 Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the fourth meeting of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee of 2022. We have a number of items this morning. The first item on our agenda is the consideration of continuing petitions and an evidence session. It's petition number 1896, which is to provide every primary school child in Scotland with a reusable water bottle. The first petition has been presented to us by Callum Isted, and it calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to replace the disposable water bottle provided with many primary school lunches with a sustainable, reusable metal bottle. Callum, good morning, welcome, is our youngest ever petitioner to the Scottish Parliament. We're absolutely delighted that he's found time to come in and have a chat with us today about his petition. It's the warmest of welcomes to him. He's joined by his dad, James. Welcome to James as well. His mum, Sarah, is in the gallery. We also have with us his local MSP, Sue Weber, who I'm very jealous, has already been gifted a very fancy and appropriate reusable water bottle, which is very colour toned as well, it turns out, for Sue as well. Callum, it's great to have you with us. I suppose the first question is just to tell us a little bit about yourself. How old you are, which primary class you're in at school, and why you decided to do this? So, I am seven years old, and I'm primary three at Daddard Primary. Is that a big class, or are there a lot of people in it? Yes, there is a lot of people. And you've got a lot of friends in there as well, I hope. Well, yeah. And where was the school again? Is it a big school? Yes. Lots of people at it. And what's your favourite subject at school? Definitely maths. Well, that's very encouraging. I was absolutely hopeless about that, as to be said. Well, that's great. So, you're here because you've lodged this petition, and I wonder if you'd just like to tell us why you thought it was a good idea to have this petition, and what you hope it will do. Why did you think it would be a good idea to write to the Scottish Parliament? Because we could get things done for it, or is that it? So, I wanted to go to my necklace surgeon's house to go and speak to her about the bottles, but my mum said that it wasn't allowed. Then we looked down, lying in front of the petitions. Ah, so we were second choice. Well, in fact, I raised this with the fact that you were coming in with the First Minister last week at a meeting of all the committee group conveners, and she was very keen to be you. And I gather you're going to be seeing the First Minister in a little while as well, so you can actually discuss the petition with her. Is that correct? Yes. That's great. What are you going to say to her? I really do not know her. Well, I hope you're going to do some straight talking and not let her flannel you, put you off, you make sure you get straight through it. But essentially, you obviously want everybody to have a reusable water bottle, and is that the sort of water bottle that you're thinking of that you have with you today? Well, it's the yellow one, not the black one. What's special about the bottle? So, instead of getting a reusable plastic one, I would have got a reusable metal one, because the reusable plastic ones break to ways away. Okay, that's great. We're all going to just ask you a few wee questions and just to get some handle on all of it. So, David Torrance. Thank you, convener. Good morning, Calum. And in 11 years I've been on the public petitions, I could never have caught anybody half your age if I was as young as you. So, well done, and welcome to public petitions. Before I ask you questions, what's your favourite sport? Football. Football? What team do you support? Manchester United and Rangers. I'll not say what Scottish team I support, because in the headlines quite a lot just now, but I'm a Leeds United fan. Anyway, you see all the plastic bottles, when did you first notice in school that there was lots of children using plastic bottles? In the last lockdown, February 2021. So, everybody in your class was using plastic bottles nearly? Yeah, everybody actually, everybody in my class. And why do you think you shouldn't use plastic bottles? Because I could see you've got lots of them in front of you there just now. Because animals could get injured or die if they, or litter and humans could get ill, or if they eat a fish that has eaten plastic. These are called microplastics. Can I just say, Calum, I know it's somebody who does a lot of litter picks. Plastic bottles is probably the most common thing that we pick up in trees and bushes around Cercodi and the surrounding areas. So they're really bad for the environment and I'm really, really glad that you've brought this petition to committee today. In fact, I'm so impressed, especially at your age, because usually boys your age are looking for two fairies for money and things like that, rather than bringing petitions to the Parliament. So can I say, we're really, really well done, okay? Thank you. Thank you, David. I mean, you might be looking for the money for these teeth as well. Don't shortchange them there. Ruth Maguire. Thank you, convener. Good morning, Calum. My name's Ruth. Thanks for coming to talk to us. Would you be able to tell me a little bit about your eco-group? I heard that you did some work with them in your school. So we have meetings and also meetings with other schools and we've teamed up with another school called Dumbling Primary and we're trying to fix the broken taps. I was interested to read a little bit about that. You did something about the broken taps in your school, didn't you? Could you tell the committee about that? So in my class, there's a hot tap and a cold tap that's broken. And see, in my area, there's only two taps and both of those taps are in my classroom. So everybody, if they need taps, has to come all the way to our primary class and there's only one place to fill your water bottle up and that is in P4. Okay, and did you do something about it when the taps weren't working? Did you get some help from one of the adults in the school? Yes. Who did you go to for help? Mrs Mohammed and my eco-group. And the janitor fixed them for you? She's not replied to our letter yet. I'm sure she will. This will be a wee reminder for her. And who else have you spoken to about this? Cos you've not just come straight to the Parliament, have you? You've spoken to lots of people. So I've spoken to my headteacher, Mrs French, and the STV, fourth one, Radio Scotland. John Radio Scotland this morning, he did very well. You sounded less nervous than some of my colleagues sound sometimes. You did a really good job. And I also spoke to the council, and I also spoke to the BBC. Okay, well done. You've done a really good job. And fourth one. Thank you. Thanks very much, Ruth. Out of interest, what did the council say today? Because the council obviously managed all the schools. They could be one of the people, one of the groups that gave everybody a reusable water bottle. Are they a way to think about it? The bottle's constant money, and they made the bottle optional. Right. Well, when we're paying for baby boxes, I think a water bottle doesn't seem like such a big additional expense. Paul Sweeney. I think so. Well, go to Paul. We'll just do it the other way round. Okay, okay. Well, thank you, convener, and welcome to our committee. Callum, it's great to hear from you today. So I heard that you went to visit COP26 last year in Glasgow. Did you have a nice time there? Yes. What was your favourite thing about COP26? The big bouncy castle that had water inside it. All right. I didn't see the bouncy castle. I'm gutted I missed that. I saw the big giant planet that spun round. That was really cool. I thought that was really interesting, but also what was really cool is I got a reusable water bottle when I visited COP26, and I think everybody who came to visit Glasgow for the conference got a reusable water bottle. So when you brought your petition, I thought, why don't we give our own children the same thing? Why are we giving all these VIPs these metal reusable water bottles? Did you think that it was a bit of a double standard? Do you think that it's been posted that we set an example if we're doing it at COP, we should do it for kids as well? I didn't even notice they were doing that. Oh, really? All right, okay. I'll need to send you one then. No, I want to go up too. All right, okay. That's fine. Well, three. Well, I got one with COP26 written on it, so that was quite cool, but it probably peels off after a while, so maybe it's not such a good thing. So who did you meet at COP26? What kind of people did you go and see? So I met BBC and I met the boss, Stephen. He is very nice. Okay, brilliant. So there's a lot of bosses at COP26, a different kind, so at least you got to see some important people. Did you talk to him about your idea? Science Museum. They already knew it as well. Oh, brilliant. That's fantastic. And did they agree with your idea that bringing reusable water bottles into schools was a good idea? Yeah. Oh, good. Well, so you've got a ringing endorsement from the Science Museum then. That's good to hear. And he was actually in a reward that I actually won. Oh, really? That's fantastic. Well, it sounds like you've got a lot of support for your petition and a lot of imposing voices have backed you up. So I think that's really promising. And now that you've been there and had that experience, do you think that this looks like you've got a really good basis to do this project, to roll out these water bottles? Do you think that's what you want to happen next? What would you like to see happen next? I would like Parliament to buy the bottles, please. Okay. Well, we'll certainly look into that. We'll see how much money we've got left in our wallet. Well, thanks very much, Callum. And Alexander Stewart, you're going to ask some questions about how he's been handling the fundraising of all of this. Morning, Callum. My name's Alexander. You did a long walk to raise some funds to make sure that you could buy bottles for your school. Where did you walk and how long was it? So I started walking and also the last lockdown February 2021 and it took 134 miles. I was actually just, like, on the back of Parliament. Just on there. And how much did you raise? I raised £1,405 and £66. Fantastic. I'm right off money. And who went with you on the walk? So my mum and dad went with me and also my puppy and also my sister, the tilde. And what did your school say when you raised that huge sum of money and you were able to give them a bottle? They said nothing. But how did you feel? I felt very surprised that I'd raised so much money. It was actually over how much I had had to have. You beat your target? Yep. Excellent. And now that you've got that, you want us to make sure that everybody can now get the support and get a bottle. What's your next project going to be? You want to get this one finished first. Well, thank you very much for coming and, as they say, in raising a huge amount of money, Calum, you should be very proud and very proud to be here today. We're delighted to see you. Yes, thank you, Alexander. And thank you, Calum, and I wish you lots of success going forward. You are going to be seeing the First Minister shortly, so I wonder, colleagues, if we would agree on our next actions. First of all, is there anything else you'd like to say to us, Calum? No. You've got it great. Well, I think we've actually got quite a clear steer, I think, in all of this. How many bottles did that buy? Do you know how many it was? I earned so much money that I was able to get some for the adults in the school, too. And I also bought some straws. And I gave some to every class of rates in my school. The nursery which is literally next door, and also some to the adults, and they have to share them. Thank you. Well, a lot of bottles. Sorry? 250. 250, that's fantastic. Well, before we just come to a conclusion, our colleagues, Sue Webber, I'm delighted to see, has been, as I said earlier, with us this morning. Sue, would you like to contribute to our thoughts and discussion? Oh, thank you very much, convener. And you can see why when I first saw the Facebook posts from Calum back in May, not long after I got elected, you can see why I was so keen to do everything I could to help this young, inspiring man, boy, to aspire to his dreams. And I followed him diligently, and he's walked the door of your way. And we went out and met you and your puppy, and your parents in East Lothian with my old dog. And your teachers, that's right, we had to see you. As you got to the end of your role. And my auntie and uncle. Oh, everyone was there, there was a lot of people. So, and I just think it's tremendous that you've opened up and been so willing to really endorse and support this young man's dreams and to get the First Minister involved again. I just think, with everything else that we aspire to do as parliamentarians, I think, when there's something as tangible as this, that will make such a real difference to so many young people across the country, I think we would be full-hardy not to get onside with Callum and his petition and back it all the way. Thank you very much, Sue. Well, we know that Callum colleagues is going to be meeting with the First Minister. I wonder if the committee, in taking the petition forward and considering further Callum's evidence, if we would agree that we will write to the First Minister following the meeting just to outline again the objectives that Callum has set and to see what the First Minister and the Scottish Government might be able to do to take forward the objectives within Callum's petition. Can we agree on that? We can. Any other suggestions at this point? Okay, we'll take things forward on that basis. Callum, thank you very much. It's been an absolute pleasure to have you in here. I hope you're going to have a great day going forward. We're going to take the petition forward. And after you've met with the First Minister, we'll be asking her to honour whatever commitments you can get out of her and to see what we can do to put your petition into practice. So, I'm going to suspend the meeting briefly and thank you very much. Thank you. Welcome back. And we once again to this fourth meeting of the Citizen Engagement Public Petitions Committee of 2022. And we are now resuming agenda item one, which is consideration of continuing petitions with petitioners evidence session. This is petition number 1812, protecting Scotland's remaining ancient native and semi-native woodlands and woodland floors, which has been lodged by Audrey Baird and Fiona Baker. And it calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to deliver world-leading legislation, giving Scotland's remaining fragments of ancient native and semi-native woodlands and woodland floors full legal protection before COP26, which of course took place last November. So that deadline has passed, but we're still very interested in the aims of this petition and the issues at its heart. And at the last consideration in February, we decided we would invite the petitioners to hear from them directly. It's great that we are able to do that again, and so it's a very, very warm welcome to both Audrey Baker and Audrey Baird and Fiona Baker. And following that, we're going to be hearing from a number of organisations who are interested in the issues that have been raised. Both of our petitioners appearing today are here on behalf of Help, Trees, Help Us, and we also expect to be joined by Jackie Baillie, who spoke to the petition at its first consideration last month. She's on her way, and so we will welcome Jackie in due course. So we have a number of questions and an opportunity just to test some of the objectives of the petition and what you might want and hope that we are able to do. So I can ask the petitioners first what they would specifically like, I think, to say to us at this stage of our consideration by way of an introduction. And as one of you nominated to speak first, so Audrey Baird is going to speak first. Audrey Baird. Thank you very much, and I would like to return the thanks for extending an invitation to your committee today. It's very much welcome. Thank you. I am going to be referring fairly extensively to notes because this is such a complex issue, and I don't come from a forestry background, so I do need some prompts. So in terms of an introduction, I would just like to say that over the last two years, since we submitted our petition, we feel that the case has been successfully made on an international stage, basically for the world's old growth woodlands being protected to stem biodiversity decline in global warming. Sadly, however, forest deforestation of old growth woodland continues unabated here in Scotland and across the world to meet growing demand for timber products from big economies like China and England. The tragedy is that most minds and hearts have not yet been won over by the case to save woods and trees for the future or for people who are losing their