 Mae'r cyddysgu'r cyddiogel? Fy gydigodd yn gallu gwirioneddau ar y cerdd, the third meeting of the standards procedures and public appointments committee for 2022. Before we move to our first agenda item, I'd like to welcome our newest member, Colette Stevenson. Welcome to the committee, Colette. I would like to give you this opportunity to declare any relevant interests that you may have. Thank you, convener, and good morning to all the members and the clerks here today. I will make you aware that I am currently a setting councillor in South Lanarkshire Council. Thank you. Thank you very much and welcome to the committee. Collette Stevens is joining us to replace Elena Whitham and I would like to put on record my thanks for the work that Elena has done with this committee and seek the committee's approval to write to her to thank her for her time spent with us. Are we in agreement with that? Excellent, thank you very much. We now move to agenda item 1. Mae ystafell unig oid i gilydd y cyd-dweud o amser i gyd o ddoeithio ymweld Nghymru, cyd-dweud o ddoeithio cyd-dweud o'r cyfgaredd cyd-dweud o'r ffordd o gyd yn ffwylio'r rwyngoedd yn grwysig i ffwylio a'r cyd-dweud iawn. Sw HIV, ynw'n ddod writerthau cychydig ac yn gyffredig. Mae'n ddysgu ymlaen nhw. Felly,'r rwy'n cael ei chynnig o'r grwysig, a wnaeth ni nhw eu gwirionedd a'r plwyddedig Rwy'n mwy ffawr yr edrych CPC G i'n ymwylo sy'n iawn i'Svals, ac rwy'n meddwl i'r ぜerfodraeth Serf Genial Crowe Johnson MSP, gan ddarlwg yn ddiwedd ac yn ddiwedd i'ch gwneud i fynd arall. Yr gael yn exec, Jamie. Rydw i'n ddarlwg yn ddiwedd ac yn ddarlwg yn ddiwedd i'r llwyth mewn teimlo o defnydd. Diolch yn ddim yn ddylayr. Thank you, convener. Can I take this opportunity to thank Sam Currie and the clacking team for all her support in getting the proposed CPG on islands to this stage? In an area of considerable interest for the Parliament in recent years and for those of us who were here in the last session, the islands Act was a significant step forward with its aim of re-establishing the relationship between Scotland-wide public bodies and island communities. The legislation was part of a broader recognition of the distinctive status, challenges and opportunities that our island communities have within Scotland. There is certainly a great deal of diversity between these areas, some are represented by island authorities, some are connected with mainland local authorities, some have considered really better links to mainland Scotland than others, some have benefited from growth in recent decades while others have faced problems around depopulation. However, what seems clear to me is that there is a great deal to be gained through collaboration, sharing of experiences and working to make this Parliament better aware of the island perspective. The CPCG would seek to be a forum for discussion of issues relevant to those islands and to improve their links to the Scottish Parliament. An initial meeting was held on 14 December, with five MSPs in attendance and representatives sent by a number of others. We have had an interest expressed from parties across the Parliament. I was also keen to ensure that it was not focused just on the highlands and islands, as a number of important island communities exist in other regions too. Discussion was held during that meeting in December on potential areas of work, highlighting island transport, particularly ferries, energy and wider issues of depopulation and impact on island economies. There was broad agreement that a future policy, at least hybrid meetings, would be beneficial with the aim of increasing participation for those organisations and individuals that are distant from Edinburgh. There is an existing all-party parliamentary group on the islands that a number of MSPs with Scotland's constituencies are involved in. It would be my hope that some of the collaboration could be explored as we go forward, potentially with meetings with that UK group. There will naturally be some areas of overlap. Issues such as sustainable transport and energy will be areas of interest across Scotland. It is my hope that the proposed CPCG will bring a uniquely islands-based perspective on those matters. Thank you very much, Jamie. Can I now open up to the committee if any members have any questions for Jamie? Over to you, Bob. Thank you very much, Mr Johnson. I'm just looking at the Perth to Cross Party group. As a city MSP, quite far away from islands, I thought what might interest in myself being relation to the Perth to Cross Party group. I thought about the vital aspects of tourism for many island communities. I'm just wondering if that idea of sustainable tourism but also responsible tourism for which everyone in Scotland and beyond has a responsibility to be aware of and make sure that when we visit island communities that we are respectful of that tourism, sustainable, might that be something that the Cross Party group may consider at some point in the future? That's a very good question. There are a number of examples across the Highlands and Islands region in particular where island communities face real pressure from the impact of a very successful tourism offerings, but that creates uniquely island issues. For example, capacity on ferries being stretched and sometimes the case of local people and local businesses don't have access, but it is a wider issue than that. As I say, I think that there will be overlap in other Cross Party groups. I would certainly hope to work with other Cross Party groups where we think that there are areas of potential collaboration, but our approach is looking at those from a distinctly islands perspective because often those solutions are different for us in the island communities than perhaps they are in other parts of Scotland. Thank you, Bob. Thank you, Jamie. Can I just ask about the organisations that were listed in your application? The application came in before Christmas and there is a substantial list of interested