It's great to work with the Mises Institute because we have so much overlap in a way people say Mises as economics We do form policy a lot of people say oh Ron I love your economics, but I hate your foreign policy those on the progressive left might say I love your foreign policy Can't send your economics, but Jeff said it much better than I could they are intertwined the Fed Enables the wars that we fight and the wars that we fight enable the Fed So it's very important. I think that people understand the package that we have The Ron Paul Institute is in its fourth year. I'll be very brief about it People turn to us in times of crisis in in very large numbers, which is what we wanted to do when we started it Dr. Paul and I did a show on Wednesday on the Ron Paul Liberty report right after the news hit about the Syrian So-called chemical attack That show that we did immediately went viral With now well over 200,000 views of the show We put the show up on our Facebook page and a million people looked at it immediately So it's really incredible what you can do and we work hard into both the print media And we have a little studio down here in Lake Jackson where we can do our daily show and we can also do our media hits So it's it's it's Times of crisis like this that we're happy that people will turn to us for an alternative from what you've heard the mainstream Media's Chorus I'm gonna do something a little different just for a minute, and I think it's almost a sort of a poetry I'm going to just simply read the headlines from today's anti-war comm and just ponder and think of every one of them For a second as I read them hawkish Dems cheer Trump attack on Syria Tomahawk maker Raytheon fuels defense sector rally 45 times Trump said attacking Syria was a bad idea lawmakers say proof lacking lacking before Trump bombed Syria Lacking Syria plan us threatens more strikes Syria US missile attack killed nine civilians, huh? Is it solid to blame for the chemical weapons attack in Syria? Syrian rebels call for more US attacks US says Russia responsible for Syria gas attack Russia cuts military communications with us over Syria attack Russian Prime Minister US attacks in Syria one step away from Russia clashes ISIS kills dozens of civilians fleeing Mosul and Finally, US considers putting nukes in South Korea So that's just a random and it tells you where we are it tells you the mess we're in We all we've talked about this strikes the 59 Tomahawk strikes at a cost of a million and a half dollars each Fueling the defense sector rally in the markets But this was not the first US strike strike on Syria as a matter of fact it was the 7,899th airstrike on Syria from when President Obama started in late 2014 so this didn't begin yesterday circumstances around it made it more dramatic Did Assad gas the people in this village in the Homs area the other day? Well, we don't know that he did we don't know that he didn't If he did it would have to be one of the most reckless acts or an act of insanity Probably from any leader in history Judging on past behavior and this is certainly no praise for him.  He's been able to helm his country in a war against almost impossible odds where? Jihadist rebels that were back by Saudi Arabia and Turkey and other countries the US Were determined to overthrow him yet in a very cool and calculated way He developed alliances with Iran and with Russia and was able to beat them back Hardly seems the motion of a madman or someone very reckless He was on the verge of winning the war It was literally days before peace talks were supposed to begin for a political solution and less than a week After the White House said Assad can stay it's up to the Syrian people to choose their own president So in these circumstances, he was fighting al-Qaeda in the area in Idlib Would he launch a chemical attack and kill a few groups of civilians? It doesn't make sense Maybe he did we won't know probably but you have to ask yourself as in any crime who benefits Is there any way conceivable that Assad benefits from doing this? He risks risks alienating his two allies that have literally saved his bacon in Syria He could he risks risks being Gaddafi'd in the end. Is it good for him? I don't see how it is ISIS and al-Qaeda on the other on the other hand were on the ropes ready for defeat Did they benefit from this? Well, they certainly cheered it and immediately after the missiles hit They started moving on some villages in the area where the strikes were and took advantage of it A couple of other points I want to make before we get to our panel discussion I think the China factor is important and I think it was the David or perhaps it was representative Massey who mentioned The missile strikes were launched as President Trump was having dinner with Chinese Premier Ji They were sitting down to dinner as the missiles flew if that wasn't intended to send a message to both China and particularly North Korea, I don't know what was I think that may have been the real target And I think that might have been why we didn't see a lot of damage The Russian reaction this is probably what I worry about most today. The Russians have not backed down. They've stood by Assad They've said there's no evidence. We know the last time we thought it was Assad It turns out at least according to Carter del Ponte the UN inspector She concluded it was probably the rebels we almost went to war then believe it