countries and their homes and flooding and so on from rising sea levels and indeed for the very survival of Earth's habitable ecosystem. For our own local community, the ancient bluebell wood that gave rise to our petition two years ago is essentially our ground zero, and you have photographs of that ancient bluebell wood before and after a by-track was built in it. So, in order to protect this wood, we feel that we need to identify the immediate threats to it. You can't protect it unless you know what the threats are. So that's basically the process that we're going through now. We're trying to identify what the threats within sort of a mile's radius of that wood are. So the key points I would really like you to try and keep in mind are Scotland only has 1 per cent of its ancient woodland cover. That's down from 80 per cent land cover 5,000 years ago. England has about 3 to 4 per cent of ancient woodland left. The term ancient woodland is not a legal term and does not bring any automatic legal protection. Most of Scotland's ancient woodland has no special designation like SS, SSI, SSI, SSI and therefore no legal protection. So, NatureScot in response to our initial petition wrote, At present, more than half of Scotland's woodland with a special designation are in unfavourable and declining condition and on route to eventual loss. The status of designated woodlands and their priority for innovation and incentives is important but has not been sufficient so far to prevent the decline and loss described. The rate of decline and loss is very likely to be worse in those non-designated natural woodlands which includes our own woodland. Again, Heads of Planning Scotland wrote, A specific national legal protection for Scotland's remaining ancient native and semi-native woodlands and woodland floors would be a long overdue start with anything short of properly enforced statutory protection. Those assets will remain at risk and continue to be degraded. So, in addition to that, in which regard specifically to the threats associated with commercial forestry, which is what seems to have brought us to this stage now with being invited here, around 16 per cent of Scotland is already covered in monoculture commercial forestry. Some areas, like Dumfries and Galloway, are 25 per cent of forested and I suspect that it is similar for Argyll and Bute. The vast majority is non-native and invasive and half of all forestry is one single species, the highly invasive Sitka spruce. Sitka was blacklisted in Norway in 2012 and labelled as an ecosystem engineer by Norwegian scientists because of its ability to spread rapidly. It grows three times bigger than other native trees and it changes the soil and water acidity to suit its own requirements. We understand that Scotland is already a net exporter of timber, so we already have enough to meet our own populations needs and still sell some. So, when commercial forestry people basically slam the UK for having the second biggest deforestation footprint in the world after China, they are actually talking about England. The latest United Nations international panel on climate change report issued just last week and includes a section on concerns about geoengineering. Specifically, it is most concerned about planting the wrong trees and the wrong place where they degrade water quality in soil and reduce biodiversity in indigenous plants and animals. We feel that our local community in Argyll is powerless to stop the destruction of our immediate local environment and we have described that powerlessness in our latest petition submission. Just by way of an introductory question before asking them my colleagues to follow on, we did see the portfolio of photographs and that was very striking. I mean, that was a series of images that we found quite arresting. I mean, it is extraordinary just how much stuff can just be dropped and is very successful at invading a space and crowding out stuff around about it. What do you, I mean, you may say it's all of these things, but is it primarily a lack of knowledge? Is it a lack of regulation? Or is it a lack of enforcement of what limited regulation there might currently be that you think has got us to where we are just now? Stiffly. Oh, sorry. I would say it's all three. I think the damage to the blue bell would... I think that I don't think people set out to cause damage and they weren't really aware of how much damage and destruction they were doing so easily to something that's so fragile. There is no legislation when we spent, I don't know how many hours wading through guidelines and policies and the law to try and find... Because we had always grown up under the impression that blue bells and ancient woodlands and wildflowers were all protected and you didn't pick them and you didn't disturb them. So to find out when something was being damaged what should we do to try and stop this and intervene? Actually nothing. So while we have an ancient woodland inventory and it's designated ancient woodland it doesn't protect them. So this is why we brought the petition because legislation is needed to protect our ancient and semi-native and native woodlands and woodland floors. And out of interest because I suppose like you I'm perhaps made assumptions about a regulatory a legislative environment that might exist. Why do you think we all thought that? Well the wildlife and countryside act does include provisions on wildflowers and specifically blue bells. And so I think people have skimmed that perhaps and got an impression of what the legislation is. But in actual fact if you read the detail blue bells and our native blue bells are only protected if you are not digging them up destroying them to sell them and you don't have the landowner's permission. So the protection is against commercial harvesting without permission to do so. But actually commercial harvesting is also okay if you do have permission to do so is that the essence of it too? Yes exactly if you have the landowner's permission you can do that. Now that may have been appropriate in 1981 when this law was passed. But here we are about 40 odd years later and it's not suitable anymore. David Torrance Thank you convener and good morning Audrey and Fiona and welcome to your committee. You say in your submission that you're looking for protection of historic native woodlands over 0.5 hectares but is there a lack of data and information and collection that would help to achieve this and how would that help the Scottish Government or whatever it is for a look after woods? Okay so this is in relation to the ancient woodland inventory that already exists. Yeah I mean you can't protect something if you don't know where it is absolutely. And also there's a terrible lack of knowledge in amongst community councils and local authorities that there is actually an ancient woodland inventory but the ancient woodland inventory that exists is completely out of date and it needs substantial investment to bring it right up to date and make it relevant for current. The inventory hasn't worked hasn't provided any protection and you know within just two miles in our local community over the last couple of years in three different ownerships over less than a two mile stretch we've seen ancient woodland destroyed with the bike tracks burnt, ancient oaks being burnt and pools which is planted ancient woodland also with a designation illegally felled without any licence and you think this is just within such a short stretch so to extrapolate that over the whole of Scotland and of course since we started this campaign you know we're hearing from all over Scotland of things that are going on and it's all incremental and adding up and an inventory hasn't helped it's great to have an inventory and to have it updated but it's legislation that we really feel is needed. You mentioned the 1981 act here and it needs to be updated but there's a new national planning framework out just now for consultation have you been able to see it or have you fed into that so it can maybe change the regulation? Yes, thank you So getting the new national planning framework for right is absolutely essential for our ancient native woodlands all weak and ambiguous language has got to be removed to ensure that local authority planning officers have the law at their backs when they're recommending planning applications that threaten ancient native woodlands and other important nature sites are refused all of the weaknesses are in the ambiguous language so and that makes and that wastes time in committees and it causes a lot of stress for planning officers it's you know give them the clarity that they need to actually make these recommendations and see them through so that they can actually protect our ancient woodlands and other sites so permitted development rights for forestry plantations should be removed and also environmental impact assessments and the assessment of impact of forestry plantations on communities should be attached conditions to new planting schemes as a matter of course yes it is a tremendous opportunity in the national planning framework for and it mustn't be lost because we really are you know if you listen to Antonio Guterres at the United Nations we are running out of time and we just cannot afford to take these risks and have this sort of weak legislation but just creates loopholes thank you thank you I'm Alexander Stewart thank you convener and thank you Audrey Infano for your comments so far and the knowledge that you have on the subject is good to see and and thank you for imparting that through some of the evidence you've given and also your statements now we're aware that Scotland is due to have an update on its biodiversity strategy now that could be a real benefit if it tackles what you're attempting and want to see progressed so what would you like to see in that strategy that would assist you to achieve some of the goals that you're trying to impart in this process well you know we support the 2020 nature recovery plan for Scotland which is created by all the leading conservation organisations you know and these are these are the real experts but you know having said that relevant to our petition is you know the issues we have subsequently identified there's the current 14 000 hectares per annum of forestry plantation by 2024 we really feel this needs to be reviewed very carefully and reconsidered I mean really I think we just need in terms of the a forestation programme to stop to review it to think about it because I think we could be we feel that we could be heading for a you know a biodiversity catastrophe by you know it's I'll continue to what I'd actually written down is that a a sicker spruce woodland is not a biodiverse woodland and a native woodland is a broadleaf woodland and a single statistic exemplifies this the number of invertebrate species supported by a sicker spruce is 37 the number supported by an oak tree is 423 and I think in terms of biodiversity and the biodiversity and climate change are completely interlinked it's a circle and the carbon capture argument for commercial forestry I also think we also feel it needs scrutiny because native broadleaf woodland will capture much more carbon over its lifetime than a 40 year cash crop and all the carbon that is locked up in the soils and undisturbed in the so-called marginal land you know peak lands even you know it's less than 50 set if it's deeper than 50 centimetres it can't be planted with conifer plantations but that top 50 centimetres captured plenty of carbon as well and I think you know how much is being released how much carbon is being released by forestry and actually it's not a gain it's a loss if we keep a forest in huge vast areas we rather feel that the current forestation programme is a strangulation of Scotland's biodiversity and is potentially catastrophic in the long term you know reaching net zero is one thing but doing it in a sustainable manner is another and the other thing I'd written down you know one of Scotland's most famous sons and the founder of the global national parks movement John Muir observed when we try to pick out something by itself we find it hitched to everything else in the universe and I think it would be important to remember that and the whole idea of the commercial conifer plantations that come into the process and your views on how that should be balanced in this whole system is really one of the main thrusts of your petition because you want to try and identify and stop and stem some of that process to ensure that there's not so your views on that would be useful as well Well it's you know from where we started you know because we were upset about our blue bell wood being disturbed and then you know trees are being burned and and then at the same time simultaneously an application we're having another 202 hectares of commercial conifer planted next door so as a community councillor and current convener of our community council we were assessing that as well so we were going through the whole consultation programme which I have to say leaves us at the end feeling completely disenfranchised and that the communities have no influence or seat at the table with the forestry industry and what is happening in our local environments for our health and wellbeing that's why we sent in the pictures of the logging trucks because this has been running for you know years and this is more forestry but we're going to keep using the same roads but that is a separate issue but yes it is about balance and we just feel that with the current planting targets and of course there are lots of other influences coming into there with commercial forestry and how much money is involved in it which we might touch on later but we just feel that we really need to stop and assess and get a correct balance in this we know how important commercial forestry is to Scotland and we're not saying we shouldn't have commercial forestry it just needs to be done better I was going to do that Thank you, thank you, yes Our issue with commercial forestry in relation to ancient native woodland is that commercial forestry species are invasive and non-native and it's something that really has no profile in the media and elsewhere that these are invasive non-native species that are being planted in our country and I mean there are several sources of evidence in relation to this but specifically for Scotland this is the Forestry Commission Scotland's own guidance on managing invasive non-native forestry species that they produced in 2015 this is the latest version of it so that details how forestry managers should be managing conifer escape and self-seeding and you know time is absolutely obvious and you know according to these guidelines and the UK forestry standard they should be rapidly responding to self-seeding spread from conifer plantations but it also lists all of the species that they use in these commercial forests I mean for Sitka Spruce for example characteristics are so well known because of its widespread spread planting regeneration can be profuse in favourable conditions early intervention would be needed and here western hemlock a species that is less used but potential to be highly invasive particularly in native woodland early intervention is needed now I hope you got the impression from some of these photographs that I've sent you and that you saw at the last meeting from Jackie Baillie that many of those escaped conifers are many years old you know they are 10, 15 years old so they're not being dealt with by the forestry industry and the way that they should be according to the forestry standard in addition to that as evidence the nature scots who I believe that you'll be talking to shortly you know they are already providing funding through their nature recovery fund for the removal of self-seeded commercial conifers so why is a publicly funded nature restoration fund having to clean up after a very vastly wealthy highly profitable industry that's harming our country and also I'm sorry you'll be speaking to the RSPB again in their policy briefing recent policy briefing the threat of non-native commercial trees seeding out into peatlands and other priority wildlife habitats must be addressed when considering where to plant trees this is already a significant issue and drain on conservation budgets and is likely to intensify in the future risking Scotland's world leading peatland restoration investments you know and in addition to that obviously there's all of the photographic evidence that we have provided and you maybe had a chance to look at this guy in news piece also that was filmed in rainforest in Argyll where the self-seeding of these commercial conifers in the rainforest and directly onto the trees themselves is very evident and obvious so I you know there is so much evidence out there that this is an issue that is not being dealt with and with one sixth of Scotland already covered in commercial forestry and there clearly the industry is not able to manage that amount of forestry should we be adding more you know when there's a big cleanup job that needs to be done already now