DNS over HTTPS is coming with our ISPs and governments like it or not This is a good read over at a naked security by Sophos and Reason we have a picture of Homer took me a second then I'm like don't Literally DOH DNS over HTTPS is referred to as DOH anyways Not for the Simpsons references. This is actually a really good article about the rise of DOH and What it means for security what it means for privacy? It's a big win for privacy It's a big lose for those that want to have visibility into the websites We go to and block them including the many ISPs and the UK's controversial porn block system Which many systems do rely on DNS now I've covered before DNS over TLS this is separate DNS over TLS means and this is a general common way you set it up In we're gonna refer to pfSense, but other systems who support it where you set up a secure Encrypted DNS to go from your firewall to whichever network you choose for your DNS You know cloud fair Google quad 9 all support it and then your local connections that your computer make not just the browser one But your computer itself it needs more than just the browser for DNS It contacts your local firewall and then all that traffic once it leaves your networks encrypted Making you invisible which is great Unless you're a government that wants to spy on people this goes a step further And this is actually a big problem for filtering sites and filtering systems used by many companies and a common question I get so I wanted to break down a little bit how that works and what's going to break with this and how to enable it in Firefox because it's available in Firefox right now It's just not turned on by default and there's not a lot of places that support it But good news is cloud flare does and by default Firefox comes with a cloud flare Reconfigured as a system you can set up so To do this test first I wanted to make a rule this rule is not enabled right now This is the block for the demo port 53 block on a special VM. I set up at 172 1669 dot 129 Here is watching all the port 53 traffic kind of bouncing around on that particular system. So Port 53 is the default port for DNS and Obviously, this is really simple. I'm just you could obviously move DNS to another port. I'm not getting into those technical details I'm just looking at the default ports and the default way the VM works. So if we go over here, we're gonna go ping apple.com Pinging Google.com, you know, we can see we're resolving addresses Apple apparently doesn't support replies right away We see some port 53 traffic over to the Firefox browser And let's uh, I don't know We'll pull up read it real quick So we pull up a couple things and we'll pull something while that's doing that Google my name YouTube comes up before that's interesting All up the about us page Not now. So, you know generating some traffic and we go over here Lots and lots of DNS queries just you can see it's completely filled with them So everything is working as expected and of course by default and most people are running things that default port 53 being DNS is Not encrypted ideally and the way it's set up in my network is we're using DNS over TLS Which means it contacts our firewall and it goes encrypted out, but that local traffic can be watched can be filtered And because it passes through DNS on my firewall, the popular tools like PF blocker allow for blocking of websites and ads or whatever You want to block with PF blocker, which is pretty cool But watch what happens when we block port 53 and turn this rule on apply All right, so now all the DNS requests have timed out on this VM no more DNS requests The block is active. They've all died. So all the sessions have died So we can't establish new DNS connections on this bigger computer. Let's see what happens in the VM now We try to ping something that's not cash. I got to come up with a new website name dead air Can't do anything. Well, let's try opening up a website in Firefox. I Don't want to open up any news crap Let's try to open really anything It's thinking let's try to go to Google now it may have Google cashed in there. So yeah, it has Google cashed But that means if we look up Lawrence Systems again, and let's go to a website. We haven't been to hold on Try to look up something completely different. So if we go to news We're resolving a new address Looking up news at Google comm Dead air go back over here No new established DNS connections. So Let's talk about how to turn on this DNS over HTTPS you go to network dot tr dot mode And this is just the about config so you open up the bout config You're going to get a warning you're going to go to network to our mode I'm going to modify it you set this to two Now we've changed the DNS inside of this now if you want to know where it's going the URI is Right here The default string is Mozilla dot cloudflare DNS dot DNS query This is sending all the connections over to this particular DNS the cloudflare DNS I don't know which other companies I don't have a list right now who supports it But this is the default that you don't have to make any modifications for the default that Mozilla is working for and you can see It timed out server not found and I can still not ping anything here, but now what happens Refresh the page. Hey, we're surfing the web again Oops, and I'll pull up that website that I can't ping but I know it works Wcrc.com is our regional chamber Look I can open it up although I can't do anything here So here's different websites browsing away, but I don't have any DNS access. How's that working? Perfectly fine here still no DNS queries. It's completely bypassing and doing everything over port 443 So if we look at port 443 on here All the connections are being established over here and nothing is being established on DNS So I am now my system is now blinded to this DNS Now this can create like I said a real big problem for companies that want to monitor DNS that want to monitor and filter Things be a denna DNS or create redirected URLs for browsers The good news is it adds a lot of privacy in this system The bad news is you have to rely on any type of sync holding you want to do of something in DNS ie ad blocking or blocking websites in general or even having visibility into websites at the end point and you'll have to do it as a Browser extension to get this to work. So I just wanted to show how to do this It's really easy to do it is to my knowledge not supported in Chrome yet with the exception of Chrome on mobile So Android phones have been using this for a while Which has caused problems because people try to block the bring your own device or block mobile devices and Chrome doesn't care about What DNS when it's on mobile it automatically uses its own encrypted DNS and bypasses anyways, this is Like I said, it can be problematic in terms of you know, if you're trying to do filtering It's a big win for privacy So they're gonna have to work on something else and obviously The other solution is going to be for a management or a business a use case would be to install certificates on the end points In order to get control over what websites are going or visibility and locking it down So it comes back to one of the things I've said many times Monitoring at the firewall is a progressively losing battle. It gets harder and harder You pretty much have to focus on doing it at the end point because once again This blinds the firewalls blinds the filtering systems because the only thing that can be seen across the system now is 443 connections which are all encrypted and without a certificate installed on that endpoint that matches a certificate on the firewall Which also sometimes causes further breakage of things and more problems, especially with the newer banking websites and standards It becomes Invisible again to you especially TLS 1.3 with a second Diffie helmet exchange that happens inside the encryption Basically a second layer of encryption that even breaks installing the certificate option. So the firewall once again becomes blind to it So like I said, just want to bring this up. It's going to be interesting to see how companies try to handle us especially Authoritarian governments because they are going to really not like this because they do so much DNS blocking But this is the way of the future and this is a big win for privacy So I want to show you how to do that. That's all you got to do enable is that little about config and like I said This is a beta feature in Firefox that is available use at your own risk, but pretty cool feature. I do like it All right, thanks. Thanks for watching if you liked this video Give it a thumbs up if you want to subscribe to this channel to see more content Hit that subscribe button and the bell icon and maybe YouTube will send you a notice when we post If you want to hire us for a project that you seen or discussed in this video head over to Lawrence systems calm Where we offer both business IT services and consulting services and are excited to help you with whatever project you want to throw at us Also, if you want to carry on the discussion further head over to forums at Lawrence systems calm where we can keep the conversation going And if you want to help the channel out in other ways we offer affiliate links below which offer discounts for you and a small cut For us that does help fund this channel And once again, thanks again for watching this video and see you next time


There's a significant body of research suggesting the Mediterranean diet is associated with longevity. Now scientists behind a new study reveal which ingredients of the Mediterranean diet work best at promoting weight loss. I'm crossing my fingers it's feta cheese and red wine. Welcome to Lifespan News, I'm your host, Emmett Short. Today we're talking about the Mediterranean diet study. It's linked down below and it's focused on the role of polyphenols, a class of phytochemicals known for their antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. Polyphenols are abundant in berries, nuts, vegetables, tea, coffee and many other plant products. So 300 participants in a randomized controlled trial were divided into three groups. The control group ate a diet based on dietaryguidelines.gov which I'm sure is based on nothing but hard science and definitely not influenced by food industry lobbyists. The two study groups were put on Mediterranean diets, one on a generic version and one on a more plant-oriented version that had the same amount of calories but almost double the daily intake of polyphenols. So 800 milligrams versus 440 milligrams in the generic version. Patients in all groups were also put on an identical physical activity regimen, I'm guessing not that. The participants mean age was 51 and that doesn't mean that's the age they started getting short tempered. But I'm 46 and I can feel it coming. No, their average age was 51, average body mass index was 31, 36 percent were pre-diabetic and another 11 percent were diabetic. So about half the participants could stand to lose some pounds and that was the point of the trial but weight loss was measured in a way more sophisticated way than just putting people on a scale. They used MRI to precisely measure the abdominal adipose tissue following the 18-month trial period the MRI revealed negligible weight loss in the control group despite patients being physically active, not that. The two study groups on the other hand showed substantial weight loss with the plant-oriented group losing the most weight.   I don't know about you but I have a way more visceral reaction when I gain a little subcutaneous fat which is the fat you can pinch but I wasn't put in charge of naming so and that's probably a good thing.  The researchers went to great lengths to establish the effects of particular dietary components according to their calculations higher consumption of green tea, walnuts and dietary fiber as well as reduced meat consumption were all significantly associated with greater visceral fat loss when adjusted for age and sex. So the results of this randomized controlled trial confirm the importance of polyphenol consumption and hint at more plant-based variants of the Mediterranean diet being more effective for weight loss. It's important to note that being thin is not necessarily directly related to longevity.  So will these results impact your view of the Mediterranean diet? Will you change your diet? Let us know in the comments and when there's more to share we'll have it for you here so definitely subscribe so you don't miss out. I'm Emmett Short. We'll see you next time on Lifespan News.