or not Obama was sane enough not to do it But I want to talk a little bit about the Russians I'm just going to quote very very briefly because Prime Minister Medvedev is not known as a fire breather He is Almost considered up to be too liberal. He's no Putin. Let's put it that way. This is what Medvedev very quiet man said Yesterday, that's it. The last remaining election fog is lifted Instead of an overworked statement about a joint fight against the biggest enemy ISIS the Trump administration proved They will fiercely fight the legitimate Syrian government in a tough contradiction with international law without you an approval in violation of its own procedures stipulating that Congress must first be notified of any military operation unrelated to aggression against the US on the verge of a military clash with Russia Nobody is overestimating the value of pre-election promises, but there must be limits of decency He seems to know our Constitution better than Trump does So what's next? We're back to the beginning. I think we are in big trouble right now. I think maybe we all feel the tension in the room I think we're on the potentially on the verge of something cataclysmic as I said Moscow said We are one step from war with the US and what did Trump say today quote? This is on drudge. I'd hit Assad again is what he said. So the idea that Assad did this because he's simply crazy. I'm starting to wonder if Trump did what he did because he's simply crazy So maybe the shoes on the other foot, but I want to announce our panel to take a little bit more of a look at this and First I have someone I have someone I know very well And I have someone that I know his work, but I we have not met in person yet and Phil Geraldi I've known for quite some time Phil as a regular contributor to our to our Institute's website It's one of my favorite writers. He writes from experience. He spent a couple of decades in the CIA and operations He knows the Middle East like the back of his hand And he's a terrific writer. He's always uncovering something and Phil. I think is such a Asset to our movement what we're trying to do someone who's been there and knows it Professor T hunt to Lee is the chairman of history a chairman of the history department at Austin College and his expertise Really is the Great War which is so appropriate Today, he's the author of the Great War Western Front and Home Front And I think it's it's excellent that the Mises Institute invited him because this sort of pulls the strings together So welcome panelists. Let's sit down and have a conversation. What we're going to do is Each panelist will present, you know five to seven minutes synopsis of what they are thinking about and Then we will open it up to a discussion and we would like to involve all of you in the discussion There are little microphones. I'm told that you can throw at each other and ask questions When the questions do come, please make sure they are phrased in the form of a succinct question So we can get as many people in this so we can answer specific questions. So let's let's get started Okay Dan and David Stockman between them stole virtually everything I was going to say So what I'll try to do is throw out a few comments, which I hope will be supplementary to what they've suggested and These won't be in any specific order or not necessarily connected, but hopefully they'll be useful the first thing I would ask people to to consider is That the premise for this conference is actually incorrect. I Would suggest that the United States actually doesn't have a foreign policy a Foreign policy virtually by definition is a coherent Plan essentially pulls together different elements in terms of how the United States Interacts with the rest of the world What we've been seeing ever since 9-11 is essentially something quite different We've been seeing a reaction To what is going on in the rest of the world and the original intention of a foreign policy to protect American interests and to protect Americans Traveling or in business has basically been abandoned. So I think that's something that people should consider We have we have really Walked away from what the principle was for having a foreign policy as seen by Jefferson and others Another thing that Occurred to me when I was listening to the previous speeches was that in my own history I voted for George W. Bush in 2000. I voted for Obama twice and I voted for Trump In every case the reasoning was exactly the same. These people represented to me the peace candidates In some cases only by virtue of who they were running against But the fact was they were people that were promising a change of direction in terms of the United States and how we conduct our policies In in terms of what I did and what they have done I would deduce that we've been betrayed that Basically the people in this country, which I think both from the right and left constitute a considerable Part of the electorate that really do want peace have been betrayed by both parties I think this is something to consider that the peace movement that David Stockin was talking about I think it's actually much bigger than we we see it because we generally come out of our own bubbles Politically speaking and from our own bubble We may not see that there are people that are politically on the other side that share a lot of our concerns The trick will be to bring all of this together Another another thing that David brought up was essentially that the investigations of what Happened in Syria just like a Russia gate will probably produce no result. I think that's an accurate assumption on this part But coming out of the intelligence community I would say the the sad thing about this is that the intelligence community and the US government know Exactly what happened in both cases, but whether this will ever come out or not is is doubtful I think what we really need is a whistleblower and I think in people in their Conversations with people who work for the government in national security should subtly hint to people that this might be a good idea Finally, I think It's important to assess just how serious What is going on today in Syria really is I consider this just as bad as the invasion of Iraq And there are two reasons for that for one thing ISIS was on the verge of destruction. It's gone the other way The other thing was the Russian relationship was improving that's gone the other way These are extremely serious issues and I think that they're going to be very destructive for the United States if Trump is not ranked in Thank you Is that on okay Well, I think this is a very good time to talk about peace and war from Historicals perspective, it's a good idea since 100 years ago this week We began the week at peace and we ended the week at war so We're talking today in part about prospects for peace today are there prospects and As a historian, I'm a little bit conflicted there because historians are are pretty good with the past and we're pretty bad with the future So I remember the day I told my or the two weeks I told my students at the Berlin wall, which I'd just been Seeing after a research trip to East Germany would not fall in my lifetime or theirs and two weeks later it fell So they were pretty pleased you can imagine so I have three I have three short points and Two are kind of historical and one is not quite as historical First of all this vilification of Russia that we see in the press the systematic cranking up of Of the steam and above all of Putin as the as yet one more face of evil I've been working a lot lately thinking about American intervention into the war in a in a course of a series of essays and I'm just put in mind of the whole run-up to World War two World War one and American intervention in particular the press was a pretty much British subventions but There were many many forces of the government that that really made it Made it appear that the Kaiser was the face of evil and that the Germans were the the root of all evil This was this was a technique that had been invented a while before by the British but But it was used in this big way to say okay focus people's people's ideas on this one face of evil a phrase by the way which Time magazine adopted beginning with many tyrants in our times Gaddafi and many others but Since then it has become much more sophisticated and we've got a We've got a virtual machinery of creating faces of evil in that same imperial city that that David Stockman mentioned and They can really crank them out on demand and and make Everybody that same sort of Time magazine face of evil so this has become the indispensable part of the the sort of propaganda for war I think and that's where we find ourselves today looking at Assad and we had we had to have at this point some kind of Terrible event with children involved the second point is that there were There were in the in the period of World War one of as I say I've been working on American intervention and It's a tragic but exciting material to study One aspect the heroic rearguard action by About 50 members of the house and six-rate senators Who who just fought like mad to keep that war from happening in spite of having the deck stacked against them and so forth They they filibustered an arm ships bill which fighting Bob La Follette said Would mean war if it passed and they filibustered that out of existence, but a few days later the the administration was able to conquer anyway and just Persuade everybody they vote was said 50 congressmen opposed and six senators La Follette and Norris and others opposed But I want to point out this and thinking about this. They they did all this without a coherent anti-war Anti-interventionist movement with a with a deep background of economic and a political philosophy behind it They did it without Ron Paul they did it without the Ron Paul Institute They did it without the Mises Institute So I say all honor to their names, but I do believe that puts us in a better situation today Finally just a very short point if peace is to have a chance I Let me give my opinion it won't come because of our of some individual politician who comes to power and makes peace It has to come from changing minds and perceptions Something that I suppose all of us in this room are engaged in and a part of Education at all levels is certainly the key and in this regard there is I think since 2003 and above all since 2008 and the election there is a huge growth in the understanding of the deep state and Therefore, I'm optimistic about the prospects for peace Thank you very much professor and thank you Phil for your comments I'm going to take the the right of the chair I guess and ask and ask a couple of questions one each of you Professor Julie, I'm fascinated by the media. I always have been I think it's such an important part of How it shapes our