my questions were actually around the impact of commercial forestry and we've covered it quite extensively but I wonder if you know we speak about that the issues need to be addressed are you in a position to expand a bit more on what exactly needs to be happening and what the industry should be doing well complying with the UK forestry standard you know complying with their own guidelines it's all clear it's all perfectly clear in their own guidelines but it's not happening yeah I think we feel that you know because with the targets of eight currently 14 000 going up to 18 000 hectares a year you know there's I think there's a huge burden now on Scottish forestry to get all of these planting schemes approved and pushed on and you know I kind of feel that they're not maybe they're not all given the due due due diligence that is required to look at all of the the aspects of it so apart from greater buffer zones better wildlife surveys all of them having an environmental impact assessment I mean the one next to us there is no wildlife survey they say oh there are no otters in these burns yes there are otters in those burns people have seen them there are no whatever I can't remember which kind of it wasn't black grouse but whatever kind of bird it was but the rsbb people have seen you know little eard owls and what have you and up there the archaeological survey it looked pretty sketchy you know and we've already you know there's a hundred percent increase in just a tiny area from the local society going up and having a look around so I don't know how you know I don't feel that they're particularly I think I feel that things are getting pushed through in a rush and that there isn't due due diligence they should all and there should be greater intervention and possibility for communities to to intervene I did bring a picture with me this is the local woodland that that we're getting on our doorstep so the top you don't know if you see that the top picture is what it looks like now the bottom picture is what it's going to look like and yet there's we asked if we could have a community path through it nothing they said oh we'll be looking into a new road the landowners haven't heard anything there's no new road and all of this and so basically it's fiddling around the edges with putting a few broadleafs in to to screen it and make it look a bit better but it's not enhancing biodiversity and I think I think Scottish forestry needs a bit of a root and branch review I like we also feel I certainly feel that Scottish forestry and confor are in each other's pockets and who regulates the regulator you know who is they're marking their own homework that was a phrase that was used of the forestry commission in England and I think it is something to bear in bear in mind is who is scrutinising the you know the delivery of forestry thank you that's helpful Paul Sweeney thanks very much convener and thanks thanks for coming along and making such an informative contribution so far I looked at the the photographic evidence that you submitted and was quite struck by example 2 in particular of the clearance of the ancient windlands in Argyll pretty brutal looking felling of trees and he mentioned in this that having now investigated the felling that was carried out Scottish forestry or investigating or pursuing a breach of the forestry and land management act to Scotland 2018 so I'd just like to understand what exactly in that act are the penalties for that kind of breach is there is it you know often some of these penalties are so so utterly weak that infringements are just priced in basically and you know it's like people just take a bet on getting a parking fine you know if they take the hit on 30 quid they're not going to you know it's not going to massively change the behaviour so I just wonder whether in your view what is the current provision for enforcement and then when the rules are enforced what are the penalties just a bit interesting no more about that okay well the penalties are pretty substantial I think for the felling at the example that we've given you I can't know how much £5,000 a tree and there was a hundred cut yes so half a million that was what the forestry officer told us at the time yes however um there isn't I think I don't know when is that it's over a year and we've just actually heard this week that there isn't going to be any enforcement and they've had a nice chat and everything will be fine don't worry it's basically what it's basically what it seems to boil down to we'll be bringing more evidence on this hopefully in the next submission just talking about all of the issues that we're talking about with regards to commercial forestry and its threat and impact on can I ask who in this instance is the landowner who was the the person accused of a private individual the landowner right but Scottish Forestry came out their head of operations came out and looked at it and was at the time you know we we were there and we helped you know measure the trees and it was very upset about it you know he was swearing at some of the trees that had been cut down because it was so shocking so we're very surprised in trying to find out what was happening in the follow-up on it to find that well nothing there isn't being any enforcement well there were various measures asked for which was to fence the area of woodland that had been felled and put nets over the over the stumps in order to protect them from grazing animals so that they could naturally regenerate you know in a kind of copacing kind of way but the landowner hasn't done any of these things what was the landowner's motivation for felling the trees to you know they said because they wanted to have more grazing animals in there they wanted to have more sheep grazing and if you look at the but it is it is a planted ancient woodland the council were actually asked to put an emergency tree preservation order on it was still pursuing that though they have been up and looked at that and the the ancient woodland next door which was getting burnt by the tenants on that land and that you know they said well yes these are high value woodlands so you know we're hopeful but again an emergency TPO and it's a year later so it's and a tree preservation order doesn't yeah I think they're broken all the time as well but you know to be honest What's our Gaelan Bute Council's position in relation to this of the express review on TPO's and enforcement of of any of this well I believe they have visited the woods so there may be a TPO on the way but we have we're in contact with NatureScot, SEPA, Scottish Forestry and the council on this particular incident I mean 23 square metres were felled and you can fell up to 5 square metres without a licence so anything over 5 square metres you need a licence for right per quarter well okay anyway yeah anyway we have all of this in writing we have all of this in writing from the Scottish Forestry and we are pursuing this at the moment and hope to be able to come back to you with more information on this Tree preservation orders are they something that a council can enforce it's not a national thing or can it be both no it's it's administered by the local authority right you see yeah okay yeah a similar issue with the bluebell wood example above I take it none of the landlord is it liberty to do what he likes with the landowner is it liberty to do with what he or she likes with that asset it's not like they don't need a planning permission or something like that to do any changes do you feel that perhaps if you look at like planning consent as an example would you say something more akin to that would be needed for forestry and for woodlands if they were designated like listed buildings are designated or is that kind of what you're looking to achieve yes yes I mean our natural assets our ancient woodlands are not protected in the same way as our scheduled ancient monuments are at all and yet we rely on them for life so yes ultimately that would be yes great so the kind of a valid comparator is how we treat our built heritage actually I would say not some listed buildings obviously have protections but scheduled ancient monuments have much more protection legal protection and something akin to scheduled ancient monuments would be more appropriate for woodlands than listed buildings would you say that should be carried out on a national basis rather than being left to individual councils who may have radically different attitudes would you say that's important I think it should be national it should be the law it should be scots law is our opinion and in terms of doing I mean when the listed building system is first brought in there was a national survey done of all potential candidates and then the list was compiled by kind of experts at the Royal Society for Ancient and Historical Monuments in Scotland you think something similar has to happen here would you also say there's a role for public nominations of potential sites that's a good idea the more you can involve communities in identifying their ancient woodlands the better because they don't know where they are it's so very difficult to know what the character characteristics of an ancient woodland are so yeah good idea because we're also looking you know that we feel this inventory and register should include native and semi native self-generated woodlands yes and I think some and because our ancient woodlands have become so fragmented some of the just tiny pockets that are still worth protecting and trying to preserve and regenerate you know because we would hope that any kind of register would also be considering the regeneration of these woodlands because in terms of carbon capture there are best bet for the future not a short life conifer cash crop just to go back to so if I'm hogging time but as just convener but just another point about conifer contamination is there any provision in law to deal with that or address it is it not treated in the same way as other sort of you know contamination it is UK forestry standard in order to meet the UK forestry standard you should be dealing with any invasive spread self-seeding yes no enforcement against that does it like that I know the the law is that any any invasive species if you allow an invasive species or a non-native to spread or grow outside of its own that is against the law but the forestry industry is exempt so the law exists but not but forestry is exempt okay well that's really helpful I just needed to get it clearer in my head I hope you thank you for indulging me if you know but I think the key thing for me is it's about lack of enforcement I mean I was concerned that you mentioned Scottish Forestry where initially gungho about enforcement of this case and then seemed to have had a gentleman's agreement to let it lie which is a bit problematic and then there's also this issue about how do we enforce a more robust measure such as what we do with these ancient mornings so I mean that helps to clear up for me I don't know but the rest of the committee that was helpful thank you can I just touch on something that I noted in in your most recent submission which is relation to because we've talked here quite a bit about the commercial forestry and aspects and issues arising from that but you touch on mountain biking and I'm not a mountain biker I should say those days are behind me but as it happens I do quite a lot of walking in the Alps and the continent and I've seen a fairly massive expansion of this as a pastime and very interestingly to me in France and Switzerland and wherever else there are an awful lot of Scottish families I'm aware are participating because you're suddenly struck by the accents and there's a very strong Scottish thread through it and it's interesting for those of us who are walking in the Alps or wherever going down to see the various biking trails that have been put in place which tend to be designed to get from the top to the bottom on the fastest possible time they're not stopping for a picnic halfway down or anything I mean they are getting where they have to get to and clearly that is an emerging growing sport and the thrill of it I think is it's not through Open Country but it is through forested the whole thing is the cuts and turns of doing it how do you see I mean given that that appears to be an emerging and growing and popular sport for which there could be an ever increasing demand how do you see something like that being accommodated because it'll have to be accommodated if it's popular but how do you see something like that being accommodated within the landscape that we have and where you think that's appropriate and where you think it would be better not to be facilitated and whether it needs to be managed in some way rather than just produced on a whim there's no doubt about it mountain biking is really popular in Highlandswood which is the conifer woodland close to us there are many mountain bike trails which have been set up by the local mountain bike group with the forestry company's permission so absolutely it could be managed it needs to be managed and you know to go back to archaeology and cultural heritage there are mitigations if you read any set of planning conditions there are ways to mitigate everything one of the other points when we looked into the mountain you know the mountain bike trail in the blue bell wood which was just being built and I can't remember if it was the mountain bike council of Scotland or what the organisation was called but they had quite a lot of guidance about building mountain bike trails how to do it safely things not to do there were a lot of things with that trail which would be considered dangerous that would not be done on a professionally built trail and the landowner was actually if they'd fallen and broken their necks the landowner would have been liable so there is actually you know it is a pretty developed sport an activity so there are ways to manage it and I think in terms it's like building a hydro scheme or a wind farm or as forestry should be is you avoid your acid flushes you avoid your archaeological monuments you avoid your ancient trees and so yes it needs to be managed and I actually think that the mountain biking council if that I can't remember exactly what they're called but I think that they would probably welcome actual government assistance in you know creating standards for that I mean it is an olympic sport too so yes I just think it can be done in a managed way thank you yeah I know it's it's fast I'll come back to just to pull just in a minute I mean it's a fascinating thing to to watch I have to I mean I have to be honest and say that I don't go up I walk down the mountains not up so I tend to be going up and I chairlifter a cable car which allows you to look down and all the people that are doing the biking and there's a lot of reinforced body armour now associated with it because you they do expect to be thrown off their bikes at various points but but as I said as you say it's a olympic sport but I can see it it is very much one that is growing and for which they'll be increasing demand and that's an interesting observation about their own operating authority which may be something we want to pursue Paul Sweeney you wanted to come back in just briefly because we are coming just to the end of our time yes can we just a brief one just to emphasise this point about there is a seeming grey area if you take kathkin parks BMX trail for example that was done as a result of applying permission for the commonwealth games right but I'm just I'm just astounded that such a development doesn't require planning consent and that you know if you developed a ski slope in glenshi for example you know you would require planning consent to do it I just think there's something in this to be further investigated about where do you draw the line why aren't councils you know looking at that is it maybe not in the legislation maybe there is a gap but also there's an issue around enforcing where people are just doing stuff without seeking planning permission Audrey Baird just very briefly to say that if it's deemed as a dirt track where there are no additional materials brought into the wood and it doesn't need any planning permission so they basically used the fallen timber and unfortunately the stone dike that was originally protected the wood as materials to create the bike track and that was not illegal given that the landowner had given permission for this okay as we come to the end of this I just wanted to give you but is there anything we've not touched on that you would obviously we're going to go into this round table shortleaf for which I know you're going to stay in the gallery to to observe but is there anything you'd just like to add finally to our thinking very very briefly I'm going to just make a couple of points so estate agents are marketing Scotland's marginal land as if it is in some way less than productive land but this marginal land that they advertise for tree planting is actually essential for biodiversity wildlife tourism walking biking and simply appreciating our