bodies, but it states that at that moment none were formally intending to affiliate to the CPG. Has that position changed in the interim or are you still waiting to hear because I know there are a lot of bodies that clearly have been invited? Yes, we have obviously. There are some areas where the interest has been discussed but not formalised yet. I think that the key thing for us was to be able to go through the process and make sure that, albeit and hopeful, the Cross Party group will get the approval today that we can go with a clear agenda and timelines and also help some of those bodies to be part of that development certainly in terms of some of the policy areas that we cover. This has been quite a long process over the period. It has not just been from this parliamentary session at the back of conversations with different groups in my previous four years as an MSP. It is also going even beyond that as a candidate and somebody just lives in the island. We know that the interests there, firming it up as it were, will be the next process and making sure that those organisations that want to take part can do. That list is not exhausted if there are other organisations from the Highlands and Islands particularly that want to be involved that they are given the opportunity to as well. Excellent. Thank you for attending today, Jamie. The committee will formally consider whether to approve the application for recognition at agenda item 3 and the clerks will be in touch with you after that decision. I thank you for attending the committee this morning. Many thanks. The next group we will consider is a proposed CPG on rugby development in Scotland. I welcome Douglas Lumsden MSP, who is the proposed convener of the proposed group to the meeting. I confess as a new member of Parliament that I was surprised to discover that this Parliament did not have a cross-party group focusing on rugby. Scotland has such a long history with the game, some years better than others. I always like to point out that we are still the holders of the five nations tournament back in 1999. I am sure that I always will be. It should be important for that contribution to our cultural history and our future development that this should be recognised by a cross-party group in this Parliament. Rugby is changing. I looked back. The first ever international rugby match was played on 27 March 1871 at Rayburn Place in Edinburgh. Scotland beat England that day, and it was amazing the scope was 1-0. It shows you how much the game has changed. That was in front of 4,000 people, and hopefully that is something that could be replicated again in a couple of weeks' time. As I said, the game has changed completely since then. The game is now a game for everyone. We have seen the incredible emergence of women's rugby and clan rugby, and we have seen safety standards increase. The professionalism of the game is there now, but it is still important that the grass-suit game is protected and evolves. The cross-party group invites the Parliament to consider that development and how we can go further and make the game more inclusive and make sure that it is as safe as possible in the years to come. I am pleased to have two key partners on board with this group, the Scottish Rugby Union, who is providing secretariat support to the group and the School of Hard Knocks. There is a fantastic charity that uses rugby to support young people in Scotland. I thank you again for the committee's time this morning, and I am happy to answer any questions that the committee has. Excellent. Thank you very much, Douglas. Does any members of the committee have any questions for Douglas? Bob, pass over to you. Just a brief question, convener. I should point out that my first ever engagement with the cross-party groups in this Parliament was sporting-related, because the first ever email I received as an MSP in 2007 was from the late David McLeach for a cross-party group in Golff. There is a long tradition in this Parliament of sporting cross-party groups. My interest in this cross-party group is the involvement of the School of Hard Knocks, because I have seen first hand in my constituency in Maryhill and Springburn, how they have worked with local partners to get not just young people but various sections of society that otherwise would not think about rugby as a sport for them, to use it as a way of doing team building, team bonding, learning skills and even sign posting to college for further education opportunities. It would just be an appeal that should this cross-party group receive recognition if you do any work in relation to work in deprived communities and vulnerable groups, I think that there is a wider range of MSPs would be interested in following that, even for not-to-formal members of the cross-party group, because the School of Hard Knocks comes with a really strong reputation. No, I absolutely agree and I am delighted to have them on board. As I say, the key intention for this group is to get more and more people involved with rugby. The School of Hard Knocks is probably using rugby as a medium to engage more with different people that might not think about rugby in that way and really trying to improve their lives and try to improve their outcomes. I mentioned clan rugby as well and that was something that I was not aware of before I became a member of Parliament. That is really trying to involve people with disabilities, whether that is physical disability or learning disability, trying to engage with them, to try and get them involved in clubs and mixing with people without disabilities and just the whole camaraderie together. I think that the work that they are doing as well is really key. As a cross-party group, we can engage a lot more with the School of Hard Knocks. I think that that is good and engaging with the clan rugby side as well, just to make sure that we can get everyone working together just to try and improve outcomes. You touched a bit on inclusive. I looked at the