Praying too much is not a sign of faith. It's a sign of unbelief. There's a belief that's out there that's been out there for some time now. It's kind of more of a charismatic feel that tells people that you should not pray too much. It sounds odd, but what they mean is that if you pray once, you should have the faith and then just believe and receive. If you don't receive, then that must be because you didn't have enough faith. And if you keep going back to pray, then that means you still don't have enough faith. Is that true? Well, I submit to you that that is not only not true, it is the opposite of what's biblical. People will say those things who simply do not understand one, what prayer is, but two, do not have a strong foothold in the word. One such person is Dr. Prophet, Lovi Elias.   And that's not even including his false prophecies. Yeah, you know the ones where he'll say something is going to happen at an indebted or they're ultra vague or stories about a family member being able to have the gift of disappearing, that very same person. The same person who says that he was taken to heaven, he met Jesus and had a personal angel body guard from the time that he was six. Yeah, that same person, the very same person who was married and got divorced, but still had a closer walk with Jesus and an angel than anyone else, that very same person. So that person, I've been asking for someone to kind of give a defense, not just to make a blanket statement to say that this person is a man of God, you don't have the spirit, that's easy to throw out. You don't have the spirit, he has a spirit. Well, we know who has a spirit by that person being able to read and to understand and to preach exactly what the spirit gave us, the very same word of God. If you've got the spirit, then what you say will not go counter or contrary to the word of God. Who gave us the word of God? The Holy Spirit did. And so I want to play this clip. You tell me if you think that he's wrong or he's right. Praying too much is not a sign of faith. It's a sign of unbelief. Some people didn't like what I just said. Praying too much. Praying too much is not a sign of faith. It's a sign of unbelief. Somebody will cut this and post it and say, he said, don't pray too much. Now I'm not going to cut it and post it and say that he says, don't pray too much. But the truth of the matter is you literally just said that, Lovi. That's literally what you just said. And then when you try to fix it up, you're going to go back and say the exact same thing again. And so no one's going to be taking out of context, but we'll let it finish playing. But the other thing I want you to notice is the people in the audience who are clapping and cheering clearly are not paying attention to the scripture. We're going to look at the scripture in a second and see if what he's saying makes sense. I know where he's coming from. I know what he's trying to say. He's trying to impugn people who will want to keep praying about a matter or coming to God about a matter as though they don't have faith. Well, the truth of the matter is if that's the case, why pray at all since he already knows what we need before we even ask? But that would go against scripture. But let's finish listening to him. I'm going to say it again. Praying too much is not a sign of faith. It can be more of a sign of unbelief based on what God has revealed. If the Lord has come to you when you had no food, he puts food on your table.  You can't afford rent he produced for you. But every month you are kneeling down. Father, my rent is approaching. Father, you are my provider. You just showed God that you don't believe is more than enough. He knows what you need. That was his word and it was completely at least in my estimation on biblical. Think about the implication. Paul, who we would say probably, I don't know if how many people are followers and devotees of Lovia lies, but even they would probably say that Paul ranks a little bit higher than Lovia. Hopefully they would say that. Well, Paul, who has written almost half of the New Testament, Paul had an issue that Paul prayed for three times. This is the very same Paul who has seen God take him and deliver him and do mighty, wonderful things in him and in others. And so clearly Paul trusts God. Paul knows the power of God. Paul knows the power of faith. Paul knows that and preaches it. But here we have Paul asking for the Lord three times to remove this thorn in the flesh. Well, does that mean that Paul didn't have faith? Does that mean Paul was really showing unbelief? No, that would be a ridiculous statement to say so, wouldn't it? Remember, this is the very same Paul who also said pray without ceasing. And we see all throughout the Bible, everybody who has had a supernatural or a magnificent or an awesome encounter with God. And I mean, where it was demonstrated before the people, his supernatural hand being moved in their lives and lives of others, people who have witnessed that experience and lived that, they tend to keep coming back and praying, even though there is something going on. Ask Elijah. Ask Jeremiah. Ask Moses. Ask Abraham. How often did Jesus pray?  In Daniel 10, verse four, let's read the beginnings on the 24th day of the first month while I was by the bank of the Great River. That is a Tigris. I lifted up my eyes and looked and behold, there was a certain man dressed in linen. Now, this man that he's speaking of is an angel. We want to see why this angel is there. What's happening? In verse 10, as we drop down, he says, then behold, a hand touched me and set me trembling on my hands and knees. He said to me, oh, Daniel, man of high esteem, understand now, he calls a man of high esteem. He says, understand the words that I'm about to tell you and stand up straight for I have now been sent to you. And when he had spoken this word to me, I stood up trembling. Then he said, do not be afraid, Daniel, for from the first day, look what he says from the first day that you set your heart on understanding this and on humbling yourself for your God. Your words were heard. Now, if we understand, Daniel has been praying. And he says, from the very first day that you started praying, your words have been heard. But the Prince of the Kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for 21 days. Then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me for I had been left there with the King of Persia. Now, I have come to give you an understanding of what will happen to your people in the latter days for the vision pertains to the days yet future. We won't go into the whole point of the vision for the prayer and so forth and what the angel is going to tell him. But here we have Daniel praying, not just one time for an answer for resolution, not just one day, but for 21 days straight. And we are told by the angel that your words were heard from day one. He did not come back and say, Daniel, the more that you kept praying, that just demonstrated more unbelief. No, as a matter of fact, quite the contrary. The more you pray demonstrates belief. Why? The same reason that you would keep going to your employer to ask for a raise or ask for something. The same reason that you would keep going to, I don't know, a bank to keep asking for a loan. The same reason, if you're a child, that you would keep going to your parents to ask them for food, to ask them for clothes, to ask them for anything. The same reason that you would go to someone who you know can help you, that doesn't demonstrate that you don't have faith in them. That demonstrates that you do have faith in them. The reason why you keep going to them, that demonstrates that you know that they are the source, they are the power, they are the solution to whatever ails you, even if your answer is not what you're looking for. And so for someone to come back and say that to do so, or really to tell you, or to dissuade you from doing so, that is just a bad thing to do. That is really horrible. To tell someone to stop praying or to pray a little bit less, don't pray too much, you can never pray too much. Find the scripture and notice, he will not find the scripture. There is no such scripture. So what he's doing is he's playing on kind of his word of faith sort of thing that you have the power to make these things to be something because you said, because you believe it. Your faith is not that powerful. As a matter of fact, you are not faithful, but he is faithful. And like Paul said, as he's making this prayer, he says, when I'm weak, then I'm strong. How is he strong? Because he recognizes his weakness, and then he goes to the one who is strong. And in being in him, then you become stronger. And there's two things that we all have equal measure of. I've said before that the one thing that we have equal measure of is the word of God, the Bible. We have the exact same words, maybe in different translations, wherever we have the exact same message in the Bible. Many you have various translations. And so we all have the exact same word of God. One of the other thing that we have is we also have the ability to pray. Now we all have churches and friends that we can go to, but they may not say the same thing. They may give different advice. They may lead us differently. But prayer, us and God, that's the same thing. We all have access to the Father, and we all have access to his word. Those two things. And what he is doing is, one, he is distorting or not even going to the actual word of God, and then also telling you to nullify or just not even use the other thing that we have. That is a person that you need to stay away from. Anyone that tells you not to speak to the one who wants you to speak to him, that person should be marked and avoided. You should also let everyone else know whose listening to him do not listen to this person. The very definition of a false teacher. Amen.


The best way to take power from government and banks by Bitcoin? Three of us? No, I disagree. The best way to take power away from government and banks is to localize your life. Localize your currency, localize your food consumption, localize your business transactions, support your community. That's the best way, right? Not to buy Bitcoin. Disagree, disagree. And this is coming from someone who's been following Bitcoin for over 10 years now, from the get-go, okay? Disagree, disagree.


Felly, wrth gwrs, rydw i gyfarwyddwyr yn cyrraeddion P1E1615 i'r sylwgr yn ei ddalod yn gyflaesu'r system i Gîmbert, Huntingdon a Scotland. Mae sylwgr yn ymgyrch yn ymgyrch ymgyrch, sydd wedi'i llefodol cyflaesu ymgyrch y 27 ymgyrch, ac yn gyffredig i gael y paprach ymgyrch ar y mewn ddodol yn 10 ymgyrch.   Da'n bwyllt o gwyfododd Tim Bain, y director of the Scottish Moorland Group, a Dr Colin Shedden, y director of Scotland for the Bridges Association for Shooting and Conservation to the meeting. I thank you for attending today. You have an opportunity to provide a brief opening statement after which we will move to questions from the committee. Thank you very much, convener, and we are most grateful for the opportunity to be here this morning. The petition clearly calls for a state-regulated licensing system for game bird hunting in Scotland. In reality, this was licensed all game bird hunting, which would include rough and walked up shooting, as well as driven shooting, and the shooting of pheasant, partridge, ptarmigan, woodcock and snipe, as well as crouse. This would affect all who shoot game, whether reared and released or wild. This could affect the vast majority of the 49,000 shotgun certificate holders in Scotland, as well as the many thousands of people who come to Scotland to shoot each year from all over the world. Shooting is a substantial rural industry in Scotland that influences the management of about two thirds of the land and supports the equivalent of 8,800 full-time job equivalents. More importantly, the conservation work carried out by shooters from all walks of life is the equivalent to 3,900 full-time workers. The argument has been made that game bird hunting in Scotland is the least regulated in Europe and North America. Game bird hunting is regulated in Scotland, initially by the Game Acts, dating back to 1832, and much more recently by the Wildlife and Country Act 1981, as amended, and the Wildlife and Natural Environment Act 2011. That was the act that introduced vicarious liability, for instance. Those who participate in game bird hunting are also regulated by some of the toughest firearms legislation to be found in Europe. Those who hunt game are already regulated. They will have to have a shotgun certificate. That means that they have already been vetted by the police and, as noted in the Wildlife Crime in Scotland 2015 report, such certificates can be revoked and wildlife crime could be considered relevant in such a revocation, and that is at a civil burden of proof. While shoot licensing may not exist in Scotland nor anywhere else that I know of in Europe, game bird hunters are effectively licensed very much in the way that their petitioners desire. In addition, SNH now has powers to withdraw the general licenses that allow essential management activities to take place. They can be withdrawn from land holdings suspected of being involved with wildlife crime, and that has happened. We therefore have a wide range of both civil and criminal law, including vicarious liability, which amounts to unusually stringent legislation. We are also waiting for the introduction of stiffer penalties for wildlife crime. As of outlined, in contrary to the petitioners claim, game shooting in Scotland is well regulated, and that regulation has been updated on a regular basis. The petitioners also claim that shooting is underpinned by illegality and that persecution is endemic. Shotgun certificate holders are among the most law-abiding sector of society, and any hint of illegal activity can lead to the right to hold a certificate and the ability to shoot being withdrawn. In recent years, there have been an average of about five poisoning incidents in Scotland, five too many, we would agree, but considerably fewer than suggested by the petitioners. The fear of the cost and the bureaucracy surrounding any shoot licensing scheme on top of the current legislation and regulation faced by land managers could act as a real disincentive and may lead to shoots being abandoned and important conservation work deserted. Much of the existing stringent legislation that is in place is recent, and we suggest that this will continue to make a significant contribution to efforts to eradicate wildlife crime without the need for further regulation at this time. Thank you very much for that. You said that the regulation was unusually strident in terms of other countries. I would say that, in terms of a UK context, the legislation affecting those who shoot in Scotland is probably tougher. In fact, it is tougher than the legislation that applies in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. So, in that UK context, Scotland probably leads the way in effective legislation to tackle wildlife crime. Can I ask, in what circumstances and what type of evidence, how general licence has been withdrawn? General licence has been withdrawn recently on two areas in Scotland and has been withdrawn by SNH because of the suspicion of wildlife crime having taken place on these two properties. That withdrawal of the general licence has been challenged and I believe that it is going to a judicial review in January. When there were proposals for the current regulatory scheme being introduced, would your organisation have been in favour of those or did you resist them at that time? We had certain reservations about the restrictions of general licences but we recognised that it was probably a reasonably cost-effective way to challenge or to maybe ensure that wildlife crime is being properly addressed. As I say, there is judicial review coming up in these two sites so I would probably better wait until that has been heard before I could say any more. However, we generally are supportive of any steps that are taken to fight wildlife crime and I am happy to expand on that later. I note that the Scottish land and estates consider that new penalties regime arising for the review of wildlife crime penalties in Scotland is the icing on the legal structure. I am just wondering if you shared that view and if you do, can you expand on why? We generally support the outcome of the Professor Pustie's review because it looked at the issue and it came up with a number of solutions, some imaginative new penalties and also toughening up the tariffs which had got very out of date. I do not think that I think that they had last been renewed in the 1990s. We generally support that as a measure that would deter wildlife crime and it seems entirely sensible. I know that they have not been announced yet but I think that there is a general assumption that they will be adopted as recommended but I cannot be sure of that. Do you think that it goes far enough in that sense? Yes, I think that the icing on the cake is because, as Colin said, there is a pretty tough regime of wildlife crime and this will be an extra disincentive or deterrent by increasing the tariff of penalties. Okay, thank you. I think it's fair to say that the issue of vicarious liability has received a mixed reception since its introduction in the act in 2011 and you yourself, Dr Shedden, have referred in your preamble to the unusually stringent legislation. I'd be keen to know what your views are on the impact of the vicarious liability provisions within the 2011 act and how you think that that's progressing and also in particular get a picture of how that's impacted on land management practices. I'm sure that Tim will like to answer that. Tim also has a short opening statement that maybe we could take at some point. With respect to vicarious liability, the main impact that it's had is probably to ensure that any contract of employment is explicit in the fact that no wildlife crime will be tolerated, no use of poisons will be tolerated. Practically every gamekeeper in Scotland and everyone employed in the land management sector will be under a contract that is explicit that there will be no tolerance of wildlife crime. I'm sure that in the coming years we'll have a considerable impact. Those who employ land managers obviously have to protect themselves and the main defence will be to ensure that the contract is in place and that there's on-going training with respect to ensuring that everything is above board. I don't know if you want to respond as well and maybe if you want to add your statement at this point. If I may, could I just make a brief opening statement to cover? This is particularly because much of the evidence behind the petition seemed to revolve around grice moors, although it is for all types of shooting and just to cover one or two of those points. Again, thank you for the opportunity to come here today. I'm talking on behalf of the 2,500 or so people who operate Scotland's 140 grice moors, and they are passionate about the work they do looking after the uplands and the birds and the habitats. The petitioners say that environmental concerns are behind their call for licensing, but there is solid evidence that the mureburn, the predator control and the other work that goes on in Moorlands really is a positive net contribution in the environment, for instance helping waders, which are fast declining elsewhere. Colin has outlined the regulations and there is a long list of other things that keepers have to abide by every minute of the day. They are very heavily regulated in terms of what they do. The petitioners have not put forward any detail of how licensing system could actually add to all that regulation that is there. As I say, the petition rests mainly on grice moors, but we don't recognise the picture that the petitioners are painting about how grice moors are managed. We are very clear that we condemn any form of wildlife crime and we are members of Paws like them and share the same objectives, but the evidence shows that grice shooting is not sustained by criminality as they are ledged. What we would like to mention is the very positive impact that the tighter regulation, particularly in the last five years, has had and the actions of the Paws partnership. There is a lot of partnership working on this issue. We question why the RSPB chose to refer to their own report that goes back over the last 20 years rather than focusing on the last five years, which we think is the most relevant. You mentioned earlier the new Government wildlife crime report, which I think hadn't come out at the last time the committee met. That's been mentioned in the agenda. Broadly speaking, the show is to be a continuing gradual decrease in wildlife crime over the last five years. The raptor figures we think are the lowest for the last three to five years. What that seems to suggest to us is that the current measures are working. Another thing the petitioner said was that the crime is going undetected and this is something that is often mentioned. Earlier this year in his evidence to Parliament, Assistant Chief Constable Graham, he didn't accept that