Chamber and committees

You mentioned the Werritty report, which says that licensing should be introduced only if raptor populations have not improved. What evidence do you have to suggest that raptor persecution and grouse moors are connected? On what objective evidence are you basing your assertions on the rates of raptor persecution? The golden eagle project is eight years old, so it is now out of date.

Was there evidence to suggest the connection? What did you use—DNA or other things? How did you connect the crimes to the grouse moors or establish that the persecution was committed by somebody who was managing a grouse moor?

Can you provide the committee with that specific evidence so that we can take a look at it? I cannot see it in the information that we have. The offences overall in the wildlife crime reports are not split between those that connect to grouse moors and others. The numbers of raptor persecution offences are coming down, so clearly whatever is happening out there is working.

Professor Werritty said to the Government in his recommendations that, if the raptor population numbers did not improve, a licensing scheme would be appropriate.

I will go back to some of the original stuff that we talked about. Does the Government have evidence to suggest that the cause of death in relation to raptor persecution is linked to grouse moors? Obviously, the aim is to ensure that there is robust evidence and that there is a causal link to a specific aim that you are trying to achieve, because, although there are other relevant offences in other bits of legislation, this is specific and relevant to wildlife crime that is related to grouse moor management. It is almost as though it is different for those who are operating grouse moors, compared with other regulation.

No, no, no—we need clarity.

It could or—

I have a simple question. Is the bill compliant with the European convention on human rights?

I return to our discussion about the suspension of a licence without any evidence of wrongdoing. Is that compatible with the ECHR?

Such as?

To be compliant with the ECHR, if there is a vexatious complaint, there must be an immediate investigation and evidence to suggest that there has been wrongdoing.