members list, and I note that it is all males. I was just wondering what you are doing along with the fellow members on there to attract more female members into the group to increase inclusivity in that. You are right, and it occurred to me at the time when I put that application in. I am happy to report that I have recruited another member to the CPG. Jackie Dunbar has agreed to join us as well. I managed to rope Jackie in. That is something that I am aware of. Looking at the groups that are involved, there has been, from our initial meeting that we had before, the group is formalised. There are suggestions about whether there are women's rugby clubs that we can try and get involved as well. That will be addressed. Thank you Douglas for picking up on the gender issue. I am a bit more of a hockey player, which probably detracts me a little bit from joining the rugby. I am very aware of the benefits of team sport and how that can be a great leveler and tackling the qualities. With all the connections that I have, even with rugby clubs in Edinburgh, I would be delighted, because Cury Chieftons have a great women's set-up, and I know that women's rugby in the city is thriving, and Spartans all sorts of things. That is good to hear. Maybe I have a new member already, convener. I will dip in and out, Douglas. Careful who you poach. I suppose just to follow up on both of that. Obviously, School of Hard Knocks, which rightly has been spoken of very favourably this morning, and SRU are the two organisations that are named. I am assuming that you would be looking to other organisations, and I was thinking particularly at club level for input on that. Yes, that is something that we spoke about as well. It is not all about the international game, it is about the grass-suits, and we are talking to local clubs as well to get them involved. That is very helpful. I thank you for attending this morning, Douglas. The committee will consider whether to approve the application for recognition of agenda item 3, and the clubs will be in touch after that time to inform you. I am now going to have a short suspension for a changeover of witnesses. Thank you. The next group that we are going to consider today is a proposed CPG on sustainable transport, and I would like to invite Graeme Simpson, MSP, who is the proposed convener of this group to the meeting. Welcome this morning, and in person this time, rather than the IT problems that we had last. Graeme, would you like to just explain again the intentions of the group, please? Thank you very much again, convener. I thought that it would be much safer to turn up in person rather than rely on technology. For the new member of the committee two weeks ago, I tried to make this pitch and my parliamentary service device decided to turn itself off as I was in mid-flow about to get into the meat of the issue. If I can just go over some old ground, the history behind this is that in the last session two cross-party groups, which relate to what this one is proposed to do, there was a cross-party group on cycling, walking and buses, which I was co-convener of, and there was a separate one on railways, which John Mason was a convener of. A group of us who were involved in these groups got together and we thought, well, maybe it makes sense to merge those groups in the next session. Those talks started in the last session and have continued. We decided that it made far more sense just to have one group. Part of the reason behind that is that, as you will be aware, convener, there is a problem and we will probably face this problem as we go through this session of MSPs attending cross-party groups. There is a rush of enthusiasm at the start and then numbers start to tail off. I think that that is an issue. It is maybe something that this committee could monitor because it is actually not fair, I think, on the various groups that turn up, particularly if it is in person. If we turn to what this particular group is intending to do, my view is that cross-party groups have in the past tended to become talking shops, people who agree to each other, talking to each other, going away, everybody is happy and then nothing happens. My view is that, to make it worthwhile, a cross-party group should actually do something, do some work, do some research, produce reports. That is why I want to be involved in this one because everybody agrees with that. We have a programme for the initial year and the first bit of work that we would like to do if we are given approval is to look at traffic reduction policy. The Scottish Government produced a paper last week spelling out how they would like to see car miles reduced over the next few years. We will be drilling down into that. If we are given approval this morning, we will be meeting at lunchtime and will have a presentation from a Scottish Government official, somebody from Transport Scotland, just to get that ball rolling. Probably what we would like to do is meet every month for quite a programme and produce reports with recommendations. We would also look at traffic demand management, how to get the modal shift to get people walking and cycling and using public transport. I know that there are at least one member who has strong views on that of the committee. To me, that is really important. Whatever you think of cars, it is a positive thing to get people more active. That is what this group will be looking at. Not just more active, but the whole public transport aspect of things is absolutely vital. We look at ways to help public transport to build back better, if I can borrow a phrase, to get more people on to buses and trains. It is not going to be a talking shop, it is going to be a working group, so I am happy to take any questions. Does anyone from the committee have questions? Perhaps you have portrayed me as some anti-sustainable transport guru, and I am not. I am very much a believer in public transport and I am making that accessible to all, which is where my challenge does come. In terms of the active travel agenda, I am very passionate about ecoabilism, and I have grave concerns that many active travel policies discriminate against disabled people and those that have mobility issues. The sweeping statements that you watched on Tuesday when people talk about going from walking to wheeling, there is a whole lot in that range of mobility from walking to wheeling. Are there groups that you are involving in the CPG that will help the voice of those with mobility issues, disabled, blind, hearing and mobility impairments? Are they going to be represented on the CPG? Without their voices, it does not matter what reports are presented, you are creating more inequalities in society. You are absolutely right. We need to cover all sectors of society, people who are disabled, elderly people, young people. I am just looking at the extensive list of organisations that we have, our initial group of members, and there have been more since who want to join. I do not see any specific disabled groups in there. You have the Midlothian Disability Access Panel, who are phenomenal. That is encouraging, but there are groups in there who speak up for disabled people, even if they are not specifically disability groups. I am just concerned that the voice of the cycling body will be overrepresented, and I want to make sure that there is balance. I have had that challenge in the city of Edinburgh, and we continue to have that challenge in the city of Edinburgh, with the 40 kilometres of cycle lanes that have created 40 kilometres of road space that people with disabled bodies can no longer access. I am gravely concerned if that membership does not reflect a more balanced view on those with mobility issues. If you were to look at the membership list, which you should have in front of you, you will see that it is not just about cycling, as you know us whether. I am a cyclist, but I am not a man in Lycra. I am not somebody who can achieve any great speed and cause alarm while I am cycling about. The name of the group is sustainable transport. It is not cycling, so we are covering ferries, trains, buses, walking and cycling. It is not just about cycling. One of your first submissions was in essence about the bringing together of two former CPGs so that a full and wide voice. I am going to presume rather than even assuming that the organisations that are currently listed are not now a finite list and that other groups, organisations and indeed voices that need to be heard will find favour to be listened to by the CPG in the production of a report. There are a number of questions coming from the committee. You will be glad to know, Graham. Can I pass over to you, Collette? Thank you, convener, and good morning, Graham. I very much welcome your CPG. As somebody who previously worked in outdoor education, I completely understand the benefits that come from outdoor ed in particular, and as a fellow East Kilbridean as well, the cycling and some of the routes that we have got in East Kilbride as well. I am completely for all promoting that. I note from the membership list as well, and I touched upon that as well as having a young person's voice there, because I know, even from my daughter and the young people that I worked with and some of the children's homes that got involved in outdoor ed, that more young people should have a voice in terms of particularly cycling, but even transport links and what not as well, is that something that you would be considering going forward in terms of having a young person come forward on the cross-party group? Yes, I think that that is a really good idea, because I think that one of the challenges that I found particularly when I was a councillor, Collette, is that you find that kids will cycle to school when they are at primary school, and when they get a bit older, it becomes uncool, so you will find that you might have lots of bikes outside primary schools, if you were out of any outside high schools. I think that that is a really good point, and just as you were speaking, it just occurred to me that perhaps it would be an idea for for this cross-party group to reach out to the Scottish Youth Parliament and perhaps ask them to become involved. I do not know if they are involved in any cross-party groups, but it is an idea that has occurred to me. I would also invite you, if we get the go-ahead, to maybe become involved. I had not realised that you had that outdoor education experience, so you would be a very useful voice indeed. The number of potential CPGs is trying to poach members this morning, Tess, I think that you have a question. Thank you. I also welcome this CPG. Just a question on your focus of rural versus cities. You cannot focus on everything, and a lot of people in rural areas have issues that, if they do not have a car in frequent bus travel, you could just focus on cities. Is it 70, 30, 50, 50 or 100 per cent cities? No, it is not 100 per cent cities. I think that one of the issues that I found in the CPG that was all involved in the last session, cycling, walking and buses, was quite Edinburgh centric, so I am keen that that is not the case. I am very alive to that. This is a cross-party group, as they all are for the whole of Scotland, and not just urban Scotland. There are specific issues in rural areas, as you well know, particularly around public transport. I would not want to put a figure on it. We are looking at issues generally, so when we produce a report, it would be reflective of the whole of the country. I was taken by the inclusivity of your approach to the cross-party group about those who might want other voices to be represented in the cross-party group. If your door is open, there will be other third-party groups or other MSPs in that place. I commend you for that. I also commend you for trying to be more efficient and a streamlined approach to cross-party groups in that place. You can make some pretty important points in relation to that. There is a