 Y Deputy Minister for Scottish Government, John Lamont? To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to Scottish borders councils' decision not to allow the Jim Clark rally to take place in 2015. The Scottish Government understands the disappointment of the organisers that the Jim Clark rally A addysg o ddiogelwch eich rhan oherwydd roi'i wneud eich rhan oherwydd a ydyplaywyr rhan oherwydd nesaf, nad yr hyn wedi bwysig o'i ddwyngas cyflwyno ar gyfer policerau o fynd y bywydol, rydych chi gael rhan oherwydd oedd y ddim yn gwneud o'r bwysig oherwydd oherwydd ac oherwydd rhan oherwydd i'r lle i ni fwy oherwydd o'i ddweud yn ei ddiogelwch. Mae'r Cymru yn cael ei gael ar gyfer hynny oherwydd dyma. can be following the tragic events earlier this year. Given the announcement last week that the rally will not go ahead in 2015 as planned, does the cabinet secretary believe that there has been adequate consultation between the race organisers and elected representatives before this decision was made? First of all, I am sure that the council has not taken this decision lightly, given that they know the strength of feeling of the organisers and indeed the local community. It was always going to be a difficult decision to impact to the organisers and elected members. I hope that the communication going forward can be improved and I hope that the dialogue between the council and the organisers will continue, because what is important is that we look at what the options are going forward in terms of making sure that there will be a gym-clack rally at a future date. I thank the cabinet secretary for that further helpful response. Since the announcement on Friday, the organisers of the rally have been in contact with me to say that the Scottish Borders Council felt unable to discuss the possibility of a 2015 rally in closed roads, although the police inquiry was on-going. That is despite assurances from the transport minister in June that the rally could take place in 2015, provided it complied with the recommendations that would be made by the Scottish Government's sports safety review team's recommendations. I understand that there is still time for a rally to be held in May 2015. That is certainly a position of the organisers who have issued a statement to that effect this morning. Will the Scottish Government now intervene to facilitate discussions with the organisers of the Scottish Borders Council and the police, and more specifically, would the cabinet secretary encourage the Lord Advocate to meet me and the race organisers with a view to issuing guidelines to allow the organisers and the council to proceed with the planning of the 2015 event? I will deal with the last point first. I am sure that the Lord Advocate would be happy to meet the member to discuss issues, albeit that he might be restricted in terms of some of the elements that he can discuss, given that the Crown will obviously receive the report from the police in due course. If I can just respond to the other points, the member will understand that the role of ministers in the Jim Clark Rally is determined by the 1996 act. There is a role for ministers to monitor the event at a high level from a public safety perspective. However, of course, it always was the case that the Scottish Borders Council remained the lead authority in terms of authorising the event. Clearly, the council in discussion with its legal advisers, when they looked at the requirement to look back at the rally of this year in order to plan the rally next year, came to the conclusion that that was going to be extremely difficult, while there was a live police investigation on going with possible proceedings from the Crown, depending on what that report from the police to the Crown says. I can understand that it was a difficult decision for the council to come to, but, based on the advice that it has had, that was the conclusion that it has come to. It is important that the communication between the council and elected members and the organisers is good to look at what can be done. I know that the organisers are very keen to continue those discussions. I believe that the council is also good, but we have to bear in mind that there is a live police investigation on going, and that will take some time, as will any Crown proceedings that may or may not emerge from that report. However, I am very happy to facilitate a discussion with the Lord Advocate if the member would find that helpful. Can the cabinet secretary please provide any details of the broader review of on-road sporting events, including cycling, which I understand is currently being undertaken? What impacts that might have on other summer events for 2015? The motorsport safety review has reported its interim recommendations, which looked at, among other things, the training that is required of marshalls and those involved in the organisation of events, not just the Drimclark rally, but the rally that took place in Mull and, in fact, any other events of that nature. The final report will come in at the end of this year, but it was important to get those interim findings out there, not least because the Mull rally was about to take place and there were important changes that needed to be made and were made in time for that rally. Going forward, it will be important that any organisers of any event will want to look very closely at those recommendations that will come by the end of this year and make sure that they plan and arrange their event in line with those recommendations. To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to introduce legislation to ban circuses from using wild animals. As the member may be aware, the Scottish Government consulted earlier this year on banning the use of wild animals in travelling circuses on ethical grounds. The analysis of over 2,000 responses is currently being completed and, of course, we will carefully consider all the views that are expressed. The Scottish Government does, however, recognise the concerns around this very important issue and we will look carefully at what the options might be for implementing such a ban. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I thank the cabinet secretary for his answer. Like many, I was shocked to hear that two lions and three tigers are being wintered, as they call it, in small cages in a farm near St Combs in the northeast of Scotland. Twenty-eight countries have already implemented bans on the use of wild animals in circuses, according to reports. Will the cabinet secretary ensure that we move in a much more progressive manner and follow their lead? I sympathise with the sentiments expressed by Kevin Stewart. I should say that two male lions and two male tigers and an elderly female tiger arrived in Fraserborough in October 2014 at the end of the circus season. The Scottish Government officials are in close contact with Aberdeenshire Council, who are responsible for ensuring that animal welfare and public safety needs are met and that the required licence under the dangerous wild animals Act 1976 is in place. I also understand that the animals are not at this time attached to any particular circus. However, it raises issues and questions, as Kevin Stewart rightly raised in Parliament today. I want Scotland to be progressive. The fact that we are considering moving the legislation forward on the basis of ethical grounds means that we have to clarify the exact legal route for doing so. Of course, we are paying close attention to events elsewhere in the UK as well, because similar legislation is being proposed south of the border, albeit via a member's bill. We are paying very close attention to this. I will move as quickly as we can. Aberdeenshire Council claims that everything is above board, and I have no reason to doubt that. Unfortunately, we have outdated legislation in this regard. I am pleased that the cabinet secretary is looking closely at that. Will he give us an indication of when it will be likely that the collation of the responses from the consultation is completed and when we can expect to see some action? On learning of the animals being overwintered at St Colm's close to Fraserborough, I made inquiries into the issue. It has also led me to urge my officials to give me details on how we can improve the timescale of bringing forward legislative action. There are, as I said before, issues that we have to look at in terms of legality, but we are doing that at the moment. The member mentions the legislation out of date. I would say again that, although I accept that there is an issue that we are looking at with regard to the use of wild animals in circuses, there is also the issue around the animals in St Colm's near Fraserborough, and there is legislation in place in terms of licensing that. If he thinks that that is out of date, I would be very interested to hear his further views. As I follow on from the last question, the cabinet secretary says that banning wild animals in circuses does not necessarily address the overwintering issue. I am glad that he has had discussions with Aberdeenshire Council. Does he still feel that those regulations are fit for purpose? That is a good question. As I said, the particular case in St Colm's near Fraserborough and the public concern around that raises questions of my own mind as it is doing with colleagues. The issues surrounding animals that could potentially be used for circuses in the future are something that arises perhaps from that. However, as Kevin Stewart says, if the use of wild animals in circuses is out of the lode at some point, then this incident might not have arrived in the first place, so we have to just balance that. However, I will certainly have a look at all those regulations. That ends topical questions. The next item of business is a statement by Michael Russell on chair protection. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement.