and local authorities and we're now looking at bringing in SSPCA and so on. I think that whole thing maybe needs to be broadened a little bit. I'll have to disagree with my colleague Rob Gibson here on tourism a wee bit, because the Tolley Centre hosts several thousand visitors a year. The Tolley Centre at Branagh State near Conanbridge, which I opened a year or two ago. Can I just say finally that we shouldn't be knee-jerk reacting to anything here. We need to find out exactly what happened first before jumping to any conclusions about what we need to do. Many thanks. We now turn to the closing speeches. I call on Alex Ferguson. Maximum five minutes please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I begin by saying that I very much welcome this debate just as I welcome anything that highlights the utter iniquity of wildlife crime. But I'm also clear that wildlife crime is the result of the actions of just a very few people. Now in no way does that in any way justify their actions and I join with everyone who totally condemns those actions, especially where poisoning is involved, but we must keep these actions, these crimes in perspective, as I think we have generally done during this debate. However, I think there are some engaged in the debate in the wider country whose comments do not do so. For instance, I do not think that recent comments by an RSPB spokesman stating that levels of wildlife crime were in danger of returning to Victorian levels has actually done this debate any favours because nothing could really be further from the truth. In Victorian times we completely eradicated some species, species that we are now generally strongly supportive of their reintroduction and the subsequent rebalancing of nature that man has done so much to destroy in the past. The Victorian era and the present day do not bear comparison and to make it is in my view simply whipping up feelings, often against the land owning and game keeping fraternity in general in a way that is I think totally unjustified and which is completely contrary to the partnership working that is exemplified through the workings of Paws as recognised in the motion, an approach that I totally endorse. When it comes to wildlife crime of any sort, surely we are all in it together. It should not indeed, it must not become an us and them approach between specific sectors or organisations. This is an issue in which it surely is all of us against a very very few individuals as Rob Gibson and I think Graham Day both referred to. These individuals of course have no respect for the law and even less for the wildlife that the vast majority of us seek to protect and enhance. Up until 2013 indeed, as has been pointed out, we were looking at quite a success story in this regard with raptor poisonings reducing steadily from 30 in 2009 to three in 2012. Sadly there has been a slight increase since then which almost pales into insignificance when placed alongside the truly shocking incident in Russia that has killed at least 20 red kites and buzzards. Now that incident is one, I'm sure we all hope, is the one off that Dave Thompson indicated but it is however imperative that the cause and if there is one a culprit or culprits are identified because there will be many invaluable lessons to be learned from this particular incident. It's easy to become a bit despondent on this issue. I don't think that we should be too hard on ourselves. Scotland has a really good approach and a record of approach to wildlife crime and it's an approach on which there is considerable evidence to suggest that it's been working. All trends suffer an occasional blip and we should not lose sight of the encouraging downward trend that was in existence up to and including 2012. It's for that reason that we are, I'm afraid, unable to fully support the Labour amendment to this motion. We believe that existing legislation, especially where it was strengthened in the Wayne Bill, contains the appropriate measures that can be taken, especially as they still have to be tested to their fullest extent. We support increased penalties for those found guilty of these crimes and we will support any measures that help to identify the perpetrators and bring them to justice, including increased powers for existing organisations. In short, Presiding Officer, and in conclusion, we support the Government motion that is before us and we will do so even if amended. We believe that the current work that is being undertaken by Paws is immensely worthwhile and we would encourage continued partnership working to ensure that the downward trend that existed up to and including 2012 is first regained and then maintained. Scotland's wildlife, as the motion says, is indeed remarkable. The mindless actions of a very few individuals won't change that and I have to say that I don't believe, like Rob Gibson, that their actions will have a major impact on tourism because our wildlife is still remarkable despite those unpleasant actions. Let us use the powers that already exist and let us ensure that those individuals get the message once and for all that their crimes are not just against wildlife, they are against Scotland and that, as First Donald Dure and now Rhoda Grant has said, is a national disgrace. Thank you very much and I now call on Claudia Beamish. Six minutes please. Thank you Presiding Officer. The consensus on eradication of raptor persecutions sends a clear message to Scotland today with the strong words from this chamber. It was a positive step that the Scottish Government has produced the first wildlife crime in Scotland report for 2012. As a minister stated in the forward, the aim is to establish a baseline of what is happening in Scotland. That, of course, can be built on in future years. The reports also sent a clear