cross-party group in that place, which I am not involved in, but I have to be honest on disability. I was looking at some of the non-MSP membership lists of that cross-party group. Given some of the considerations that were floated today, it might just be worth it while keeping the cross-party group in disability aware of your work. It does not mean that they want to necessarily do work on it, but they have a pretty strong network of groups where they could disseminate information in relation to the work of your cross-party group. It was just a suggestion, Mr Simpson. I think that that is a really good idea. Jamie Halcro Johnston, who you had on earlier, touched on this. The cross-party groups can work together. It has happened in the past, of course. There is a big opportunity. I would just say that my door is always open to you, Mr Doris, if you want to pop in and indeed any other member. Put the kettle on, Mr Simpson. Thank you, Bob. Thank you, Graham. If the cross-party nature of this committee is reflected in the potential cross-party group that you are forming, I think it would be very beneficial. I thank you for attending this morning, Graham. The committee will consider whether to approve the application for recognition at agenda item 3, and the clubs will be in touch with you after that, but thank you for coming this morning. There will now be a short suspension while we change over for witnesses. Thank you and welcome back. The final group that we will consider today is a proposed CPG on sustainable uplands management, and I would like to welcome back, but with a slightly different hat, Paul MacLennan MSP, who is the proposed co-convener of the proposed group. Good morning, Paul. Would you like to make a statement about the purpose of the group? Thank you, and it's good to be back and another guy is in the committee this morning. I suppose that a bit background was East Lothian's rural constituency. In the first few months, I was touring some of the groups and there were about seven grouse mirrors, for example, in East Lothian. When I was up speaking to some of the owners and landowners about that and other groups around that, it was very clear to me that there was a need for the cross-party group, because I think that there are different views. The real purpose for me was to try and bring forward and bring together these different views. There's a lot of legislation that's going on in the moment and in that sphere, if you like. We're talking about biodiversity issues that are going through just now, obviously, the climate change issues, grouse mirror management, deer management, and obviously the just transition as well. The purpose of the group was to bring forward or bring together the two—I'm not saying two sides—but there are different opinions, let's say, within that whole debate. For me, I think that it was trying to bring all that together and try to get a reason debate around that and, obviously, inform legislation and inform that debate going on. That was the main thing behind it. The intention when we set up the groups, as you can probably see, there's quite a wide range of organisations that are involved, again, very much with different opinions in that regard. So, as I said, the intention was to bring people together. We're aware, obviously, as well, that there are other groups. Before I done that, obviously, we looked at other groups. I think that it was mentioned in the application form about rural policy, crofting, animal welfare and so on. I think that, as you heard from the previous trailer, it might be an opportunity to work with some of those groups as we develop, I suppose, our work programme, if you like. I think that there was a specific need around about sustainable uplands management, but it was really the real reason for me to try and bring together groups that had a different opinion to try and get that reason discussion. It's been a very emotive issue over a number of months and a number of years, so the purpose was to bring that together and say, right, okay, let's see where we can get some mutual co-operation and mutual understanding for any of the issues that are out there. That was the reasoning behind that, yeah. Thank you, Paul. Does anyone on the committee have any questions of Paul? Let me know if this is in scope or out of scope. I'm not sure. I've got a half's urban and rural constituency in terms of the Pentland Hills, so I have a lot of questions come to me about the balance between the right to access in Rome versus the right to responsible access in Rome. I didn't know if that was something that your group might be considering, just out of curiosity. We've had, you know, the initial discussions that we had was around about that. That has had issues about the right to Rome and the right to access, and there are different opinions from that. Again, this is probably quite, I suppose, an example of the group with different opinions on trying to balance that, so it's trying to get that. That has been discussed, and I've got local issues in my own constituency, and I know there are other issues in other constituencies, so that has been discussed. Part of that, I think, is around about education, engagement with different groups and organisations within that. I'm sure that I shall be raised and going forward. I know from the name of it is Upland. One of the things, as a East Kilbride constituency MSP, I have been looking at is lowland deer management, so you touch upon Upland. It's a different type of deer. It's like every day is a school day. At the moment, you learn something new. Has there been talk about sharing information on that? We have very little in the way of lowland deer management in the central belt of Scotland. Is that something that we're isolating now, if you like? I don't want to be left out, Paul. I get that point, because I think that some of the issues are, we're talking about grassland deer management, which is not exclusively for Upland management, but predominantly