beautiful country in the last couple of weeks we've been reminded once again how important it is for local people to value their country and obliterating it with monoculture evergreens and taking away all its colour character beauty and beauty is doing absolutely nothing for Scotland and a conifer sorry confor undertook a survey of attitudes to commercial forestry in the highlands in the last couple of months and reported that nine out of ten respondents were very favourable towards additional afforestation but did they explain to those people the risks associated with commercial forestry the invasiveness and the fact is non-native and so on I'm very much doubt it and just respectfully I wondered given hearts and minds still have to be won over a sort of earth first earth first type campaign is urgently needed to persuade old to persuade all people that old growth woodland and other important nature resources are essential for life on earth now and do you want to finish with I think something else that we haven't actually really touched on is about Audrey's just mentioned Struton Parker and the price of marginal land has increased by over 3,000 pounds per acre from say two two and a half thousand to five and a half thousand in the last year which is all to do with the rush for forestry and it's a get rich quick scheme as we know with Gresham House and all the stuciae with the Scottish National Investment Bank just that Jackie represented on you know an agricultural communities is starting to be priced out and disenfranchised and there's already this is already hitting the headlines in Wales and I it's been described by farming communities in Scotland as it may lead to another Highland clearance so again that's part of the overall as I said you know there's just more and more and more issues around it and I just think mistakes are being made and we need to stop and review and understand the real impacts of the massive expansion of monoculture forestry on the climate emergency health wellbeing economy biodiversity and maybe you know very important to all of us the patrimony of our nation thank you both very much I know it was a very early start for you I hope you can see that as a committee I think we're very interested in your petition I think it has opened up a number of areas that it will be very worthwhile for us to pursue and examine in some detail further which of course will begin with the your evidence this morning and now the round table that we're going to hear from so I'd like to thank you both very much and we will obviously take the petition and the discussion further forward and liaise with you further as we do so thank you very much and I'm going to just suspend again briefly thank you so welcome back as we resume this meeting of the citizen engagement and public petitions committee and our consideration of the petition in relation to Scotland's remaining ancient native and semi native woodlands and woodland floors we heard just a few moments ago from the petitioners Audrey Baird and Fiona Baker and I'm delighted now to support a round table discussion to welcome a number of people who are going to be able to help us in our deliberations so good morning to Andrew Wetherill from the RSPB from Arena Russell good morning to you from the Woodlands Trust from Doug Howeson who is with us at the end of the table from Scottish Forestry and joining us online this morning we have virtually Claudia Rose from NatureScot and also Andy Leitch from Confor so welcome to both of you as well hopefully everybody can see them on the screens although if you're at the far end of the table it's quite a reach just to see the screen but hopefully you can we had hoped to be joined by our colleague Jackie Baillie but she is sitting in another committee just now unable to get here at this point and this is the first round table discussion we've held as a committee in this new session of the Scottish Parliament it would all have been virtual until now so it's great to actually be able to have you with us if you'd like to contribute as we go through the discussion on any of the issues rather than going round everybody every time you can just either catch my eye or the eye of one of the clerks and that will then let me know that you'd like to come in on that particular point and if you are if you're participating to our two colleagues who are participating on virtually this morning if you just put R in the chat box the clerks are looking out for that and again they'll intimate to me that you would very much like to join us in the discussion those of you who are here your mics all work remotely so you don't need to press buttons or anything they will be being controlled by our team as well so you don't need to get preoccupied about that and I'll move to our first question and we we actually have just heard from our petitioners about the value of ancient native woodlands and whether or not adequate protections are in place as we see a big expansion of commercial forestry and also other potential uses of ancient woodland for recreational use and I wonder what your reaction is in general terms to the essence of the petition and at the same time your own respective views and on this occasion I possibly will go round everybody but your own respective views on the biodiversity and the value of that ancient and native and a semi-native woodland to Scotland why it's important and why also the woodland floor supporting it is important to so by way of an introduction I shall maybe go to each in turn so would somebody like to volunteer to or will I just take the I'll just go to Andrew Weatherall and take the lead okay, thank you convener I think there's quite a few bits to that question so the value of the petition first of all I think is it's really timely and important so I would like to thank Fiona and Audrey for that I was personally quite shocked to to read in the Woodland Trust's excellent report on the state of the UK's woods and forests last year that in Scotland 270 woodlands since 1999 have been lost to or damaged by development and I had no idea that it was so such a large number and also really disappointed to see that of those that have been threatened by development actually 72 or 73% of those had then been lost and in contrast to the other devolved nations of the UK that's a much worse position the the proportion lost across the UK is 40 45% I think so clearly the desire to protect ancient woodlands and there are lots of references to that in government literature is not quite working at the moment and then I think I just want to say about the biodiversity value of the ancient woodlands there is lots I think it's in the Scotland's forestry strategy the mention of the value of ancient woods and I've just been reading a paper from last year by Eliza Fughentys Montemeir and others about the structural value the special structural value that aids the biodiversity of ancient woodlands and they're suggesting that new woodlands don't begin to take those characteristics on for 80 to 160 years after they've been planted so from the point of view of addressing the climate and the nature emergency I think those ancient woodlands are a precious resource that we do need to address the protection of thank you very much arena thank you for the question and first in formus I want to thank Audrey and Fiona Baker for the petition and the opportunity to discuss this at Scottish Parliament today Fiona and Audrey are just ordinary members of the public that are very determined and very very passionate and the woodland trust it's really grateful to them for their passion and determination and continued dedication to ancient woodland protection and to bring this matter to the Parliament today we as a leading native woodland conservation charity in Scotland and in the UK believe that protections for ancient woodland are not sufficient at the moment we know their condition is unfavourable in some cases and we also know that planning policy is not watertight enough to give our ancient woodlands the protection they rightly deserve they these are extremely biodiverse habitats our forestry strategy for Scotland recognises these habitats as the ones that will contribute most to biodiversity and to put it quite simply they are irreplaceable so once they are gone they are gone they cover less than 2 per cent of our land area we should be able to protect them better than we do at the moment they also have cultural value in Scotland and Scotland's rainforest or a caledonian pinewood Scotland's rainforest has species that are not found anywhere else in the world we really owe it to the world to protect these species and this precious habitat they are also important carbon stores because they have been in existence for so many centuries our ancient woods actually have been shown to hold 30 per cent more carbon than the average for other woodland types so there's beyond about diversity value there's also the cultural and carbon value that we should take into account when we look at policies for ancient woodland and also for forestry in Scotland thank you thank you very much I'll bring in the first of our virtual contributors if I may know and that is Claudia Rose from NatureScot good morning good morning everyone I hope you can hear me thank you very much for joining this event and as others have said I think yes we really welcome the petition coming forward and it is really timely as we look towards developing a new biodiversity strategy for Scotland and how we can halt biodiversity loss in the next 10 years and restore it by 2045 I think others have said about the important value of ancient woodlands for biodiversity and I would completely echo that they're some of Scotland's most valuable woodlands and they support a range of species of flora and fauna whether that's in our Atlantic rainforest as Arena has mentioned or the upland oakwoods and ashwoods and birchwoods that are important and the other point you said about the structural diversity I think that's really important point and certainly we already recognise that importance in our site condition monitoring process which actually monitors how that structural diversity is an important component of a functioning woodland I think just one point as well to flag up that others haven't said at the moment 25% of Scotland's natural woodland area is currently protected through existing nature conservation designations so that's a significant proportion and with Scottish Government's commitment to protecting 30% of biodiversity by 2030 we're actually in a reasonable position on protection of natural woodland at this stage thank you thank you very much Doug Hoeson I'd like to bring you in thank you and I have some data here from the native woodland survey of Scotland in 2014 and in that survey it was recognised that there are 311,000 hectares of native woodland in Scotland that's 22.5% of a total woodland area and 120,000 hectares of woodland are present on ancient woodland sites of which 61% were native and some of that is now pause woodland and so on as a fordyser what would say is that our ancients and native woodlands are some of our most treasured and beautiful woodlands in Scotland and they're iconic in their setting and they are just fantastic places to spend time in and as fordysers we would regret any further decline in the ancient woodland resource in Scotland because it's so valuable and such a wonderful resource for us the two biggest elements that are endangered ancient woodlands are invasive non-native species and herbivore damage principally by deer and so we have our resource we're not going to get any more of it that's of that status for 80 to 100 years but in the last four years we have grant area the creation of 15,000 hectares of new native woodland and we spend between a million and a million and a half pounds each year on the restoration protection enhancement of Scotland's existing native woodlands thank you thank you very much from Scottish Forestry to Confor and our second virtual participant this morning good morning Andy Leitch and very happy to welcome you to the round table and to ask you to make a few introductory comments thank you for inviting me along I think Doug had my script there because he's just given you all the kind of backs that I was going to to share with you too in regard to Spars, Confor's concerned ancient woodland is a key resource for Scotland the other speakers have mentioned that it's key habitat structure etc so I'll not repeat it I think what Scottish Government should be proud of is too is their woodland creation targets of 18,000 hectares per annum and of course 40 per cent of that at least is going to be native woodland so whilst it's not increasing the level of ancient woodland because of the age situation it's certainly increasing native woodland but I don't want to repeat what everyone said that we don't really agree with the biodiversity value structural value of the ancient woodlands thank you David Torrance do you want to lead us into an area of discussion thank you convener and good morning to all the panel members Woodlands Trust has campaigned for years with the protection of ancient woodlands has any progress been made and the commitments by the Scottish Government will they offer greater protection? I guess that's a question for me yes, I just got it so yes we've been the roots of our organisation are in protecting ancient woodland that's what we were founded to do there has been progress but that progress the one that's most obvious is possibly in England at the moment through increased protections for planning policy in England through the national planning policy framework and there's also the ancient woodland inventory in England which is a map resource for the extent of ancient woodland in England is also under way so sorry the update of that is under way so they're mapping habitats and updating that inventory of the moment there are issues however while planning protections in England have improved our experience at the moment is that we're seeing less direct impacts on from inappropriate development but we're seeing more indirect impact so next to ancient woodlands rather than directly on ancient woodlands we're seeing developments that are causing decline in these woods and we are at the moment conducting a review of the last three years of evidence on planning applications that have affected ancient woodlands UK wide and we can share further data with also with government and with the committee if that was needed but that will be available sometime in due course I don't have data the exact dates for that and your second part of the question was was commitments by Scottish Government will that offer greater protection to ancient woodlands so Scottish Government's made commitments to protect and restore Scotland's rainforest that's been really really welcome they've also made commitments that 30% of land will be protected by 2030 there's commitments to restore our riparian woodlands for example and also our national planning framework the current draft that is actually for scrutiny of the local government committee does have improved protections that's a draft document at the moment we really do hope that the word in stays as it is or it could be slightly improved there's a shreds there that could become a must just to make the policy as watertight as possible but if that national planning framework policy is approved then it comes out in the final version we will be in a better place for protection from development though there's also as my colleague Doug Howison mentioned the biggest threat to ancient woodland are actually overgrazing mostly by deer and also invasive non-native species particularly rhododendron ponticrum there's at the moment no overarching strategy or no overarching aim and clear direction to address these issues there are commitments there's ongoing dialogue that we are having with with government on these issues but given that we are in a nature and climate emergency we would like to see more action on the ground now as an accompaniment to all these commitments which we welcome but we just need to kind of get on with it at this point in time my next question was around npf4 and you said there could be improvements made to it to protect the woodlands what improvements could these be so the particular policy that deals with ancient woodland and also with broadley with all native woods in scotland is policy 34 and at 34b there's a word that planning applications or development should not be supported if it causes damage to ancient woodland including indirect damage so it is much better the wording is much clearer than what it used to be and it will go we think if implemented correctly will go a long way to improve the situation at the moment but if that should could become a must it would be ideal and it would actually speak to the aim of trying to have no further loss of ancient woodland that's what we would really like to see reflected in in policy these habitats like I say they're replaceable and they cover 2% I don't think that we need to continue doing development and our