there was a tip of the iceberg issue as is sometimes said, and he actually said, we are not missing the vast majority of what is going on here. We've also helped on the other side of the coin to try and develop voluntary schemes, particularly the Wildlife Estates Scotland initiative, which is supported by Government. There's currently 43 estates that are now accredited, covering 1.1 million acres, and there's another 29 that are under assessment or forming up to be assessed in the next year or so. We also work in other partnerships such as the Heads Up for Harriers with PAWS and SNH, the South of Scotland Golden Eagle project, which is just getting going after many years of gestation, and the East Cairngorms Moorland partnership. All of these have raptor conservation at their core of what they're trying to do. We are doing everything we can to voluntary initiatives to help with raptors in particular. We don't recognise the impression given by the petitioners that gross moors are raptor deserts. I mean, since the last time the committee met, we've seen the Golden Eagle survey published, which has shown a 20% increase in golden eagles since 2003, and many of those are on managed gross moors. We do have, if it is of interest to the committee, we do have a positive four-point plan, which we think could deal with this issue once and for all, hopefully, which we're very happy to discuss with the committee. I think that's all I would say. Thank you very much for that, I guess. It would be good if you could share that four-point plan with us. In fact, it would have been good if we'd had that in advance. Right, okay, I'm not sure how much time is spent. The first point one would be we very much support the continued enforcement of wildlife crime. I mean, this is absolutely essential. There is a tough regime, and that needs to be continued to enforced, and the tougher penalties that we discussed a little bit earlier would help that. So that would ensure that the current momentum is maintained. Secondly, we would ask for support and development of the Wildlife Estates initiative and the other collaborative schemes projects going on, because other sectors such as farming and forestry, they have their own accreditation schemes, which I think are very effective. Wildlife Estates is a rigorous accreditation scheme. It can't be done in five minutes, so it's started slowly, but it is on the rise, and more and more estates are signing up and being accredited. And these sort of formal initiatives actually make working together with people like the RSPB and the Raptor study groups. They make it a lot easier, because there's a formal framework that we can operate together in. And so we would say that it is that sort of co-operation which is the way ahead. Thirdly, one thing is you may be aware of the understanding predation project, which was run by the Scotland's Moorland Forum, and that was all stakeholders across the board came together to look at this whole question of predation and how that can be managed. It was a groundbreaking scheme, and at the moment they're working on the next stage of that, which will be a big sort of live management project with everybody involved. And it'll draw on the sort of proven methods of environmental conflict resolution, and we think that that is a very important way of everybody moving forward together on an understood scientific basis to deal with the issue of predation. And then finally, the fourth point, we would very much like to see greater co-operation between ourselves and the Raptor study groups and the RSPB. I mean, we have tried hard on this. For instance, just this year, with the help of SNH, we developed a new protocol for national bird surveys. Last year it was a golden eagle. This year it's been the Henharrier survey to try and build better working relationships, better trust between the people on the ground and the people doing the surveys, which has got a bit strained over the last few decades. And we're very keen to try and rebuild this relationship because it is only by working positively together that we're going to deal with these issues. That in a nutshell is our four-point plan. Thank you. I think that's very useful. Thank you very much. Thank you, chair. I'll look at the question of accreditation, gentlemen. The Scottish Land and the State submission to us referred to the Wildlife Estate Scotland accreditation programme. I understand that it is administered by the Scottish Land and the States. What external input was there for other organisations or groups into developing the accreditation requirements or assessing applications? It's initiated and supported by Scottish Land and the States, but it had support from the outset from Scottish Natural Heritage. They'd been very much behind it. From the Cairngorms National Park Authority, they were very supportive. On the expert panel, the specialists who help with it, we have RSPB. They've been on it right from the outset. Game and wildlife conservation trust. The accreditation is run by a professional accreditation body who used to be Scottish Food Quality Certification. They now have another name, but it's the same one who do some of the farming schemes. They're a professional accreditation body. The idea of the outset was that it should be as broad a church of support as it could be, and that is still happening. There are discussions with other organisations, other agencies as well, to support it. That's quite well spread and the input into the accreditation programme. We very much hope so. It is a slow burn. It's building up slowly in terms of the number of estates taking part. As the number of estates increases, the bank of data that it produces becomes more and more helpful. As each year goes on, one can see patterns in wildlife species. We've mentioned that the number of golden eagles on accredited estates can now be counted, and that sort of thing is developing. Thank you. Brian Whittle. Good morning, Dr Shedden, Mr Baines. Given the relatively few numbers of raptors, any persecution is significant. I wonder if you accept that those who break the law are almost forcing the hand of the legislators. Given that, there have been discussions around the efficiency of self-regulation, and I wonder if you can explain how that is working in practice, and is there any liaison or engagement with enforcement agencies? I'll answer that very briefly. Yes, raptor populations may be relatively low compared to the numbers of other bird species, but they tend to be top predators, and Scotland has reasonably healthy populations of most raptor species, and as Tim alluded to, the golden eagle has increased 20 per cent since 2003. There have been a couple of good breeding seasons for hen harriers, so we expect, possibly, when the hen harrier survey completes, that might indicate an increase in that population as well. We are talking of over 500 pairs of hen harriers, over 500 pairs of golden eagles. For instance, we're not talking about small numbers, but these are territorial birds, so they're usually well spread out. We do accept that the killing of any bird prey is very damaging for the shooting industry, and that works for an organisation that deals with shooting in conservation, and people say, how can you do that when people allegedly involved in shooting are involved in any form of wildlife crime? It's in our best interest to stamp this out as best we can. That's why we do work with as many other agencies as possible. I mentioned that we're all organisations and members of the partnership for action against wildlife crime, and we do work very effectively, we hope, with them. An example was a sharing best practice event to open to general public, and that was to demonstrate to the general public how to identify wildlife crime if they come across it. I was certainly happy to take part in that process, pointing out to the general public legitimate land management tools such as trapping and snaring, and how those could be abused in certain situations. The public were trained to recognise when abuse was taking place, so we're quite happy to work with the public and other agencies to ensure that, as many people as possible know, what is a legitimate wildlife management activity and what is potentially illegal and should be brought to the attention of the police. We also train the police in those management techniques as well. In the forward to the wildlife crime annual report, the cabinet secretary welcomes the reduction in raptor persecution offences, but did so with caution making reference to the review. She has instructed into missing satellite tag, bird of prey. What are your views on whether a clear trend in raptor persecution can be demonstrated until the findings of this review are known? Well, I think that if you look at, since the government statistics have been produced as the fourth one, we think that there's a definite downward trend in bird of prey crime. I mean, it is quite confusing some of the way the statistics and police and other figures have worked, but I think that underneath there there is a definite trend downwards, and that's what we definitely see that on the ground as well. In respect of the minister's forward and the examination of the satellite tagging, we welcome that because what we need on this is evidence, and so often this is what's lacking in the whole field of wildlife crime and particularly raptor crime is hard evidence as to what has happened. And so we think that that is the right approach, and we particularly note that in the recent cases of satellite tags stopping working, although there was no bird of prey found dead and the police weren't treating them as crimes, we don't know why the RSPB collected this data for five years and never came to speak to the people who owned the land where the satellite tags had last been recorded, because if they had come and spoken to the relevant landowners we might well have been able to find out what had happened. So we do support finding more evidence. Do you have a view as to whether the increase in recorded raptor persecution offences illustrates that there are valid concerns about raptor persecution? We very much recognise the valid concerns. We don't deny it, but we think that the figures show a downward trend. That seems very obvious. I think that the agenda has mentioned the disaggregated police crime data, and I don't want to get into the technicalities of this report, but there is a time lag between the police, how they calculate and the figures, and I think I would refer the committee to page 37, the number of incidents which have gone down by one this last year from 19 to 18, but that is following a general downward trend over the last five years. Angus MacDonald? Thanks, convener. Your earlier comments regarding the RSPB are noted. Some of the decisions taken by the RSPB recently have been a mystery to many of us. You'll be aware that issues relating to gamberd hunting have also recently been considered by the UK Parliament through petitions, one of which called for a ban on driven grouse shooting. As you know, SLE questioned whether the potential environmental, economic, community and cultural impact had been taken into account in that petition. However, the petition that we have before us calls for licensing rather than a ban. Can you outline whether your concerns about licensing would cover the same potential impacts that SLE has identified in its submission? Yes. The call, as I said at the start of my introduction, was for a state-regulated licensing system for gamberd hunting in Scotland. That confuses me because I'm not sure whether it is set at the individual level or at a collective level for a shoot. Is the shooter to be licensed or is it to be the shoot, which would be either the land or the collective group of people who come together formally or informally to shoot, were they to be licensed? Some of the evidence that has been presented before confuses me as to whether it's at the individual level or at a more collective level. I've been trying to make the point that at the individual level, the shooter is already licensed. It's a state-run scheme administered by the police and it has worked at the civil burden of proof, which is exactly what the petitioners want. My argument is that the shotgun certificate is effectively a shoot licence in itself. If we're talking at a more collective level, it's difficult to see how a shoot licence could actually be administered. We don't know, for example, whether it would be based on land or whether it would be based on people coming together formally or informally. It's something that hasn't occurred in Europe before, as far as I'm aware, so it's new territory if it is at that collective basis. That's certainly what concerns me. It would concern me because it would be a bureaucratic and costly form of licensing, which would be another burden on shoots. A majority of shoots are small and informal and it could well lead, as I mentioned earlier, to them being totally disbanded. It could well lead to landowners thinking it's not worth the trouble that the shoot could collapse and the conservation benefits coming from shoot management would also disappear. If I could just add, I think that what seemed to come out of the Westminster debate was this unknown, unquantified impact. Obviously, a ban on driven crushing would have a very serious impact on the uplands in England. I would echo what Colin said, that it would be this loss of confidence and this loss of willingness to go out and do the unpaid conservation work. People would just... It would be another reason for not doing it. I think that it could undermine all sorts of aspects of rural life. Alison Johnstone. Thank you very much, convener. Thank you both for your statements this morning. There are some parts of your statement that I agree with wholeheartedly. Perhaps your four-point plan might be something that would work very nicely alongside a licence and regime. I think that there are other parts. Your views on moor burn perhaps aren't shared by everyone. There are concerns about deterioration of soil, degradation of peatland and so on. I'd like to focus specifically on this issue of licensing. You've said yourself that two thirds of land is being impacted by these activities. I think that there is growing public interest in this agenda. I'm certainly aware of it through my own mailbag, as I'm sure colleagues are. Specifically on the issue of raptor persecution, the 2015 national golden eagle survey informs that where golden eagle range occupancy is only 39 per cent in east of Scotland, where the dominant land use is driven grouse shooting. There's a good food supply there compared to 95 per cent in the northwest islands. What do you think the difference is there? That is what we've seen. I had a look at the summary report of the survey. The east of Scotland has had that level of occupancy for decades now. The level of breeding success in east of Scotland is the highest anywhere. It seems to be a definite, the highest levels of occupancy in the west of Scotland, the western isles, and it gradually decreases to the east. One interesting thing that comes out of that report is that the area south-central highlands, which has had the highest increase in occupancy, I think it was 70 per cent. That is an area running down the spine of the highlands, which includes a lot of driven grouse moor areas as well. It's a complicated picture, but grouse moor managers are passionate about golden eagles. They really do want them. There are things happening in the eastern highlands that the reason for low occupancy could be many other than just the fact that there is grouse shooting there. Perhaps, but it does seem perhaps a relationship that we need to investigate seriously. I would suggest that, if the issue does, and I hope it does, go to the environment committee in the Parliament, perhaps one that they could look at further. A recently published scientific report commissioned by SNH pointed out that there has been no decline in levels of illegal killing of red kites in the north of Scotland. Does that not fly in the face, perhaps, of your assertions that raptor persecution is in decline? I think that report looked at it all over Scotland, and I think the red kites in other parts of Scotland were doing very well, but they could do better in the north of Scotland. We can only echo if there is raptor persecution, it needs to be condemned and it needs to be stopped. I think we were quite clear about that when that report came out. You've suggested that we're more regulated than other parts of the UK, but it appears. SNH is undertaking a review at the moment of European neighbours that were the least regulated and most intensive game bird shooting system in Europe. In a recent article in The Shooting Times, the British Association for Shooting Conservation suggested that a licensing system where a right to shoot is dependent on legal and sustainable management is a threat to the socio-economic and environmental benefits of game bird shooting in Scotland. Do you agree? Yes. As I pointed out earlier, I've argued that there is a lot of licensing in place already in Scotland. Introducing another tier may replicate what we already have in place if it's at the individual level. For an individual to have to apply for his shotgun certificate to give him the tool to allow him to go and shoot and then apply for a separate licence and then get permission of the landowner, I feel would just be going a bit too far. There are other impositions that are coming through. Just now all owners of land will be faced with the prospect of sporting rates being introduced from next year onwards. The licensing system relating to air weapons is coming into effect in 1 January. Shooters who shoot in Scotland are being faced with a number of financial impositions. We see shoot licensing as being another one and it could lead to the end, as I said, of some of the smaller and formal shoots that are the mainstay of shooting for ordinary people. Thank you very much, convener. Clearly, this activity has an impact on the entire ecosystem. I do think that there should be a system in place where we understand how many animals have been shot, how many hares have been culled, for example, so on and so forth. I do think that any well-designed legislation would take account of the concerns that you have about duplication. If you maintain that regulation of shooting as a threat, isn't that an acknowledgement that the current shooting management system is, in fact, undermined by unsustainable and illegal practice? Surely estates that are being well run have simply got nothing to hide? I would argue, yes, that estates that are well run have got nothing to hide, but estates that are well run may have difficulty in accommodating increased bureaucratic levels. The voluntary approach is working well and the wildlife estate Scotland initiative is a good example of that voluntary approach. The voluntary approach is one that shooting has been built on over the last 150 years in this country. Things have improved enormously. There has been legislation when it is required, but, as I said, Scotland is well regulated just now with respect to shooting. The voluntary approach also takes it much further forward. There is a code of good shooting practice. There are lots of codes of practice for all sorts of different aspects. We promote those codes of practice, we write most of them, and we expect all of our members to provide by the codes of practice as well as the law. Thank you very much. I think that we have come to the end of our questions, although it may have raised more questions in everybody's minds than it was. Is there any final point that you want to make before we think about how might we deal with the petition? No? No. I wonder if committee members now have any views on what action we take on the petition. Angus? I think that, given that we have spent longer than we normally would, by asking for the alternative view to the petitioner's view, I think that we should refer the petition to the ECCNR committee for consideration as part of its scrutiny of the wildlife crime annual report and other upcoming work that the committee may well have after the Christmas recess. I know that the committee has been following the progress of the petition at this committee up till now. I think that it has been useful to have today's session, but it really highlights the range of issues that we would be focused for. I do not feel to me that it is necessary for all of this committee to pursue that, but I do not know what other members think about Angus's proposal. I think that we have gone round this from every angle. I think that we have made sure that we have a very balanced view from both sides. I cannot see how much further we can take this work past that one, and I would agree with Angus. Yes, I agree with that. I think that we should pass on to the ECCNR committee and move forward from here. I think that we have exhausted it as far as we can go. I welcome the information today from Dr Shedden and Mr Bones. I think that it gives us a good balanced approach to where we are, and certainly what is in place and what needs to be put in place in relation to some of the issues that the petitions have made, but I think that it really is a matter now of the ECCNR committee to consider. We have really exhausted it and the two gentlemen gave. It was very useful to see the balance on that, and I commend them for that. I think that we are in agreement that we should refer the petition to the ECCNR committee for its consideration as part of its scrutiny of the wildlife crime annual report, which means that it will not come back to this committee, but the issues that have clearly been highlighted today in earlier sessions will be at the discretion of that committee to be explored further. I thank our witnesses for attending today or to suspend for a couple of seconds till we go. To order again, and can we move to agenda item 2 consideration of new petitions? The first of these is petition 1622 to make failure to recycle a criminal offence. Petition 1622 by Stephen Duff calls for failure to recycle to make a criminal offence. The petition collected 10 signatures in support. Members have a copy of the petition text in background from the spice briefing that provides information on the progress in managing household waste in Scotland and how that measures against Scottish Government's targets. The briefing also provides some information on recycling arrangements elsewhere in the UK and Europe. I wonder if members have any views on action to take on this petition. That would be enforceable. I think that there is an issue, but enforceable. Although I was quite intrigued, I must absolutely confess that when I first looked at this petition and read the background, I saw that different countries have moved not just to create incentives but to create disincentives not to comply. I find that quite interesting. It is very, very complex. It would be very difficult to enforce. It is really up to local authorities to bring home the fact that recycling in their own area is up to target. I do not think that it is realistic to say that we should introduce legislation for this. You wonder what supports local authorities. Local authorities and we have to meet targets. The targets are quite significant. If we establish a target, we have to have a means of reaching that target. I do not know what the answer is, but it feels to me that it was asking for that. For instance, I live in a flat and we cannot recycle, so I do not know how it would mean an enormous change from the local authorities to provide that service. I am not saying that they should not, but I do not think that is the way to do it. I am excited to see your thoughts on what kind of legislation can be brought into play and what that means in enforcement terms for the local authority. As I said, it is not something that I am particularly knowledgeable about by the interest to think where that legislation would take us. One of the things we might ask the Scottish Government to guess is how they propose to get an astonishing target. 