for that, but I think that there's an opportunity in that. I think that's a good point to raise. If it's approved at the next meeting to say, look, there's an issue around the way that can be discussed as well. I think that a lot of the groups that are involved would also be involved in lowland management as well. We've tried to be as diverse as possible in terms of the groups that have been included in that. I think that's a really relevant point to take forward, because I think where do you define Upland, and where does lowland become Upland, and where does Upland become lowland? I think that that's an issue that's relevant, because I visited Shelly just a few months ago, and we were talking about that. Where was almost the border in terms of Upland and lowland in terms of deer management there? That was a specific issue. I think that's a relevant point that I would take forward to the next discussion group that we had. I know that we raised that and said, look, can we discuss that issue, because I think that it's very relevant. Where do you define Upland's management, and where does it stop? Does it have to be above a certain height? There's nothing defined as such in that. There's no clear definition of what that is, but by its very nature when it becomes Upland, it then goes on to the issues that are in the bout, which can prove to be good or controversial ones. Raptor protection as well as one that's really relevant, and has been brought up. I'm sure that we've all had correspondence on that one. I think that it's a really relevant point to take forward. Any other questions? I'm sure that the deer aren't concerned whether we define it as Upland or lowland. I think that I just have to food. Bob, very briefly, Paul McClellan, I suppose it just put in some information the public record that's not particularly pertinent across part of Upland with indulgence. However you mentioned raptor persecution, I am the species champion for the Perigun, and I would just note that the Perigun can often be an urban bird as well, quite often having habitats, including high-rise flats and industrial cranes and the like. The whole of Scotland is covered by parts of your work, but I just thought to put that on the record. No, I think that that's an important point. As you know, I mean raptor protection, it's a really emotive issue that's out there. How do you balance, I suppose, if it's across somewhere, how do you balance that? We've got RSPB involved in that as well, so it's trying to get that balanced approach in terms of that. Again, it can be very emotive, and there are two sides of that debate. Again, coming back to the purpose of the groups, to try and bring forward both sides of the debate, if you like, and try and get that informed discussion and moving forward together if we can. If we can, of course. There's always going to be agreement on all those issues, but I think that it's an important group to try and discuss and debate through, because there's a lot of legislation and a lot of things happening in that specific sector, which affects all parts of the universe, beferd from urban or rural, so it affects most constituencies in Scotland. Thank you, Bob. I just, for the record, confirm that it is Scottish land and estates that are providing the secretariat cover. Indeed, Edward Mountain, who's a member of this committee, is one of the deputy conveners, but Edward can't be with us today. The only other point I was going to mention for the record, and this is in no way a criticism, Paul, that the code requires all groups to provide 10 calendar days notice of all meetings, and that that has to be notified to each standards clerk in course, but I know that you, as a former member of this, are very aware of that. Can I thank you for your attendance today? The committee will, as you're aware, consider whether to approve this application for recognition at agenda item 3, and the clerks will inform you of the committee's decision thereafter. Thank you for coming this morning, Paul. We can now move to agenda item 3, which is the cross-party group approval. It is for the committee to consider whether to accord recognition to the proposed cross-party groups for islands, rugby development in Scotland, sustainable transport and sustainable uplands management. Are there any questions or comments from the members before I put it, Sue? I do have issue with the sustainable transport, given that the highway code is changing this week to really reinforce that pedestrians are top of the transport hierarchy, that they are poorly represented in this cross-party group. There are only two organisations balanced off with nine for cyclists and ten for rail, and I think that there needs to be far more representation from pedestrian groups and those with mobility and disabilities. That is my grave concern. Thank you for that, Sue. As far as being the technical side within the committee of the cross-party group, there is cross-party representation. It was an interesting discussion, and I will call it a discussion, between the proposed convener and this group, about what groups are and indeed what individuals are represented and can feed into it. Certainly, it is on the record the view of members of this committee about the people who should be listened to when they come, and there certainly seems to be a very strong workload that they propose to do. I would hope that, as Bob suggested, there are other cross-party groups that can be reached out to for input into evidence. I hope that we should agree the group that they indeed take up that suggestion—in fact, take up all of the suggestions that have been made this morning. Thank you, Sue. Would anyone else like to comment? No, we will see. Fine. I would now like to invite members to a called recognition to the proposed cross-party groups on islands, rugby development in Scotland, sustainable transport and sustainable uplands management. I will now close the public part of this meeting and move into private.