opinions and our views of the world and I think you made a very interesting comment at the time of World War One What a strong role the media played in the decision And one thing I noticed when the Syrian missiles flew and the stories came out of why It seemed like the media in the large sense was completely Bifurcated and I mean on the one hand the mainstream media was lockstep as David Stockard mentioned lockstep behind But in Jeff Dice's mentioned this we now can create our own media for better or for worse through social media and I went on to my Twitter and my Facebook and I looked at the people and the institutions that I follow and it was night and day They were questioning they were speculating in some cases. They were conspiracizing if that's a word So how what do you make of this idea that the media monopoly has been broken? Oh, I think that's I think that's really important. I think it's vital to Everything we're doing. I mean think of the multitude of sort of network connections that end up with with all of us being here together in this room Yeah, it's very it's a very crucial thing to our movement and and your your shows Ron Paul Institute and you know, I watch I Watch YouTube videos and get a great information from From all kinds of people. Yeah, I think this is crucial and as you say it just goes it's this kind of viral Quality, so that's wonderful And Phil I'll ask you a quick question, you know You spent decades in the intelligence community still know people there and have good contacts you mentioned that they know What happened was very different than what we've been told is happening if you could take a guess What do you think is going on in the intelligence community right now as we sit here? Well, I can't speak for the whole intelligence community But I certainly can speak for the circle of people that I know that are retirees and some of whom are still in fact Working on contract in for the US government There's a great deal of dissent going on in terms of what is happening This is has been generated by the fact that As I hinted at before there are people inside the system Who witnessed what happened two days ago and filmed it saw it happening live from a drone And they talked to their friends and they say look what we saw what we perceived was precisely Or was a lot closer to what the Russians are saying happened then what the White House is saying happened I was personally astonished when President Trump Immediately jumped on Syria There was no way in hell that he could have known what he seemed to think he knew at that point and dad made the Comment to me that basically he was getting his feed from what was going on in the mainstream media in other words He wasn't talking to his intelligence community, which could have given him possibly Some reason to pause Instead he was listening to what Fox News was saying So this is a very scary thing if we have a president who's driven more or less by by What is perceived or is perceivable as factual information and is more driven by Sentimental information that's being put out by the media Which is basically a commercial product trying to sell what it has and saying what it thinks will be most popular Do we have some questions out there from the audience? first hand went up in the back You got to catch this though, right the key if you don't it's a miss Okay Neat all right, so I can't anybody hear me Okay I have a question about the concept of extreme vetting in light of what is happening in Europe Is that a good thing to do extreme vetting or is this just a case of being xenophobic and paranoid? Extreme vetting again is is kind of a catchphrase if you're if you're opposed to it You you see it as an extremist act and if you're in favor of you see it as something justifiable I think the reality is that our immigration system Our refugee system our asylum system. They're all connected Is broken? How do you tell that someone who comes from a war zone who has no documents who he is what he's about what he's doing? So when when Donald Trump was raising these issues initially they made a lot of sense the problem is it then becomes Dogma it becomes doctrine and the doctrine punishes the innocent together with the guilty without fixing the system I would be in much in favor of them looking for ways to fix the system rather than to punish people who might get caught up in it Norman Conventional wisdom in DC on Thursday was that the Trump administration with the allegations of The Manufactured scandals of his connections to Putin and the failure to pass Obamacare repeal and replace was causing his administration to flounder Conventional wisdom on Friday morning was he was on the path to becoming the next Lincoln because he was killing a lot of children To what extent do you think that those political considerations may have may have contributed to a wag the dog type scenario? At least in the Oval Office and also what what does this mean between the reported conflict between Steve Brandt and the more? nationalist populist America first or restrained foreign policy and Rents previous and Trump's son-in-law who represent more of her traditional establishment tarry and Rule the world and invade the world and invite the world point of view. I agree Well And I basically do agree with the premise of your questions which which all were aimed at yeah, the things we've been talking about I May kick this back to that