70 per cent of recycling compost and preparing for the use of waste from households is 70 per cent by 2025. The petitioner says that with the recent rate of increases in recycling it will take 42 years to achieve the Scottish Government's position. I will not be here to see it, but there you are. I will be recycled by that point. Avgan, now you will be pickled. You will be pickled and put down in the foye. In my house I have got five recycled bins. I think I have pretty much recycled everything. Sometimes I find my kids in me and other things are ridiculous. We do our own recycling because we do not have bins provided. I do not know it is a massive undertaking to sort all that out. There is also an issue about deprivation and affluent. The more affluent areas are better at recycling than the more deprived areas. It is a huge issue. Some of the whole thing around littering and not using your bins properly can relate to antisocial behaviour as well. I would be right to say that we are not convinced that criminalising not recycling is the way to go but it does raise quite interesting questions. It might be worth asking the Scottish Government to seek its views on the action called for in the petition in the context of their own targets around recycling and the use of waste. I think that would be worth it. I think that would be worth it. We have just gone through a massive change in our Garm butte council and we have gone the route of much better information to all the communities and towns and it is beginning to work well and we have quite a high record of recycling. One of the issues is we looked at our own household waste and I now put out one ordinary type of green bin and it is a standard waste and it is now only a quarter of what it was at the beginning of the year. That is right. Everything, there is so much more you can recycle and the problem is that people are not being told by the individual councils exactly what they can recycle. That is the problem. It may not be legislation. It is actually empowering the local authorities and this is what we have done. We have empowered ourselves to go out there and persuade and if necessary bring in bylaw, regulation at that level. Local authorities really down the local authorities to do it because they have got the teams to go around. We are not quite into photographing bins but that does happen in some areas and then people are warned but it is an education process and I think this is really taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut whereas actually education and communication can be done and there are more things coming out each during the course of the year. Certainly in my area at Cancel area we have had a big effort on this.  I am supposed to put it out each once a week. That would be really helpful. Angus? Can we now just to concur with Maurice Corry I think it is the responsibility of the local authorities but I am aware that there is a pot of money sitting at Zero Waste Scotland that can be tapped into by local authorities to improve the education of the residents that it was regarding to recycling so there is money there for it except the local authorities to tap into. I think it is not entirely a negative story I mean I think people recycle more than they have done in the past. I expect my children's generation are much more aware than the previous generations so there is something there. I wonder as well as writing to the Scottish Government we might write to COSLA that they feel that they need some legislative support and I do note from the evidence that we were given that the idea of giving people incentives I suppose is that it does not work on this report anyway but there may be issues that we could usefully flag up to see what the response would get. Is that agreed? Thank you very much and we can thank the petitioner for those issues. The next petition is petition 1624 on the definition of adultery. The next new petition we will consider today is petition 1624 by Acre Jones on the definition of adultery. Members have a copy of the petition and a briefing note. The briefing explains that the issues raised in the petition were considered in the Marriage and Civil Partnership Scotland Bill which became the 2014 act. The petitioner brought a petition in substantial similar terms in the last session of Parliament after that bill was passed. The previous petition was closed on 31 March 2015 on the basis that there was no intention to legislate further in this area in session 4. The petitioner contends that the current definition of adultery breaches equalities in human rights law. As the issues were considered by the Parliament fairly recently, I would suggest that we write out to the Scottish Government in the first instance seeking its current view on the issue raised by the petitioner and whether there is an intention to consult on the issue in the current Parliament. I am happy to hear members' views. Angus? That is the best course of action. We had clarification in the last session that there was no intention to legislate further. You know there is every possibility that that could change. I agree. I have some sympathy with this petition and I think that there is definitely some merit in pursuing it on the issue of equality. I agree around that. Times have moved on and I think that we are with civil marriages and civil partnerships and marriages between same-sex couples. I think that we just have to move forward and yes, I agree that it is going to be a government issue. Is that agreed? In that case, if we agree to write to the Scottish Government seeking its view in the petition and whether it intends to legislate on the issue in the current session of the Scottish Parliament. Can I just make a point? I have been named in the petitioner's comments. Yes, we have written to it but that was as far as it got. We did not express one way or the other to that point. I received an email from the petitioner which I acknowledged receipt of said petition and all of us on my name appears with Maurice as people have sought support of. I would just like to make that note to the slightly misleading. It is a distinction between seeking support and receiving support which I think most people would be aware of. With that, can we move on then to agenda item 3 consideration of continued petitions? We will deal firstly with petition 1, 2, 3 on school bus safety and can I welcome Stuart Stevenson MSP who has a long standing interest in the issues that we are now going to be discussing. The next petition we will consider is petition 1, 2, 3 by Ron Beattie on school bus safety. At our last consideration of the petition we agreed to write to Transport Scotland we sought clarification from it on its response to a pilot programme on school bus signage conducted by Glasgow City Council. Transport Scotland has provided a response indicating that it considers that a one-size-foot-sol approach to the issue is not merited and the case has not been made for a national roll-out. Members will see from the clerk's note that Transport Scotland has undertaken a range of other measures including contacting the UK Government to enhance awareness of the school bus sign in the highway code and driving test. As members know we received the very sad news that Mr Beattie passed away since we last considered the petition and I'm sure members will wish to join me in expressing our condolences to Mr Beattie's family and in recognising Mr Beattie's efforts in raising the issue with the Scottish Parliament over many years. It's worth noting that Transport Scotland's submission dated 21 September commended Mr Beattie for his achievements in influencing Scottish policy on this issue and I'm sure other members will agree with me that even in reading the evidence that he provided there's a very powerful message about the need for action but I wonder if members have any comments or suggestions on how we now take the petition forward. I don't know if you want to see perhaps Stuart White might worthwhile if you read your comments. Thank you very much indeed, convener and I'm sure that Ron Beattie's family will very much appreciate the kind remarks that you've made and indeed the comments that Transport Scotland made before he died which of course being prospective or possibly even higher like more highly valued. The general comment that Ron Beattie following an accident involving his granddaughter first petitioned the Scottish Parliament on the whole issues school bus safety in 2004 he is I think beyond doubt the most persistent but effective petitioners and it would be a good model for others who wish to pursue in a proper manner how to deal with difficult issues which this one is. Turning to the subject that is before us today the response from Transport Scotland is perfectly proper they do in particular in relation to in-scan school bus signs which is one of the two topics of the petition identify that in their tests only 11% of people identify these signs in hazard perception tests conditions 8% or so in darkness I think that does broadly leave open the question is whether more can be done but I think noting that the highway code has been amended at rule 209 and that the test is being amended to try and raise awareness of this I think we can count that a very substantial and real achievement but perhaps not the closing of the issue in the long term I think the other point the committee may care to consider is of course the other point that is in the petition and that is to make over taking a stationary school bus a criminal offence I'm not sure that's within the gift of the Scottish Parliament I may say I believe it is not and I suggest that perhaps the only further thing that the committee might consider doing I'm not urging I'm merely informing is of course to ask the rural committee who have responsibility for transport in this Parliament whether there are issues from this