planning policy should not be at the cost of these precious habitats it's also about how you implement the policy as we see in England the wording is improved but we are aware of cases where it's not been implemented as well as it can be and it ties in with we need to have expertise in tree and by diversity officers within planning departments at local authorities so that will be key to implementing the policy it's all good having policy work it's just as good as it's implementation really and then also daytime Scotland we have only a provisional ancient woodland inventory so we don't really know the extent the full extent of ancient woodland so how can you protect what you don't know is there really so planning policy is better to sum up but it's about how we implement it and we need more data to be able to know to know where this is so we can look after it I just wanted to just kind of clarify obviously there was a kind of consensus emerged at the opening remarks about you know the importance of ancient woodland in Scotland and I just wanted to direct this point to Nature, Scotland, Scottish Forestry, Confor, just purely for the record that you, your organisations respectively agree that the current protection regime is insufficient I just wanted to just absolutely get that established explicitly if you could each agree or disagree Thank you Yeah thank you Doug Howison Yeah thank you sorry convener did you want to speak No no I just I'm letting the people know who it is speaking because it could be a confusion of voices it's not always clear Thank you convener Yes so in terms of Scotland's forestry strategy we're about to launch the second implementation plan and one of the aspects of that is to work more closely with delivery partners including Nature, Scotland and other parts of Scottish Government for the implementation of the plan as that relates to ancient woodland for example and we're currently thinking about how can we pull the resources together to do the best that we can specifically on deer management because it's an existential threat to the native woodland and ancient woodland is the impact of her before damage so just last week we were talking in a meeting with Nature, Scotland about how do we combine our forces to do the best that we can for ancient woodlands and I think we made some really good progress on that meeting I think it's a recognition the term the the hole is greater than some of its parts on this and to try and do things separately we could do better if we work together and so we're looking to establish a series of project areas for example ancient woodlands and to pull the resources to do the best that we can there so I think that's moved forward from where it was I'm going to just you wanted to ask Andy leech the same question I think oh yeah I mean I was just in the first instance so I come to Andy then to Claudia then to Andrew then back to you Paul possibly and then Andrew so Andy first Paul can you just repeat the specific question again well I was just do you agree that the current protections are inadequate and that's the petition the knob of the petitioners issue is the current protections aren't adequate do you your organisations agree that that's the case yes in that as has been stated before that the key threats are heber force and bloody dendrons et cetera I suppose where I'd be coming from is I agree with you but we'd also have to consider what are the measures we would take to protect them and then we'd have to consider what the impacts of those are on other other areas as well so I agree with you in principle but the kind of devil would be in the detail on how we would address this that makes sense yeah absolutely that's really helpful and Claudia Rose is keen to join at this point Claudia thank you I mean I suppose the crux of it depends what you mean by further protections and whether current protections are insufficient they as I said about 25% it's a bit under from the figures that Scottish Forestry quoted are already under formal protection and government have got a plan to further increase protection of biodiversity to 30% in the next 10 years so it is about but the impacts on the condition are what is important and I think that's what we recognise 49% of Scotland's natural woodlands are in poor condition so it is not necessarily about further protections but it is about both policy and and then implementing the policy and I think that's what we've been talking about and just to touch on the deer issue um there is a coherent strategy to address deer impacts more coherently the independent deer working group reported to Scottish Government and um there is now a plan new deer legislation in this next parliamentary programme to implement its findings and a new programme board has been set up again um as um Doug Howson was saying on the forestry strategy side to have a collaborative and collective approach to managing deer impacts particularly to secure woodland restoration and its biodiversity values so I think that's an important element going forward thank you Paul are you happy with that particular point there very helpful yeah absolutely convener um can I come back to you in a moment then share someone yep um I think Andrew you were actually Andrew whether you were going to follow up on on what arena had originally said before we moved to that so if I can come to you first yeah thank you thank you convener I'll try and tie the two threads together so first of all I was going to talk about npf4 and just say within that the RSPB is calling for greater protection a Scottish nature network so that we can also identify through npf4 where there are opportunities for targeted natural woodland extension colonisation perhaps some planting because it's really important to remember I think that we are in a nature and climate emergency the work done last year showed that the biodiversity intactness within Scotland was about 56 percent I think the woodland trust's work has shown that most ancient woodlands are smaller than five hectares we're talking about isolated very vulnerable fragments it's not just the protection with climate change pests and diseases we have to go further and it has to be about enhancement improvement expansion as well as a whole package of protection and that includes the restoration of plantations on ancient woodland sites if our ancient semi-natural woodlands are our best woodlands then the plantations on ancient woodland sites have the potential when restored to be part of that that resource again in Wales I know that they use a mapping categorisation called restoration of ancient woodland sites another acronym I'm afraid Roars but it really enables them to map their success in converting or restoring back towards that ancient semi-natural woodland status which is the sort of best value of ancient woodlands that we've got so my answer is clearly when you look at the figures woodlands are still being lost and damaged by development we know that deer and rhododendrum are problems as well so protection is not just enough to say we've protected them and that's it because they will be impacted by things so it's got to be protect, improve, expand which I think is something that Doug would recognise as something Scottish Forestry would talk about thank you Alexander Stewart Can I ask a question convener specifically of Claudia in NatureScot because Claudia, in some of the submissions that we've had there has been it's been raised that there's a lack of resources at NatureScot and that's having an impact and is a barrier to protecting ancient woodlands now that could be through surveys or monitoring or managing or updating inventories and also in planning applications so is that an issue that NatureScot would recognise and if it does recognise that how should that be addressed Claudia thank you very much NatureScot's overall resources have declined over the last 10 years with Government pressures and challenges and priorities and I'm sure the committee are aware of that already but having said that we have just negotiated our budget and resources for next year and absolutely the emphasis is on supporting the programme for government and the priority set out and woodland restoration biodiversity restoration deer management and some of these issues you've said you've mentioned are clearly where we will provide the resources that we can funding will always be a constraint that we can't take action everywhere we might like to so for example looking at some of the woodland areas looking at where we want to prioritise deer management we will need to look at priority areas about where we can have the greatest impacts most quickly to restore biodiversity by 2030 and I think it's important not to forget that longer term target that it is to restore nature biodiversity by 2045 so there is further time as we work through future budgets to look at how those resources are allocated but that is the world we live in how that gives you an indication of where we are thank you you acknowledge the issue is a concern and you've indicated that you have to deal with priorities to ensure that that is the case but in doing that there must be at times a frustration by your organisation that you're not able to because of financial restraints you're unable to progress to the level that you'd like to achieve and the submissions that we've received only enforce that can I come back on that point? Yes, please do thank you I mean I think you know one of the additional points I would say is that it's not only our resources or even public other public money through Scottish forestry that's the essential element most woodlands in Scotland are privately owned and it is going to be an imperative partner in taking forward what we've set out here in this petition and improving biodiversity outcomes in ancient and semi-natural woodland is for landowners people who live and work in off the land to also come forward and to work with them so it's not only going to be our resources it's also about the landowners and land managers and community and bringing them with us I've got an integration from both Ruth and Paul Sweeney that they'd like to go in Ruth Maguire thank you convener and I've heard everyone this morning say that deer management and invasive plants for example rhodi dendron are the greatest threats however the petition in front of us this morning speaks, or we spoke a lot this morning about the encroachment of commercial plantation tree species into ancient and native woodlands so I'd like to hear a bit of the panel's opinions on that I suppose the first question would be specifically for Doug for Forestry Scotland what exactly do you do to prevent that happening and how are you tackling it in terms of new plantations as well and your opinions on the opportunities to address it through the update of the UK Forestry Standard okay thank you those are a few questions there thank you so first of all generally there are some localized areas where seeding in of commercial species does occur we don't normally see that in all of our ancient woodlands of Scotland because of the fragmented nature and the location of those so that's the first thing although we do recognise that in some areas it is an issue as part of the forestry grant scheme we have something called a woodland improvement grant and a woodland improvement grant does a number of things part of that is habitat and species management improvement and that provides specific capital grant funding for the cost of removing conifer trees and unwanted species from within ancient woodland so provide a grant for that and this year the total grant is £1.8 million so I think we have that covered we don't see generally the call on that grant is for two things it's for fences to exclude deer and secondly for the exclusion of rhododendron ponticum invasive non-native species generally we don't see a lot but sorry it just declared it and that goes to that grants available to land owners to improve their and how's that publicised that that's the availability of that well we have the on scotland's forestry website and we have access to all the information about the grants and we have five conservancies in Scotland and I see as a willing officer to deal with customers and clients and inquiries on a regular basis thank you sorry I interrupted you that's fine thank you so the vast majority of that spend is on deer management through deer fencing and removal of rhododendron it's a capital grant on rhododendron so the biggest problem for us is that people technically rhododendron but because it's invasive it regrows and we're probably to think about a future grants scheme to ensure provide some funding for the management of regrowth not just the cutting in the first place so that was those two UK Forestry standard is a technical standard over the four administrations in the United Kingdom it's being reviewed currently and the latest version is due for release by December this year and by far the biggest issue and that is the percentage of native trees we're allowing in any other scheme so for example if someone wanted to plant conifers we always insisted at least 25% is made up of native tree species other more diverse conifers and open space and the biggest issue about the UKFS is are those proportions right and should we reduce the element of a single species and we have to balance that between sustainable economic growth in forestry and forestry contributes at least one billion gross value added to Scotland's economy so there's going to balance that's required in that discussion so I don't see the UKFS as the principal mechanism for resolving the impact on ancient woodlands it's Scottish Forestry strategy the implementation plan and working with delivery partners that will do that for us I suppose the question that comes to mind is why would and I probably do not know the answer to this but why would a landowner not wish to implement that best practice and what can we do to encourage them I was surprised to hear that a bit of community woodland was refused can we address that through stronger planning in terms of community benefit clauses do you have any thoughts on how we encourage those who don't wish to do the best to do the best because I do agree that the commercial forestry is important to our economy but we have to make sure it's not at a cost or too much of a cost I'm not aware of the specific case with which you refer to so I can come back on that if you provide me with the specific case in detail In terms of community error minister My name is McCallan I made it quite clear that what is really important as well as climate change mitigations and the biodiversity and the climate crisis is community engagement community benefit just transition community wealth building and so we're developing our public register which is a consultation mechanism around woodland creation and film permission and long-term forest plans to strengthen the community engagement through that by linking that to the Scottish land commission guiding the sun engaged communities around decisions on land that affect them and also land rights and responsibility statement in the land use legislation so we are seeking to do much more about much better much more integrated community engagement community benefit and woodland creation and sustainable forest management in future I don't there were guidelines for grants or well laid out on our website and so I don't know why a community group wouldn't be successful doesn't sound doesn't sound right that but I'm more than happy to follow that up if I can get the details thank you thank you thank you convener Irina Russell I noted you were nodding along quite a bit to some of that and I just wondered if you maybe wanted to contribute yes I'll contribute if you've given me the opportunity so for us in terms of the I'll just answer it a bit if that's okay on the encroachment of specific personal native species into ancient woodland sites the way we would view this issue the trust is that there are two parts to this issue there are plantations on ancient woodland sites so this is in the past it's not a practice that's being done at the moment so that is absolutely an improvement to the way to sustainable forest management in Scotland in the past native woods used to be under planted with conifers or ancients and that creates a plantation on an ancient woodland site so restoring these would bring these woods back to a being an ancient a restored ancient woodland so there's a pause issue that's what we call them an acronym that were planted with conifers there we need to to restore those so we have an example of that the woodland trust it's our site at Laughard cake that was planted it's a caledonian pine woodland as an NGO we're putting resource into that to restore it and that work is is on their way at the moment now there's also the issue of current sitcoms proceeding into ancient and native woods in particularly in an open habitat so that's an issue where we manage a site and the seed sources within our site we will address that issue and we'll remove it but I think also there's an