Phil if he wants to take that or you did well I was just gonna say you know there is a precedent when president Clinton got into trouble in a different sort of way and The Aspen family of factories in Sudan were taken out. So there certainly is a precedent for this sort of thing Is there any sense that? this in other words if if he was Just reading the news and not and not getting not resorting to intelligence. Is there is there any way that that was? Formulated rounded created that situation by the intelligence community I don't think it was created by the intelligence community was clear created by the White House is pretty clear I think it is a plausible hypothesis that Trump would allow this to happen or encourage this to happen as a way of getting back at the Russia gate attacks against him by saying look I'm doing something against the Russians I'm I'm attacking their ally and it makes a lot of sense that he did that and and there's other There are other elements of it that makes sense to to support that argument for example the Russians knew way in advance that this attack was coming The US had a hotline connected with Russian intelligence and told them an hour before the attack was coming The Russians were and the Syrians were able more or less clear out the air base So it seems to have been an attack that was intended to minimize actual damage as a way to mitigate the reaction of the Russians now that hasn't worked as Dan pointed out the Russians didn't buy into this they're They're very offended by what occurred and what the implications of it are So I think that you know this may have been a clever or as the English would put a too clever by a half move on The part of the administration to to deal with the Russia gate issue and and to look tough at the same time Unfortunately the result has been both to to strengthen the Isis and the other terrorist groups in Syria At the same time weak in the relationship with Russia maybe in a fatal way, so Almost sounds like a hundred million dollar temper tantrum green box You might have partially answered my question already, but my question is given all of the positive rhetoric between Trump Putin pre-election and given the strategic importance of the Negotiations with China and how the timing of the missiles coincided perfectly with China Do you think there was actually any kind of more backdoor like you previously mentioned with Russia where Trump is like Hey, you know if you kind of let me get away with a little missile strike to show demonstration of strength against China Maybe I'll scratch your back in the future. Obviously you gotta you have to Trash talk it in the media and you you have to you know do your things in your PR And then we have to do our PR, but ultimately let's not try to start World War three out of this You know, let me get a little demonstration of strength against China And maybe I'll just help you with Crimea or easing of sanctions down the road after this all kind of plays out We get our cake with China. What what's your thoughts on I guess all of that? Well, I think these I think that's a very possible scenario and of course you can't know we don't have any information on this right now But and of course the basic problem is that it's president who is Came out as being in a sense kind of anti interventionist but but never accepted the premise that I Suppose most of us in this room except that you just you shouldn't go looking for monsters so So I think that's what makes us have to ask all these Do all this specific speculation. It's like the old Sovietologists, you know stringers who sat outside of Red Square to see which lights were on in the Kremlin and things like that, you know It's just it's it's speculation, but I think it's that sounds highly Possible to me And my only problem with that is that the Kremlin all is just we're usually wrong So it's absolutely I worry about speculation on plausibilities And I think oftentimes there's two there's too much complexity put into the possibilities Of these kinds of relationships and I would add that it's it's a very subtle scenario and Trump doesn't do subtle very well Blue box Yeah, I have Two short questions one Phil mentioned that we needed more whistleblowers And I agree and I'm wondering There's that hasn't been much talked about the media about this, but I'm wondering is our contractors Treated differently with regard with results to the whistleblower statute and then also I was Real shortly I was just wondering why we can't seem to get any or why nobody in Congress in these intelligence communities seems to know anything about Or can't get any documentation about what Happened in various surveillance activities. It's like they're being stonewalled Yeah, well two questions there whistleblower There are fact there's federal legislation for whistleblowers who are government employees a whistleblower legislation is my understanding For people who are just employees of companies varies from state to state. I Think that's the reality So we'd have to depend on what the law was in the state where the whistleblowers company was located So it's it's not as easy for contractors. That's for sure This and and what was the second question? Oh, yeah, got it. Yeah, got it. Okay As this was as being debated on Thursday They're debating in the Senate a resolution condemning Syria and calling for action the It was my understanding that the senators were