message, like today has, about the importance of tackling wildlife crime generally, and it also provided a clear focus for the rural affairs committee, questioning of stakeholders and of the minister. However, as we have heard today from Rhoda Grant, Dennis Robertson, Dave Thompson and many other members, all is far from well with the foul catalogue of recent attacks on raptors. As has been stressed today, partnership is essential in preventing and detecting wildlife crime. One kind has asked for genuine partnership working with the police and Crown Office, being prepared to accept evidence from NGOs just as such as themselves and RSPB, rather than ruling it inadmissible before it even gets to court. Wildlife crime is so hard to detect, as we have heard, and evidence is so hard to come by that it should be followed up vigorously wherever possible. One kind suggests that one way to approach this would be for poor Scotland to issue guidance and encouragement to NGOs as it already does to the public. The role of volunteers plays a part in partnership, and without their commitment to what is often round-the-clock vigilance, the prognosis would be bleaker. To see peregrins nesting in the cliff crevices across the Clyde and soaring high above is a thrill indeed. They are protected by volunteers, and the falls of Clyde peregrin watch, which was set up by Scottish Wildlife Trust to prevent egg thieves stealing the eggs during the nesting season, has been oversubscribed this year, which shows the public have a very strong interest in getting involved. Other partnerships are also significant. Moreland projects such as the demonstration project at Langham Maw, which I have recently visited, supported by the game and Wildlife Conservation Trust, the Clure States, the RSPB, with scientific monitoring paid for, to take account of biodiversity, as well as protecting hen harriers and other birds, and the diversionary feeding, keeping more grass chicks alive along with other species such as lapwings. Game has not been shot there during the project to enable grass to return to a sustainable number. This is an interesting voluntary model, and I know that the minister has visited the project as well. The need, however, for consideration of the statutory regulation of game shooting should indeed be further explored by the Scottish Government, either for conservation purposes or indeed due to prosecution, if specific estates are named under vicarious liability in the future, which we hope they won't be. The culture has changed radically. Continuing education is essential, but there can be no excuse for any persecution for any reason. Raptor protection and detection of despicable attacks on raptors can only happen in remote rural Scotland if the partnerships which are already having success are further developed. Those birds, which have been discovered, sadly, are unlikely to be the only fatalities as stressed by NGOs in their briefings. Partnership must be adequately funded, and I asked the minister today to reassure the chamber that wildlife crime officers have the resources to do their job consistently, as has been raised by Christine Grahame and other members. The consultation on increased SSPCA powers, highlighted by Elaine Murray, is to be welcomed in this context. The RSPB suggests that the bird of prey crime hotspots piloted by SLE are invaluable in targeting efforts to expose repeat perpetrators in my own South Lanarkshire, Angus, Invernesha and other hotspot areas. It is right that the Scottish Government is reviewing the wildlife crime penalties so that they are more robust and send a clear message. Since Vicarious Liability, which was supported by Scottish Land and Estates, has been on the statute book, there have indeed been no prosecutions, and my colleague Claire Baker has called for a review. Scottish Wildlife Trust argues rightly that any proven crime uses the Vicarious Liability provision to send a clear signal to landowners that they must take responsibility for their staff. Can the minister shed any light on why, apart from the present case in Stranraer, he thinks that there has been no prosecutions under this law? Can the minister also comment on the suggestion made by both Rhoda Grant and Grahame Day and others about a chemical amnesty and whether that would help for the future? There have been some arguments put forward that changes to protection arrangements for some species in some areas—buzzards being a case in point such as in England—might be a way forward, though I understand from Scottish Wildlife Trust that, while a third of pheasant fatalities are on our roads, only 1 to 2 per cent have been recorded as being taken by buzzards. It is significant that the minister agrees to conduct a study of licensing and game bird legislation in other countries, and I think that this is something that we will all be able to work with him on together, I am sure. Finally, our international reputation, in my view, is at stake, to some degree, particularly at the moment, and it is something that the raptor eradication we really have to push forward on because of this. The excitement of seeing the vast wingspan of a red kite overhead at the Loch Ken RSPB reserve in my region is indeed breathtaking. The support of the feeding station is essential. We must not allow our reputation as a wildlife destination for iconic species to be ruined and to become tarnished by these crimes. The raptors deserve our protection, and this is something that we must all work on together. I know that Colin Powell's wheelhouse wind up a debate. Minister, if you could continue until 5 o'clock. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and thank you very much to my fellow MSPs for attending and taking part in this important debate today, and indeed for the quality of the speeches and the thought that they had put into them. It was good to hear so many personal experiences, the Lane Murray's experience, I think is one that stick with me, and I look forward to seeing red kites in the field myself at some point in the future. It is important that Parliament is able to send a clear, unambiguous message that there is no excuse for persecution of our birds today. I very strongly welcome the broad support from all parties in the chamber today in the condemnation of the kinds of crimes that have been committed recently. Obviously, we are still awaiting the outcome of the investigations in particular, but we all will need to leap. As Dave Thompson said, we need to let the police do that work and give us the truth of what has happened. I certainly agree with those who say that Scotland has much to offer, but Alex Ferguson and indeed Rob Gibson raised it first. The fact that Scotland has a lot to offer in terms of a tourism destination, but I think that we run the risk if that goes unchecked of damaging the reputation of our country, particularly those who value coming to Scotland to see our wildlife. I think that we all reveled in the Hebrides programme last year, which was a fantastic tribute to the quality of the environment that we have in Scotland, and let's not see it tainted by things like raptor persecution. Illegal killings affect Scotland's reputation as a brand, and that is something that we need to send as a message to all those who are involved in conducting it that we will not tolerate that. Recent events involving red kites, buzzards, peregans and seagulls show that a range of species are at risk, including some of the rarest birds in Scotland. I have already gone through in the speech, but just to recap, we have introduced vicarious liability. Parliament has endorsed the Wain Act, and we will see what comes of that in due course. We have asked SNH to examine how it can restrict the use of general licences. We have reason to believe that there is a wildlife crime that has been conducted. With support from the Lord Advocate, we have signalled to police the encouragement to use a full range of investigative techniques to tackle wildlife crime. I am looking forward to receiving Professor Poustie's deliberations on wildlife crime penalties. I detect a strong sense in the chamber today that people are supportive of strengthening action, where that is deemed to be necessary. I am sure that Professor Poustie will have reflected in that, too. Public consultation on extending powers of Scottish SPCA is something that I promise to come back to when I address a couple of points that have been raised by Clare Baker and others. The length of consultation period is genuinely an attempt because of the complexity of the issue, the strong feelings on both sides and the strong public interest in this particular subject to allow the maximum possible scrutiny. I have borne the criticism in the past of previous bills and processes of not giving adequate consultation. I am not sure whether Mr Ferguson or perhaps others have done that. I think that it is important that we give an opportunity here for such an important issue for the public and, indeed, stakeholders to have their say. Mr Robertson, I thank the minister for taking the intervention. Will the minister agree with me that we have an opportunity before us with the introduction of the agricultural shows coming into this season to promote the consultation and to raise the aspect of wildlife crime and how people can get involved? I think that that is a very sensible point that Mr Robertson makes. It is one that we want to have a strong broad-based representation from all views across the industry and, indeed, from stakeholders in the conservation area. I will take that one forward and see what the possibilities are. It is also worth pointing out that there are a number of comments about the potential for anamnesty in relation to the disposal of toxins. I am thinking, specifically, as was identified by Graeme Dey in relation to car perfume. Indeed, there are other poisons, as people were aware, that affect wildlife. My officials have been tasked at looking at an existing scheme to do precisely this. When I spoke about this at the wildlife conference at the Scottish Police College last week, I reiterated that possessing such a substance was an offence, but it was also a risk to those who work in the vicinity of it and, indeed, their families. I am not naive enough to think that everybody will hand over their supplies as and when we will be able to get something put in place. However, those who do not, and I think that that is the point that Mr Dey made, need to take cognisance of the fact that, if they ignore the opportunity to surrender such material and they are found in possession of it, I think that it would be reasonable to suggest that more severe penalties might follow. We have to reflect the fact that we need to find a means by which people can be encouraged to volunteer the material so that it can be surrendered and do it in a way that is safe and does not expose police officers or others to the dangerous chemical. We will look at extending existing schemes, as I say. We have obviously had a number of comments about the SSPC, and I just want to return to that in respect of it. I think that it does potentially pose some advantages and disadvantages, so I think that that is why we need to be clear on what role it can provide. There is potentially a broader—as we have said in the consultation—a broader range of situations open to the SSPC, for example, where there are no live animals present, currently they cannot intervene at that point. An additional specialist resource might be made available at no cost to the public purse to address the point about the degree to