Chamber and committees

This is a framework bill, and you are keen to ensure that further regulation and statutory instruments are good at defining the role of the social work agency and the responsibilities of the chief social worker, so that, as we develop the regulations down the line, everybody is clear on roles and responsibilities.

Will the member allow me to intervene?

I have been thinking about that point. In my Dogs (Protection of Livestock) (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill, which was about preventing attacks on livestock by out-of-control dogs, I pursued the potential for having a wider national database. At that time, however, we decided not to pursue it in the bill, in the knowledge that, down the line, current legislation would be revised. I agree with the minister that the bill that we are considering today is not the place for further microchipping legislation. We need to allow the process to take its course.

Just reflecting on advertising and campaigns, I would say from my experience of passing my livestock worrying legislation and other awareness raising in relation to buying a puppy—I have been able to bring puppies into Parliament—that I agree with you on the need for a flexible approach to how we carry out campaigns, such as through the NFU Scotland or Police Scotland in the case of livestock worrying. I think that considering changes to how we use social media and marketing would work in your favour, and I am therefore in agreement with you that we must have a flexible approach to how we raise awareness through the campaigns.

Good morning, and thanks for being here.

Picking up on what Rachel Shucksmith said about the precautionary principle, I note that one of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee’s recommendations was that the precautionary principle be applied in planning of the siting of fish farms. I assume that that was because there were reasonable grounds for concern about siting a farm where it might cause harm to migrating fish.

Rachel Shucksmith mentioned it, so I will come to her first. Is a precautionary principle approach being applied to planning decisions in relation to siting farms close to migratory routes? If so, how does that work in practice?

You mentioned special areas of conservation. I am thinking about enhancing and conserving biodiversity. What legal duties do local authorities and the Crown Estate have when making decisions about aquaculture consents? How are those embedded in decision making as we move forward for consenting?

Thanks.

A lot of my questions have been answered.

I was just thinking about the gender identity healthcare services standards that were published by Health Improvement Scotland this month. I recognise that healthcare providers will be doing their best to provide the very best care. I am interested to hear your thoughts on those standards. What needs to be done with them? Which of them will be the most difficult to achieve? How we are doing at the moment? I am a nurse, so I know that we have been talking about how to deliver individual person-centred care for years, and that is obviously the goal of the standards. What needs to happen to ensure that they are achieved?

I have a final wee question. Ahead of today, in preparation, I was reading about how the system for people to access their GP works in Australia, Germany and other countries. There are opportunities for us to learn from approaches worldwide, looking at what works in other areas.

If GPs were to opt out from gender care, would that mean that we would miss young people who have neurodivergence or mental health issues? It is not just a black-and-white issue; this is about person-centred, total patient care and assessing individuals in a holistic way. We have been talking about a holistic approach. I am concerned that, if there were to be an opt-out, we would miss people who really need support with other conditions.