issue of particularly around like bigger plantations or you have mature said because Bruce is very good at seeding all around then it gets into other people's sites for example I don't know that who you know the cost what should we kind of spend public money to remove someone else's seedlings so there might be grants available but and can you always go and find these trees before it's too late so there are there are concerns for us around this but it's the two plantations on ancient woodland sites we need to put clear targets in our biodiversity strategy that we can secure all of those sites and ensure they're not in critical condition by 2030 and you know by 2045 I think it is realistic to restore these or have them under restoration but there's also the issue of said cut seeding sometimes you know it's within our own sites and we can manage that but you know if it goes from another site to another one landowner to another I get this this issue there to to consider how that should be addressed okay Andrew Wetherall I think I'd really like to come in on that point that arena made for the woodland trust from an RSPB point of view so I like to think that we have quite a good join-up from from your the people invited into the room the stakeholders here around deer and rhododendrum so I think it's predominantly about the the issue of the invasive non-native conifers and that is an issue for peatland restoration as well in the flow country for example and on high conservation value open habitats so it's not it's not restricted to forestry and maybe it's a wider issue that needs to be considered elsewhere where the you know the principle of the polluter pays does not apply because it should apply but it doesn't apply because there is an exemption for these non-native conifers species because they're used in commercial forestry is is my understanding of it as far as the UK forestry standard goes I just wanted to make the point that I mean it's a it's a it's a a well-intentioned document that improves I think with every iteration of it and as stated it's going under it's under review at the moment so we look forward to to more changes around maximum of a single species and and other issues but one of the main challenges I think with the UK forestry standard is it kind of stops at the forest edge it is about the management of of the woodland not what's beyond which could be open habitat could be peatland restoration or it could be somebody else's ancient woodland so I think I think the issue is is wider than forestry in this interest instance more about this kind of land use strategy issues of which forestry is one important component so just to put the context there from our perspective Paul Sweeney Thank you convener this has been a really interesting discussion because I think it's establishing where the balance lies between positive incentives to do to undertake best practice and management and also whether there are sufficient penalties for malpractice and I think I'm interested to get the view of the group on where that balance should be lying I think the petitioner has presented an example from Margyll of a landowner a private landowner who had cleared 21 square metres of ancient woodland and I believe that they were reported to Forestry Scotland and that there was actually an enforcement exercise pursued but then apparently that has quietly been dropped I think that the penalty was something like £5,000 per tree felled I think that's the level penalty I levied but I'm more I'm concerned that in a quite an egregious breach of the 2018 act the enforcement wasn't pursued so I'm just is there a problem with enforcement and again to the point that was raised earlier on about the issue of public money being used to sort of clean up other people's mess are we actually got a bit of a perverse situation here where you know the community is cleaning up for private interests or profiting from the land but aren't contributing anything to cleaning up their contamination or bad practice so Claudia Rose first Ah thank you I think my microphone's working now I was just going to pick up the previous question so I haven't got an answer to Paul Sweeney's question about the regulation and incentives but just to pick up from our understanding about the impact of encroaching tree species from plantations the only evidence we've got is that while it does happen it's very relatively small impact so I just wanted to make that small clarification thank you it would someone like to pick up the Doug Henderson Doug Harrison thank you we certainly would not condone 21 hectares of clearance of ancient woodland so I just need to squirt out hectares sorry that would be that would be extreme yeah sorry yeah and B would always pursue that I mean if it had been consented through planning well then we would we would pursue for legal felling but if it's been consented through planning that tends to Trump legal felling process for us but what we do do is to place a restock direction on people who have felled ancient woodland and any woodland that's protected to ensure that they replant that woodland generally we like that to happen in a way that's been felled but sometimes it can happen in a separate location but not on an ancient woodland site so go for that that's helpful and how easy is it to enforce or compel the land owner or the landlord to comply with those instructions and illegal felling is a fairly difficult thing to gain to be successful on and so we need to choose our cases very carefully because we want to make sure we get a prosecution and part of the 2018 act that came into the Forest and Land Scotland Management Act 2018 which came into force on the 1st of April 2019 that does allow us on a majority of cases to issue a restock direction because it's so difficult to achieve a prosecution and you get into all manner of discussions like when is a tree dead and when is it alive you get into those kind of minutiae in a prosecution so the restock direction is a means to overcome those difficulties by saying even if we don't get a even if we decide not to prosecute you're going to issue a restock direction which is illegal compulsion on you to replant that they can appeal against the restock direction and then that can get a wee bit bogged down but it's another tool if you like for us to use to help protect not just the ancient wooden but all woodland that's helpful and I suppose that the issue I suppose with a restock is if you've fell the load of trees that have been around for centuries it's going to take another 100 years for them to recover that landscape to recover I suppose so it's a kind of you know feels that the damage is done sort of thing and it's a somewhat permanent basis at least in a human's lifetime well if we know that the fell is going to take place and we can get there before it's completed we can issue a stop notice a legally binding stop notice to stop any further activity if we don't know that the trees have been felled until it's happened we're as upset as anyone else is in an issue of woodland and the best we can do is to get that replanted as quickly as possible I mean ancient woodlands and native woodlands are special places there is a seed bank in the ground and so they will regenerate mother nature is a wonderful thing and they will regenerate but if we can get there before it happens we can issue a stop notice sorry it was just to as a supplementary convener do you think something like a fixed penalty scheme to immediately you know in place a financial penalty on an infringement of such a nature like we'd help to drive behaviours in a better way if there was a big if there was a beefy or a more robust sanction on bad practice it would probably drive behaviours as you said the prosecution is so difficult to achieve that you know you might end up in a situation where it's hardly a viable sanction and you're kind of trying to then kind of bolt the stable door after the horse has bolted something yeah I mean you know if we do manage to get a prosecution for legal fel and we got one or a couple of years ago in Grampian that person's a criminal record and they've been fining £5,000 so there is some I wouldn't like a criminal record so there is some teeth we do manage to get a prosecution but it's difficult okay thank you Irina Russell was keen to come in yes there was a point that was made earlier I think it was perhaps Doug made the point that if you have consent through planning permission you can go ahead and fell the word we've just said at the beginning of this that our planning protections policies are improving but the current protections are not afford enough protection and planning so it's just it really is a little bit unfair or maybe more than just a little bit that you know planning permission can actually trump you know the need to fell each woodland we also had cases because we get contacted by members of the public a lot on cases of suspected illegal felon we've had positive communications with Scottish Forestry colleagues in the Conservancies they've gone out and investigated as soon as possible or we're aware of cases where the communities you know they're eyes and ears on the ground they've let us know we've advised what to do go and contact Scottish Forestry they've gone in like serve those those stop notices of course ideally we don't get to that and we should have that aim and well communicated that we want to see no further loss of ancient woodland and we should think you know we need to do more to let people know that it is absolutely unacceptable to have loss of an irreplaceable habitat being ancient woodland on other irreplaceable habitats we're also aware of cases where you know I think the felling was considered too insignificant to kind of go to prosecutions and go through all the motions but generally we've had many cases where appropriate action was taken and it was just really helpful to work with colleagues in Scottish Forestry Conservancies on that so we've had positive experiences but I know not everybody has experienced that thank you I mean actually an hour has evaporated pretty quickly and before I bring this session to an end I'd just like to go back to each of you just for any reflections on the conversation we've had or a point that you think we've missed or not focused on enough that you would just like to leave us with a thought on and I haven't heard we haven't heard from Andy for a little while so Andy if I can come to you you've obviously been able to hear much of what's been being said is there anything you would like to leave us with as a final thought? Just to add to one or two things from the previous conversations when we were talking about private landowners and how they contribute to the management of ancient woodlands etc the grant scheme is well recognised for the woodland improvement grant and that's probably why most of our landowners are blind to to fence rather than do anything else it goes back to the recognition that herbivores are the kind of largest threat to the ancient woodland so if private woodland owner they are looking to fence out those there so that's why the woodland improvement grant is very important to us on the the incursion if you like of seed sourced introduced species will come whether it be spruce or hemlock or sicklemore in fact I was pleased at Claudia made the point that it is a local issue but it is not prevalent of course to the country but that's it the main point I wanted to make thank you very much Andy Andrew Weatherall yes thanks convener one of the questions that might have come up was about international example so I just wanted to say I didn't actually have any because I want Scotland to be the international example on this of leading on ancient woodland protection and improvement mine's a UK wide role with the RSPB and I'd like to be able to go into the other devolved nations and say look at Scotland especially following the Glasgow declaration on forests and land use which really prioritised conserving and improving natural woodlands and I just want to finish with the last point which is that it's the 30th anniversary of the earth summit in Rio this year principal threes dated the right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet development tool and environmental needs of present and future generations so my argument would be that the best time to protect and improve ancient woodlands was 30 years ago the next best time is right now thank you very much Claudia thank you I just think my last point will be to really re-emphasise I think the point that everyone's agreed about the high biodiversity value about how we welcome this petition coming forward and I think the other key point is a lot has been done to work on the protection and improvement of biodiversity but there's a lot more still to do and the next 10 years is going to be critical to make sure we implement the issues we've been discussing here to make sure that we do hold biodiversity loss the policies are in place and they're coming forward in the parliamentary programme the new environment bill is going to have statutory targets for nature which will also be important so I think the steps are there but it is going to need on-going scrutiny make sure we're all held to account and they're implemented excellent thank you very much Doug Howison thank you so first of all thank you to the petitioners and the committee for giving us a chance to have this conversation it's been really great to have this conversation so thank you for that secondly to thank Claudia and naturescot for reaching out to us to work together as delivery partners because the threat of deer to ancient woodlands is huge and we've got to get to the bottom of that and then the third page is to say to you is the committee if you haven't spent any time in an ancient or native woodland go to native woodland native woodsry survey of Scotland on the internet and find your local ancient woodland and go and stand in it it's fantastic thank you and out of interest where is the nearest native ancient woodland to where we are just now it's probably on outskirts of Edinburgh maybe we will have all for an outdoor outing that might actually be quite useful to us and finally if I can come to arena Russell well I guess on that point I could extend an invitation to Woodland Trust sites to the committee should you wish to have an outing so we'd be delighted to host you and we have your privilege to look after sites up and down Scotland so please visit including rainforests it's just really fantastic to see okay I'm really glad to see there's agreement on the deer management issue and we all stand ready to work together it will require a collaborative effort to do this we'd like to see a policy aim for no further loss of ancient woodland and as Claudia from NatureScot also noted we have the upcoming biodiversity strategy we'd really like to see not just ancient woodlands but all of nature and biodiversity better prioritised and better funding if you're really to address and reverse nature's decline but we should see where we need to see targets to protect and restore our ancient woods and that biodiversity strategy it's our next best opportunity we also have the opportunity to implement or include legal protections for ancient woodlands in our upcoming environment bill it's expected in the third year of this parliament and we are really grateful for that commitment to bring forward a bill with nature restoration targets we welcome the commitments made by government around Scotland's rainforest ancient woodland register deer management and like I said before we're all weighed in we want to collaborate we want to provide expertise as a leading environmental NGO and you know parliament needs to ensure ongoing scrutiny of these issues and implementations of and delivery of these commitments and finally I'm really grateful that I had the opportunity to give evidence to you today and it's been lovely to be back in parliament after too long actually so thank you and thank you all very much that's actually been incredibly helpful and I quite like the idea that we're coming into the summer that's why I quite like the idea of actually sensing the thing for ourselves because it's something I think potentially we all think we know about we all certainly have an investment in it and it would be I think from everything we've heard there are some serious issues underpinning this petition that I think the committee will want to reflect on in the light of all the evidence you've given us this morning and in the evidence we've heard from the petitioners so can I thank you all those of you who have come those of you who have been joining us virtually that's been very helpful and I now suspend this meeting of parliament of the committee again briefly okay and let's continue now with the balance of agenda item 1 which is the consideration of continuing petitions petition number 1856 supporting the taxi trade petition lodged by Pat Rafferty on behalf of Unite members will recall the petition calls on Scottish Parliament's urges the Scottish Government to protect the future of the