which we have adequate resources to detect and indeed prevent wildlife crime, and potentially quicker response times and circumstances where police resources are restricted. I would point out to Liam McArthur and to others who have talked about it—and Christine Grahame, indeed—that there were, as I understand it, a total of 41 individuals involved in the search in relation to the farms involved with Russia, while I am not going to detail what they found or did not find. There were 41 people involved, and that shows a sense of the resource that was dedicated to that investigation. We are able to pull in, as I think the point was made, about community officers, not just the suspicious wildlife crime officers but non-specialists as well, to support the police in their investigations. Dave Thompson mentioned animal health inspectors. I do believe that I will look at the issue that he has raised, but we did involve Arpid staff indeed in the issue in Russia. There were Arpid staff who came in to support the police with that investigation, as did SSPCA, RSVB personnel as well. We are already trying to maximise the number of individuals that are involved, but I will take forward the point that he raised and see if there is any mileage in that. I have a couple of minutes left, Presiding Officer, just to raise a couple of other points that have been mentioned by members. Jamie McGregor has strongly welcomed his support for the issue that he has taken today, raising the seagull action plan, an issue in relation to those who are crofting and farmers. I think that it is an important issue. We have had a scheme in place to support farmers and crofters who can demonstrate that their livestock has been affected by seagulls, and we are looking at the next possible steps to continuing similar support going forward. We need to make it clear to people that there are avenues that can come to SNH for advice and support if there are encountering problems with any form of raptor that is perhaps impacting on their livestock. It is not an excuse to go to persecute them, very briefly, if you may. Thank the minister for taking that intervention. Would he therefore agree that it is quite important that, before any reintroduction, such as the reintroduction of seagulls, perhaps an impact study is done on what they are likely to eat before they eat it? As the member probably knows, there have been two studies already done. One in the Gerlock, which looked at the impact of seagulls and revealed that there was not the perceived impact on livestock that had been suggested. Just from my closing remarks, I want to identify that there were a couple of points made. Langemuir, I certainly recommend people to visit Langemuir to see what can be done in terms of diversionary feeding to help hen harriers in that case to coexist with a sporting estate. We also have initiatives such as Wildlife Estate Scotland, which has been put forward by Scottish Land and the States, which also has value in allowing land of the states to demonstrate that they can coexist happily with a vibrant raptor population and to work with conservation interests to make sure that both their sporting interests and wildlife are protected. I welcome the very strong signal that the Parliament has sent today about the condemnation of wildlife crime and in particular raptor persecution. I endorse the words that have been mentioned by my colleagues across the chamber and hope that it strengthens as strong signal as possible to those who are permitting crimes to take place on their land or carrying them out themselves. That concludes the debate on wildlife crime, eradicating raptor persecution from Scotland. We now move to the next item of business, which is consideration of a business motion 9.9.4.0, in the name of Joe Fitzpatrick, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a revision to the business programme for Wednesday 7 May. Any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press a request to speak, but now, and I call on the minister to move the motion. No member has asked to speak against the motion FRI now, but I put the question to the chamber. The question is that motion 9.9.4.0, in the name of Joe Fitzpatrick, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is there for agreed to. We now move to decision time. The first question is that amendment 9.9.1.5.1, in the name of Kezia Dugdale, which seeks to amend motion 9.9.1.5, in the name of Aileen Campbell, on the national youth work strategy, our ambitions for improving the life chances of young people in Scotland, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The amendment is there for agreed to. The next question is that motion 9.9.1.5, in the name of Aileen Campbell, as amended, on the national youth work strategy, our ambitions for improving the life chances of young people in Scotland, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is there for agreed to. The next question is that amendment 9.9.1.6.3, in the name of Claire Baker, which seeks to amend motion 9.9.1.6, in the name of Paul Wheelhouse, on wildlife crime, eradicating raptor persecution from Scotland, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The Parliament is not agreed. We move to vote. Members should cast their votes now. The result of the vote is an amendment 9.9.1.6.3, in the name of Claire Baker, as as follows. Yes, 99. No, 0. There were 11 abstentions. The amendment is there for agreed to. The next question is that amendment 9.9.1.6, in the name of Paul Wheelhouse, as amended, on wildlife crime, eradicating raptor persecution from Scotland, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is there for agreed to. That concludes decision time. We now move to members' business. Members should leave in the chambers, should do so quickly and quietly.