petition including stationary school buses and defences associated with that whether they might care to consider this further I suspect for this committee that this petition having gone on from 2009 and notched up a fair number of achievements and changes you may be running out of options could be I understand that the question of overtaking so on is reserved I think that's a broader issue just about mindset amongst drivers certainly my time as a school teacher we lost young people being classically knocked down coming round the front of the bus I think that there is an issue about mindset which I don't know if you can legislate for but I think that even the fact that these issues have been discussed and raised over a period of time I'm sure I will have some impact and public perceptions I wonder if people have views it does feel to me that we would want to close the petition under rule 15.7 on the basis that Transport Scotland has identified alternative measures to address the issues raised by the petition I wonder if people have views specifically on Stuart Steven's suggestion that we maybe just flag up to the relevant committee these broader questions that he's identified Brian? I think that the interesting one here is that the overtaking of a stationary bus makes the assumption that we can identify the bus as being a school bus in the first instance and having school children aboard the bus at the time so it's almost like a dual issue I do think that being able to properly identify the bus as a school bus is key but the overtaking of a stationary bus being a criminal offence I think would be problematic but as you say it's the mindset of drivers probably more akin to highway coding I mean a city like Glasgow very few buses will be school buses there will be buses with school children on them and the examples I would give from one teaching career would have been youngsters who would have been on the regular buses so that is in a sense all of this doesn't really address that question which is just about at certain times of the day at 9 in the morning 4 o'clock half past three in the afternoon drivers should be very alive to the fact that people coming on off buses will include large numbers of young people but that doesn't feel to me that something even to transport Scotland could address it does feel to me that we should be doing something but unhelpfully I can't think of what I'm minded to say it should go on to the rural committee but I'm just to clarify would it be going there just on the issue of overtaking school buses is there any other reason it would be going there what we would do in general safety we're closing the petition we recognise the issues here around transport and the relevant committee is responsible for transport and then we just write to them saying almost capturing this debate and saying we would welcome that they may look at this further I would support that definitely I think Ron has made some fantastic achievements just reading through the background to it and I think it would be a good idea to move it on to the committee now I don't think we can take it any further but certainly move on to the relevant committee Can I ask a question Do we have any statistics reference municipal and rural accidents Do we have any statistics showing us what the occurrences in rural sorry rural and municipal I think there are some figures in the report but I think just to clarify if we close the petition what we would be writing to the relevant committee and saying these are issues that we've considered we can't direct them then what they might do with that in their own work programme maybe something that they would wish to look at and I think that if they wanted to examine that further they probably will be sure that Stevens will know better than I what figures there are but whether it captures both youngsters travelling on school transport and those travelling on regular buses I'm not sure I think what Stuart Stevens has said is that the rural nature of it is important that that is something the rural committee can look at but I do know sorry coming back to my own we've started to put wardens on buses at the school time and that has helped it's not so much that there's a rural issue but the rural affairs committee also is responsible for transport oh sorry, yes a big one can we agree then to close the petition but we will take the actions that have been discussed and I thank Stuart Stevens for his attendance and I do think we would want again to acknowledge the work of Mr Butain's family in this regard where if that is a legacy it's one certainly to be proud of thank you very much, good dinner okay if we can now move on then to petition 1408 the updating of punishes anemia vitamin B12 deficiency understanding and treatment this petition is petition 1408 by Andrea MacArthur on updating punishes anemia vitamin B12 deficiency understanding and treatment the committee is a cop of the Scottish Government's latest response and a submission from the petitioner members will recall that since the petition was lodged the British Committee for Standards and Hematology published guidelines on the diagnosis of B12 and folic deficiency in June 2014 the committee received advice from the diagnosis steering group that these guidelines were not suitable for the Scottish practice setting as such the Scottish Government commissioned the Scottish Hematology Society to prepare a summary document based on the guidelines provided to GPs in Scotland the session for public petitions committee considered the draft guidelines for the first time at its meeting on 1 December 2015 the committee sought further information of the Scottish Government and the Scottish Hematology Society on the draft document to verify a number of the petitioner's concerns with it the Scottish Hematology Society has since withdrawn from the process citing its limited resources as the main reason for doing so the latest submission from the Scottish Government advises that no further work will be done on the draft summary document and there are no plans to publish it as such Scottish clinicians will be expected to refer to the British Committee for Standards and Hematology's guidelines the petitioner has expressed disappointment with this news in her latest submission and I wonder if members have any suggestions for action and why don't we write to the Minister for Public Health asking why we're expected to go to the PCSH for guidelines and I think previously the civil justice is not suitable for use in Scottish practice it did strike me as odd seeing that these guidelines weren't suitable and then when the Scottish Hematology Society withdrew, they then see why they are suitable so I wonder if we agreed then that we write to the Minister for Public Health I'm just trying to okay, is that agreed? okay thank you very much if we can then move on to petition 1463 in effect of thyroid and adrenal testing diagnosis and treatment you will be aware that this is an issue of interest to Elaine Smith MSP but she's unable to be with us today this petition is by Lorraine Cleaver on effect of thyroid and adrenal testing diagnosis and treatment members will recall our meeting on 29 September 2016 that we agreed to request a briefing from Spice and to consider our approach to the petition at a future meeting a copy of the Spice briefing has been provided to members and we've also had the chance to consider our approach to the petition within the context of our work programme and I wonder if members have suggestions for action the hugely important issue and I think the suggestion that we prepare a report on it and I would really like to see a debate in the chamber on this I mean I appreciate it's been fairly long standing but I think it's we need to try and move it on somehow I think there's no doubt what server that we've accumulated are the positions committee rather than we as a collective group here but over a period of time have accumulated a whole range of information which would be really useful to draw together in one place and again I think seeking a debate in the chamber we would then secure the response of a Government minister which would then allow people to share MSPs or groups beyond a parent might be able to pursue these issues and highlight them is that agreed? Angus? I was just going to agree with you convener as you say we've collated a massive amount of evidence on this and it will be good to have a report collating all that information and clearly a debate in the chamber will help to keep this major issue on the radar particularly on the Government's radar because I for one don't understand why T3 is not available through GPs and we need to get to the bottom of this once and for all Okay, are we agreeing? Okay Thank you very much We're now moving on to petition 1581 Save Scotland's school libraries Submitted by Duncan Wright on behalf of Save Scotland's school libraries We previously considered this petition at our meeting on 29 September when we agreed to write to the Scottish Government in the Scottish Library and Information Council The responses are included in our briefing pack and the note by the clerk provides a summary of these responses The Scottish Government does not appear to object specifically to the development of a national strategy for school libraries but does not consider that ministers are necessary to ensure that the Scottish Government does not consider that ministers are a necessary best place to lead on this and I wonder if members have suggestions for next steps Matt Morris I think that we should write to COSLA on the Association of Directors of Education Scotland in light of the Scottish Government's response because there are big issues running throughout all the councils 32 local authorities in Scotland just now, certainly in their budget setting and this has come up time and time again and I think that we need to get a central view on that I think that we need to go to COSLA on this one I am kind of intrigued to understand why ministers think that they are not best placed to deal with this since it is an education matter It was interesting that the Government recognised the issues but did not see their responsibility to be equally Scottish libraries body recognisers in each strategy but did not really identify in my view what should be the next step so it felt like everybody agreed that it was an issue but I am working on the assumption that there are not people who willfully want to refuse to have school libraries and school librarians and it would be interesting to know why people make the decisions they are making what are the pressures on them and what are the core things that you would expect from school education and the role of libraries within that so we could write to COSLA Association of Directors of Education Scotland may have a view as well I think one of the issues behind this is the fact that there is so much now referral to internet collecting information that the kids go home and are encouraged that and this is one of the dilemmas that councils are facing is the reduction in the use of the libraries in schools for example but yet you go to some towns where the municipal library is actually well used so is there a real dichotomy at the moment I think ideally a combination of both books and the internet working together would be good that's why I