taxi trade by providing financial support to taxi drivers setting up a national stakeholder group with trade union driver representatives reviewing low emissions standards and implementation dates and at our last meeting of the committee we agreed to write to key stakeholders seeking information directly from those in the sector in particular the committee sought figures on the number of taxi licence holders prior to the Covid-19 pandemic and the current number and we've received responses so far from 12 local authorities and the Scottish Taxi Federation and five of those local authorities provided details of taxi and private operator figures which indicated that there were 3,748 operators before the pandemic and that has now fallen to 3,258 this illustrates a reduction of 490 with four out of five local authorities seeing a reduction on the number of operators in the area 12 local authorities provided details of taxi and private driver licences which indicated that there were a totally of 11,436 licences before the pandemic but now 9,348 and that's a reduction of 2,088 with 11 out of 12 local authorities seeing a reduction in driver licences nearly 20% which is pretty significant the Scottish Taxi Federation's response highlights a number of other issues for their members including an aging workforce I think I read taxi drivers are in their mid 50s now and increasingly older than still low emission zones and what impact it may have on the viability of many of the taxis that have been the investment of their owners and the high cost of low emission zone compatible vehicles and I imagine although it hasn't been suggested in advance of today's meeting but a very immediate challenge could well be the price of fuel which we know is going to be affected by the current international situation so in the light of all of that I certainly found my own local authority reduction in taxis quite significant given the challenges there are post pandemic for the restoration of bus services and also rail services that there was a 20% reduction in number of available taxis and that this could become an increasingly difficult to obtain and even more expensive option I think there are some really serious issues underpinning all of this here that do colleagues of any comments or suggestions as to how we might proceed Paul Sweeney sorry I thought you were good I don't know if you were actually well I just I thought I put on record a written question that I'd submitted to the Scottish Government on the question I submitted was to ask the Scottish Government whether it would consider providing grants to support taxi drivers to upgrade their cars to sustainable low-emissions vehicles I understand one of the big issues currently facing taxidrivers in Glasgow is the imminent implementation of a low emission zone in the city centre and certainly the petitioner the trade union represent taxidrivers in the city you know which I remember sort of did the clear of interest has indicated this could significantly reduce further the already difficult situation facing the taxi trade so reducing numbers further potentially killing the trade all together in the city I know certainly from any dole experience that it's very difficult to get a taxi in Glasgow especially on weekends when it's busy so just to indicate on the record what the Scottish Government said in reply to my written question they said that the Scottish Government currently offers a number of funding schemes through Transport Scotland to support businesses including taxi owners make the shift to low and zero emissions vehicles applications for these funds can be made through the energy saving trust to administer the schemes on our behalf the available support includes the switched on taxi loan scheme which offers an interest free loan of up to £120,000 to enable taxi owners and operators to replace their current vehicle with an eligible ultra-low emission vehicle the low emission zone LEZ retrofit fund for taxi owners operating within LEZs this provides up to 80% grant funding to replace existing diesel engines to meet the Euro 6 standard for driving within a low emission zone the grant provides up to £10,000 per wheelchair accessible taxi installing re-powering technology or £5,000 per taxi installing exhaust after treatment systems and the low emission zone support fund which is available to eligible micro businesses and sole traders including tax operators operating within a 20km radius of a low emission zone the fund provides a £2,500 grant towards a safe disposal of non-compliant vehicles as an incentive to take older and more polluting vehicles off the road so those are the schemes available what I would suggest is that some of them for example the first one that switched on taxi loan scheme sounds like that would meet will meet the cost of a vehicle replacement but the other ones don't seem to come close to meeting the actual capital outlay that a driver might face in trying to replace a vehicle that doesn't meet the standard so I think there's a gap there that needs to be interrogated And one of the suggestions before us is that we might actually have an evidence session around this petition at a later date which might allow us to bring that point in Alexander Stewart I would agree with that convener I think an evidence session would be really very important I was surprised and also shocked at the number across the local authorities I mean obviously night time economy and other packs in communities have had an impact but there is a massive erosion here of this industry and it would be really useful for us to collect some information from the Federation themselves to come and the petitioner to give us an update as to where this is because as I say it's if it's not stopped or if it's not it's supported then there could be a massive issue in some communities the length and breadth of Scotland in the demise of taxes And I think I would still like to hear from some of the other local authorities too that we've not heard from so far because there are some big local authorities involved in all of that as well David Torrance Thank you convener I just put it on record and I'm going to bring that point up at the 12 local authorities who did their point to call for evidence that I'd like to thank them for that Now if 32 local authorities that's pretty poor we all have licensing boards in place I support the call for evidence to bring them before the committee but I'd also like to write to the Scottish Government to highlight the decrease in taxi drivers by 20% to see what they would be able to do or in two are they going to monitor the situation and see what they could do to encourage people back into the taxi business Yeah I think that on the light of the submissions that we've received identifying the reduction it would be useful I think to actually draw that evidence we've obtained to the Scottish Government so that they are aware of it but yes I agree there are local taxi licensing boards and so I would have expected that we would get a fuller response so are we content that at some later date I mean we have quite a full schedule ahead but I think this is going to be an on-going issue that we'll seek to have an evidence session around the issues raised by the petition thank you Petition number 1866 is to introduce legislation to improve bus travel for wheelchair users in lodged by Daryl Cooper and the petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce legislation so that wheelchair users can face frontwards when travelling on a bus at our last consideration the committee agreed to write to Pam Duncan Glancy MSPs to see curve using the petition and I'm pleased to say we have a response from Pam which sets out a number of issues for wheelchair users attempting to access bus services including a lack of accessible buses that can lower to allow wheelchairs on board no seating at some bus stops meaning people with mobility problems cannot wait for the bus without being actually in quite significant pain or distress while attempting that poor joined up transport meaning that some routes are only partly accessible by a bus but not the balance of the route only one wheelchair user being allowed in a bus at a time meaning that wheelchair users using couples or friends have to then split up and that of course can be very unhelpful at the best of times but if you're travelling late at night is particularly challenging for wheelchair users so I think we were slightly unimpressed with the responses we received prior to writing to Pam Duncan Glancy I think we thought there was a bit of fudge in some of what we'd heard do members of any comments or suggestions in relation to this just now? Ruth Maguire I think this is a really important matter Pam Duncan Glancy's response showed that it warrants a full investigation and I wonder if that might be a subject matter committee for them to take on whether that be the Transport Committee or the Equalities and Human Rights Committee I don't know but I think it would be helpful for a committee of this Parliament to properly and fully investigate this Are members content if we ask the clerks just to sound out and see whether there's any indication that one of the appropriate subject committee might be able to take this on and do a bit more work with it? Paul Sweeney Yeah, I agree with that convener and I also just wanted to emphasise that there are provisions in the 2019 Transport Act to provide additional conditionality on operators to adhere to certain standards whether it's through bus service improvement partnerships franchising although I don't believe the franchising scheme is established in Scotland as of yet or direct public ownership in the case of Lothian buses for example which is owned by the councils of Edinburgh what I would suggest is perhaps asking the Scottish Government what additional scope there is to introduce conditionality on operators to adhere to standards that improve accessibility I think there's definitely leverage given the significant amount of public subsidy of the industry to attach better conditions Paul Sweeney Great, okay fine, thank you Okay, petition number 1870 to ensure teachers of autistic pupils are appropriately qualified petition lodged by Edward Fowler calling on the Scottish Government to introduce legislation requiring teachers of autistic pupils to be appropriately qualified in order to improve educational outcomes and the petitioner points out that special conditions apply to the employment of teachers of hearing impaired and visually impaired pupils noting that teachers are required to obtain appropriate qualifications The petitioner suggests that the same principle should be applied to those teachers working with pupils of autism and we last considered this at the beginning of December and we agreed to write to the teaching unions we've received a response from the NASUWT and from the petitioner the union notes that initial teacher education is just one element in supporting the wellbeing of pupils and that improved initial teacher education will not provide a quick fix on its own to guarantee that appropriate ASN support is available to all schools, teachers and learners across Scotland It also notes that initial teacher education already covers a wide range of issues and in order to add a new topic in consideration would need to be made of which existing topic to remove So the submission also highlights pressures on teachers arising from an ongoing reduction in special support for pupils with additional support needs including in relation to managing challenging behaviour in classrooms Any submission of the petitioner points to a wider issue which he believes is that pupils are becoming overwhelmed in mainstream classrooms and really they are there unable to cope and the petitioner explains that many teachers are just not sufficiently trained to manage children with autism and co-occurring conditions and says that without the right support and strategies this can trigger some challenging behaviours and the petitioner believes that the system at the moment is failing both the teachers and the children Do any members have any comments they would like to make? Alexander Stewart I have a great deal of sympathy convener with the petitioner indicating and also with the union who have identified and it obviously is a much larger issue for schools today to have a number of individuals within the classroom who require additional support to do their mainstream education but in doing that it has a detrimental effect potentially on the rest of the class and I think that the petitioner makes some very strong views on all of this and I'm aware within my own local authorities in my own region that there are issues specifically with this so I do believe that there's a lot more that could be looked into and it would be useful to write to the Scottish Government to ascertain what is the assessments that are taking place within the teacher training and the way going forward and the guidance that's produced to help recognise the links between the communication needs of certain children and the behaviour that takes place within the classroom because the strain on the teachers is immense I mean there was a question on the last weekend at First Minister's Questions about the knock-on effect in Aberdeen that was happening and the report that had appeared that there was daily situations in classrooms because of children with specific needs that weren't being addressed and the burden that was putting on to the teacher and a large number of them were contemplating leaving the profession because of that so I do think that there is real scope for us to look at this Any other comments or suggestions? So are we happy to proceed on that basis? I think we could write to the Scottish Government then seeing whether it intends to undertake a child rights impact assessment into initial teacher training and CPD if it continues professional development for teachers to ensure that the needs of all children with additional support needs including those with autism are being met and to produce guidance for teachers along the lines that Alexander Stewart was just discussing there We content with that, colleagues? We are Petition number 1871 which is a full review of mental health services which has been lodged by Karen McCown on behalf of Shining Lights for Change The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to our Scottish Government to carry out a full review of mental health services in Scotland to include the referral process crisis support, risk assessments, safe plans and to create services working together first response support and the support available to families affected by suicide Members may be aware that this petition arose from the petition's own experience The petition's partner Luke died by suicide in 2017 after asking for mental health support up to eight times in the week before his death and I remember we were quite affected by the submission as received when we first considered it Once again, Monica Lennon MSP is joining us having an interest in the petition I'll come to Monica in a moment At the last consideration of the petition the committee agreed to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care and key stakeholders and we've received several detailed responses which I'll try to summarise very briefly In his response the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care highlights how the Scottish Government plans to improve mental health support across Scotland including providing additional funding improving our systems work together and establishing service standards and investing in community support for adults The Scottish Government and COSLA will publish a new suicide prevention strategy in September of this year which will be accompanied by an initial action plan A lived experience panel is also being set up so that people who lived with lived experience can advise on and inform mental health policy development In its submission the Scottish Association for Mental Health suggests that almost one in four adults continue to wait longer than four months to access psychological therapies Sam H's research into service users' experiences of mental health services during the pandemic revealed that over a quarter of respondents indicated that their specialist treatment and support had stopped altogether because of the pandemic I'm an experience of my own constituents so I'm sure that is probably quite widely the experience of MSPs too The petitioners provided two further written submissions to the committee The first summarises a freedom of information request she made to NHS Lanarkshire and that revealed that 74 per cent of patients were not admitted to hospital after attending A&E for mental health reasons and the second is in response to the cabinet secretary for health and social care's submission The petitioner states that whilst she welcomes the increased funding it's actually crucial to establish how this funding will now be used noting that a review is necessary the review being the aim of the petition is necessary to determine