think we should go to COSLA and get a real steer on this with the director of education I wonder whether in many schools they will have libraries which also have facilities with computers and so on and it's a question of what level of professional do you require when I was teaching we were still teaching in the Dewey decimal system so I don't know whether that still happens in schools we will go most things now but I have no doubt whatsoever that librarians in their profession will have moved on along with technology that should be quite interesting do we think there's a role for the education skills committee in looking at this question I think that as you alluded to convener that I think everybody recognises an issue but nobody seems to be able to take on the responsibility and I would really be interested to see who it is making the decision and who ultimately responsibility falls to so I think it would be the education and skills committee would be so we can refer it to them we can write to COSLA and ADES is there anything else and then we can obviously alright now we have a choice if we refer it to being advised we refer it to education committee it will not come back to us so it's a question whether do we want to let it go at this point no certainly not we'll do the writing and then we can reflect to that at a later stage okay thank you very much for that if we can now move on to petition 1600 on speed awareness courses petition 1600 on speed awareness courses was submitted by John Chapman at our previous consideration of this petition on 29 September we agreed to write to the Lord Advocate to seek his views on the petition and any concerns that his office may have about the effectiveness of speed awareness courses we've received the Lord Advocate's response which is included with our papers and where he indicates that he would be happy to consider a detailed proposal and looks forward to the department for transport report on its three-year evaluation of speed awareness courses to members of any suggestions for action shouldn't we really defer until the department for transport has reported on the three-year speed awareness course seems to be I agree with that I think that's the point absolutely we could also write to the Scottish Government seeking an update from its strategic partnership board following its meeting on 28 September I think however we recognise the significance of the petition and its importance so I think that if we do those two things which is getting an update but also holding on to the petition until the department for transport is reported on its three-year speed awareness course evaluation we could seek an indication from them about the timescale for publication of that report that's agreed thank you very much for that 1604 inquest for all deaths by suicide in Scotland the next petition we will consider is petition 1604 by Catherine Matheson an inquest for all deaths by suicide we've received a range of responses from NHS boards the Scottish Government and Scottish Association for Mental Health we'd want to acknowledge the seriousness with which people have responded and very substantial papers associated with this petition provide the submission to address points raised in the responses received this petition raises a number of issues about the process employed by health authorities to review the circumstances leading to a patient on a community treatment order committing suicide the overarching issue is whether the Scottish Government is minded to extend the scope of the review under section 37 of the mental health care and treatment Scotland Act 2015 following the mental health commission's recommendation the Scottish Government has already agreed to extend the scope of the review to include the suicide of patients on suspension of detention the minister for public health did not commit in her submission whether she is minded to extend the scope of the review further to include patients who were released from hospital or receiving care in the community under a compulsory treatment order that is called for by the petition this is something the committee may wish to explore further with the minister members will say that a number of stakeholders do not agree with the petition suggestion that should be in question for all deaths by suicide however there was some agreement that there may be merit in reviewing or reforming particular aspects of the NHS review process that the petitioner has highlighted this includes appointing independent chairs to conduct the reviews and sharing experience of how families can be successfully included in the review process I wonder if members have suggestions for action or comments I think we were struck before both by the power of the evidence from the petitioner and the dignity with which that was done and I am struck by the seriousness with which those issues have been raised and it is just a question of how we need to take this forward Excuse me, can I just say at this point that I have had a message from Catherine Matheson to offer her sincere gratitude to the committee for taking forward this issue for her family and for all other families who have lost someone to suicide Thank you very much for that I think we should write to the minister for mental health to ask why if she is going to expand the scope and why that was not included I think that is vital to do that and write to healthcare improvement Scotland to ask their views and the guidance provided to NHS boards and a number of other points I think just as much information from them as we can on what has already been provided but just to clarify a lot of the points mental welfare commission as well I think that is important Write to them to ask for I think that is important The view on that Absolutely no, I think we go for that I think that even in reading the papers and this is something that I have had the experience of in the past I understand that when the NHS professionals are dealing with these questions they do not want to be in a position where they feel that they are not able to explore what happened and address that and improve their action up but they almost feel that because the families will be there they will become defensive I think that from the families point of view it is only about what do we learn for the future rather than being properly open and accountable for what has actually happened I think that there is a tension that comes through in the responses which says we cannot have the families present because it will make people defensive and I think if you were the family you would think what have you got to be defensive about I think that it is a very delicate area Not just in not just in suicide I think that across a number of areas within the NHS but I think that from the families perspective I think that all they are looking for is closure and as you said the evidence that was given was very powerful very moving and I think it does lead to some of the conclusions that the panel or the committee have already made here that this should be taken continue to be taken forward I think that families are looking for closure they are also looking for reassurance that things will change and it won't happen things will improve for families in that situation because it is very brave of this petitioner to be fighting this given the tragic circumstances I think they also want justice I mean I think they want to feel I don't want to put words into people's mouths but in my experience of dealing in particular cases like this they are very assured that things won't happen again for others but they also want to know what happened and why it happened and that if people are culpable and have been neglectful that is also addressed which in other circumstances would happen Can I just raise a point it's quite interesting the different NHS boards we would quote four here Ayrshire and Arran Highlands 4th Valley the risk all have a slightly different approach to the committee's structure and I think there's something in that that we may well need to be looked at because you know best practice now I'm not saying they're doing anything wrong it's just maybe there's something there could be tightened up on Is that something we could flag up to minister and to health improve at Scotland? So just to kind of summarise where we are I think we're agreeing to write to minister for mental health asking whether the Scottish Government will expand in terms of section 37 of the mental health care and treatment act in the way called for by the petitioner How the findings from the review into arrangements for investigating the deaths of patients will feed into national policy including the Scottish Government's new 10-year mental health policy due to be published this year and the timetable for bringing forward the regulations in relation to section 22 of the health to back on a continuing care Scotland act 2016 regarding the procedure to follow on the duty of Canada I think that you know this question of the fact that the petitioner's son was still under the care of the hospital although not resident in hospitals actually you know it's not the broader question of suicide very specifically that and in writing to health care improvement Scotland really asking I suppose this question about guidance to NHS boards and how they feel about if different boards are slightly different uniformity and how they deal with it and the petitioner's suggestions on improving guidance on requiring review panels to be led by independent persons there was certainly one response which talked about the importance of the way in which that then gave confidence if the chair was independent what it's using how health authorities can share ways in which families have been successfully engaged with in the review process including directly in review meetings because again I think that was a tension me highlighted whether it considers there would be value in the action called for by the petitioner to expand the remit of the review under section 37 of the mental health care and treatment act and we've already agreed I think to Morris Corry's suggestion on writing to the mental welfare commission okay so that I think is a fairly substantial number of issues emerged from that no okay thank you very much for that and that concludes the business of the meeting and I'll now close the meeting


Feeling pretty good just started warming up I went kayaking yesterday for like four no four miles but like a couple hours so my back is a little like tired but like who cares right but it's dunk life I shouldn't have done that you know I should have feeling good warming up this is like 99 I wanted to go on that side which is like 9 10 9 11 but they're playing so we'll see if I can get to that side but we'll see what I can do today let's get it let's get scary my jumping dirt is pretty good because I was able to jump about the same height for a while practice some game dunks I'm gonna try to jump high soon I haven't been jumping high I'm sick of feeling low on low rims I think from now on I'm gonna stick to 10 feet for most sessions if not 10 to because I'm nice like that not yet but I want to be so I'm gonna push myself even harder to get higher than I have been up and I want to be up higher than I have been high so I'm gonna do that so let's get it go hard go home get out of your home go dunk