which areas are failing and need reconstructed she also suggests that a specialist crisis centre for mental health is needed and I wonder if Monica Lennon would like to contribute further at this point Monica Lennon Thank you very much convener and to the committee for having me back I'm really grateful for the work that's been done and the submissions that have been made and I welcome much of what the cabinet secretary has also said I had a brief chat with her in this morning we're in regular contact and she's really grateful for the committee's attention to the petition and she knows that that you all understand because of your own local experience helping constituents I was quite struck by some of the comments I think if I can look at the SAMH response it really stands out that they're saying that recovering and renewing the previous system will not be good enough and I think they're absolutely correct with that and I think the Royal College of Psychiatrists again, I've made some really important points and they talk about needing a radical refresh of the current mental health strategy and importantly they talk about the experience of the workforce who are already stretched who are already very tired and exhausted and we know that burnout is a real issue for clinicians and people on the front line of healthcare roles I do hope that the petition can be kept open and that we can do everything possible to make sure that people don't fall through the gaps I think that the Government clearly have good intentions but I think that there are legitimate questions about the additional resource how that will be used I think that I go back to that point that SAMH make so eloquently about we have to do more than just recover and renew what the system was like before because we know the system was far from perfect we know that sadly too many people have fallen into crisis deeper into crisis and for many that has results in them losing their lives so we know that suicides can be prevented so really just here to again offer my support to my very courageous constituent Karen McEwen Karen has been a real rock to many other people who have found themselves in a similar dark place and her loss nothing will ever make up for that Karen will not mind me saying as well that for her and her young children after Luke's death it has been a battle it is an on-going battle to get support Karen's son has autism her daughter has required on-going support and I just want to be honest with the committee because I do represent people who rely on NHS Lanarkshire and the support isn't always there the waiting times are excursiating that's not unique to Lanarkshire as you know so we have to keep everything on the table and we have to let people right across Scotland know that there is no complacency on here people's lives absolutely are worse more than any amount of money but I think the points that are being made by Karen about making sure that the money and resources get into the right places and continue to listen to lived experience and that includes many of the workforce who also have their own mental health issues so again really really grateful to the committee for all your time I know you get a lot of petitions this one is relevant to absolutely everybody in Scotland and again I know no matter what happens next Karen is going to continue fighting to make sure that the system improves no one falls through the gaps and those statistics that Kevin are read out you know Karen is beavering away on her own freedom of information request but we know that when people present at A&E and don't get the help the needs we know that that is an appalling missed opportunity and there is a space I think to provide more specialist support to try and make sure that we have a trauma informed response right across the board but thank you so much for listening today thank you very much Monica and it is extraordinary in many respects when I first came to this Parliament in 2007 so much of the discussion we were having in the chamber was about the destigmatisation of mental health many of the mental health charities and organisations changed their names to become more accessible all of which was designed really in destigmatising mental health issues to encourage more people to come forward and I think the problem we have is that notwithstanding the expansion of services that there may have been the willingness now of people to come forward with quite acute mental health conditions that probably previously they didn't it means that in some very acute situations the help just isn't there as a consequence not I think we all assume it is but I think you know the evidence is increasingly that the pressure on all of this is very very considerable do any colleagues have any comments or suggestions as to how we might proceed David Torrance thank you convener the petition is very important but can I ask Clarex if he could check the work programme of health, social care and sport committee because if they're going to do an inquiry in it I would like to pass it on to there and if the petitioner if they are doing it if the petitioner could give evidence to that thank you that seems perfectly sensible but notwithstanding that if they're not then I would be very keen that I actually invite the petitioner to come to the committee I think we would want to hear from the cabinet secretary from health and social care about the issues underlying the petition which is to have a full review of mental health services I think we might also be interested to know from the petitioner what her view is in relation to the recruitment of the lived experience panel which is being established and to highlight that potentially as a very active opportunity for participation is there any other suggestion colleagues would like to make or are we content to proceed in that twin track Monica Lennon thank you very much and we'll keep the petition open and find out where we go from here based on any work that might be being done elsewhere in the Parliament thank you petition 1904 changed scots law to disqualify strange spouses from making claims in an estate lodged by Christina Fisher calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to define in law the difference between a legally married cohabiting couple and a legally married non-cohabiting couple for the purposes of ensuring that an estranged spouse cannot inherit their spouse's assets at last consideration we agreed to write the law society to the family law association the faculty of advocates and the Scottish law commission and we've received some very detailed submissions from the Scottish law commission and the law society of Scotland which have been very helpful members have had sight of both of these submissions on their papers so I don't need to repeat in detail what was said but some general points from the Scottish law commission explaining that no legal definition of estrangement for the purpose of scots family law when spouses and civil partners separate there is no change of legal status until the divorce or their civil partnership is dissolved and the commission notes that many couples who separate reach agreement on financial matters before that divorce or dissolution the law society advises that in its response to Scottish government's 2019 consultation on succession law it suggested a solution might be to use the test of living together as husband and wife or civil partners before the surviving spouse could inherit where there was no will to resolve current anomalies and this submission acknowledges this test may be unfair to couples separated due to one partner being in long term care the law society of Scotland law suggests that there may be merit in considering the potential introduction of a time requirement before excluding a survivor's prior rights and legal rights and the submission notes that it is open to anyone to alter the terms of their will following a separation should they wish to do so the law society of Scotland also notes that while there may be situations where a deceased person had no longer intended or wished for a separated spouse or civil partner to benefit from their estate but they had not amended their will accordingly that such hard cases would not merit altering the law given the impact that might have more widely so a recognition of the issue but clearly a view that tackling it might have much wider ramifications than the actual injustice potentially being addressed would merit Do colleagues have any comments or suggestions? David Torrance Dwi'n syrchu'n gwybod i'r gwaith ysgolwyr yn ddod i'r gwaith ymddangos i gael y gwaith ymddangos mae'n ddod i'r gwaith i'r gwaith ymddangos i'r 15.7 o'r ddod i'r gwaith i'r gwaith i'r gwaith i'r gwaith i'r gwaith i'r gwaith i'r gwaith i'r gwaith i'r gwaith i'r gwaith i'r gwaith i'r gwaith any other suggestions we content with that? Yeah, I think we will I mean it's an important issue but I think given also that the legal experts don't support at the moment action then I think we want to just ask the Scottish Government what more it's going to do potentially and close the petition at this stage. Agenda item number two is the consideration of new petitions and the first of them is petition number 1923 to align the higher rate tax threshold to £37,501 in line with the rest of the UK inviting the Petitions Committee to set the Government's budget in part and it's been lodged by Peter Watson and I know that this threshold was correct at the time the petition was submitted the petitioner believes that this should happen due to the recent uplift on the block grant for Scotland and notes that the increased revenue to individuals and families will be recycled through the economy creating growth whilst rewarding hardworking people In its submission the Scottish Government explains that while the UK Government announced what was described as a significant increase in the block grant for Scotland in real times it believes it believes there has been a cut in day-to-day funding in each year of the spending review The Scottish Government goes on to state that it does not support the action called for on the petition as it believes this will provide a tax break to hiring complainers while disproportionately affecting those on lower incomes Do the committee have any views? David Torrance In the submission from the Scottish Government it highlights that it would lose £552 million to invest in public services It also says that it does not support what the petitioners call for so I do not think that there is anywhere for the petitioner's committee to take us so I am quite happy to close it under a rule 15.7 of standing orders I guess I might take issue with the Scottish Government's justification for not taking the action forward but I think it's pretty clear that the Scottish Government does not intend to and in the absence of any willingness from the Scottish Government to consider the aims of the petition I'm minded to endorse the suggestion that we'll close the petition Does that meet with the support of the committee? It does, thank you Petition 1924 to complete an emergency in-depth review of women's health services in Caithness in Sutherland lodged by Rebecca Weimer The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to complete an emergency in-depth review of women's health services in Caithness in Sutherland Petitioner believes, at states rather, that she believes there is a highland gynaecology crisis which predates Covid with funding funneled into Orkney or Inverness She believes that serious conditions such as ovarian cancer are potentially being missed due to a lack of specialist training for GPs and notes that there are currently no miscarriage menopause or fertility services available in the area Petitioner also highlights the logistical difficulties associated with patients from Caithness having to travel to Rhaigmoor hospital for help along roads that are often closed or dangerous to drive In his submission the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care submissions explains that the Minister for Public Health women's health and sport is actively engaging with her constituents on the issues raised in this petition and has now arranged to meet with NHS Highlands senior management and clinicians to discuss the delivery of gynaecology services and will feed back progress to her constituents The cabinet secretary's submission also provides further information on scoping work for the creation of Centre of Excellence for Rural and Remote Medicine and Social Care a community midwifery unit currently being built at Caithness General Hospital improvements to maternity and neonatal units at Rhaigmoor hospital in Inverness and co-ordination between transport and other agencies to explore how access to healthcare can be improved specifically in relation to the A9 and A99 In her submission the petitioner reiterates that all women need access to a gynaecologist and states that to her knowledge no in-person gynaecology appointments have taken place at Caithness General since 2019 and the petitioner is concerned that the cabinet secretary is unaware of how bad the situation with roads is in reality She also suggests that the rural unit framework is incredibly successful for MRI machines breast screening, cancer screening and more recently vaccination clinics She suggests that it might include appointments with a gynaecology nurse or consultant to filter out who needs to be on a surgical list and who could be treated in the short term to reducing waiting lists across the board Do members of any comment or suggestions? Ruth Maguire Convener, we are at a future evidence session hearing a number of petitions about healthcare in Caithness and I would suggest that we invite the petitioner to join us there and we examine them all in that one session while they are individually important and distinct I think that it is all part of the same theme and it would be helpful to speak to everyone together Indeed we are We have three petitions I think 1845, 1890, 1915 that touch on parallel issues so I think that would be a very sensible suggestion Are we content to combine this petition with those others that we are hearing in relation to Caithness and to take matters forward on that basis We are Thank you Our final new petition this morning is 1925 which is bringing the HGV speed limit on our major trunk roads to 50mph in line with other parts of the UK it's been lodged by David Singleton who points out that in Scotland the increase the speed limit is now 40mph and is urging us to urge the Scottish Government to limit to increase this limit to 50mph so it's consistent The Scottish Government states that in 2018 it conducted its own evaluation of the potential impacts of increased speed limits for HGVs in Scotland and found that there were small safety benefits and marginal environmental impacts in doing so A pilot scheme which increased the speed limit for HGVs to 50mph on the A9 showed positive road safety benefits so the Scottish Government is currently considering its policy and HGV speed limits as part of the national speed management review while this review is already commenced it will consider appropriate vehicle speeds for Scotland's roads and will include stakeholder and public consultation The petitioner however remains unconvinced that the Scottish Government is planning to increase the HGV speed limit on major trunk roads and he urges Scottish Government officials to travel with the driver of an HGV on the 100 mile A75 trunk road in both directions on the same day one way at 40 miles per hour limit and the other at the higher speed where it is safe to do so and the petitioner believes that in doing this it will give officials some idea of the problems caused by slow moving traffic and some comfort in relation to an increase in the speed limit so I mean it's interesting this one because the petitioner has highlighted something that the Scottish Government is looking at but he's not convinced that it's necessarily going to lead to anything do members of any comments or suggestions for action Can I suggest maybe even Sorry, David Towns I was going to suggest the way I mean the Scottish Government says it's having a view I think we might reasonably ask for some clarity as to when they think all of this might come to some fruition and maybe ask if there is any way in which the petitioner or others can engage with the Scottish Government in relation to the issues that are underlying I'm not sure the Scottish Government want to take up the offer of an HG lift up and down the A75 but I'm sure we would be very happy to draw that to their attention but are we content with that colleagues? We are Thank you very much It's been a long morning it's been a great morning too with our youngest ever petitioner a very sensible and I think worthwhile discussion on woodlands and a consideration of a number of important petitions can I thank everybody for their participation and confirm that the next meeting will take place on the 23rd of March we have a brief item to discuss in private session but I now close the public session Thank you