not receiving any background information from the intelligence community And the only reason I couldn't I couldn't I couldn't Possibly understand why that was the case was because the White House must have been blocking it And so yeah, this is this is an awful situation where our elected representatives are not allowed to see the information that the government has When they're being called upon basically to agree with a document that's calling for possible acts of war. It's incredible But I mean I wonder if they not getting any information because there isn't any information everyone says that The Putin hacked the election Russian hacked the hack the election Well, what did they do? You know and then when they're put into a corner they say they say something vague like somehow RT mesmerized America Mesmerized a middle America Factory worker into voting for Trump, you know when you pin them down they can't point to what what did the Russians do? Did they hack the ballot box? No, they didn't do that. We know they didn't do that What did they do did they hack the did they hack Podesta's emails? Well, his password was password So, you know, there wasn't a lot of geniuses and then there's the crowd-strike issue You know the the only organization that took the forensic evidence of the hacking Turns out to be founded by a guy who has very shady circumstances Very closely tied to the Atlantic Council, which is a pro let's go to war Russia outfit and also is on the payroll of the FBI Yeah, and the other the other thing I would point out when you talk about chains of evidence You know if a sophisticated intelligence service, which certainly the Russians had was setting out to do this hack to de demoralize our democracy to to get Donald Trump elected as all that has been alleged and basically bought completely by the mainstream media They would be able to hide their tracks and they would there Believe me there are a number of things that they could do to get this information and to make sure that nobody would be able to Pick up the trail as to where it finally went So I'm not saying the Russians did it, but I'm saying if they did it Well, it's a waste of time to do an investigation and that's why these investigations are such a frustrating thing They're gonna go on for months and months and months all they're basically gonna do is infeble the Trump administration Which after Thursday might be a good thing But they're not gonna accomplish anything Okay, let's go to green Yeah, a simple question Why do we believe the North Koreans have nukes all the tests so far have been well Well under critical mass if you don't have 15 kilotons. You don't have critical mass. You didn't have a nuke So why is it that we're believing these one kiloton tests which could just as easily be fertilizer bombs The fact is many people in the intelligence community don't believe that North Korea has a nuclear weapon They believe just as you are speculating that the the tests that the nuclear that the North Koreans have Have pointed to as evidence that they have these weapons were caused by conventional explosives or similar and There are people that have been saying that and believe that It's obviously in North Korea's interest to to allege that it has nuclear weapons as a deterrent So I think you have to pay your money and take your choice But the US government obviously has by and large bought into the theory that they do have nuclear weapons Think we have time for one more. I've got the blue in the corner Thanks for the panel guys. I'm a PhD student So my question is more about the role of academics and other pieces of the intelligentsia How do you view both normatively and positively so how you think it ought to be and how it just is right now? The role of academics and so-called the intellectual class with regard to the anti-war movement Thank you overwhelmingly still in in academe and especially in the disciplines with history and political science for relations sociology these kinds of disciplines People are financed by money that directs them in a certain way for generations the professors and the professoriate has been completely Indoctrinated by stages as they go through graduate school and So if you took the whole picture it would it would look pretty grim But but on the other hand most of these academics are pretty quiescent and You know, they're they're they're basically Investigating the the dress links of dolls in 18th century, New York or something, you know, that's that's not really that Striking so I think that there are that there are a few academics who are really Who are really effective and they We Some of them work in different kinds of institutions. Some of them are at High-profile research institutions and some are not but I think that for example, if you if you go to one of the Mises economics conferences, you'll you'll find that there are our fellow Travellers everywhere throughout the throughout the disciplines so That too, I mean, I think I think it's a big uphill battle to To think that you would ever convert that that kind of mass and those kinds of years and generations of of sort of indoctrination sort of the acceptance of social democracy sort of the acceptance of Marxism light and and all of these kinds of things but But again, I mean I see that in this case The glass is not at all half full but there's there's something there in the glass anyway, and I think that that's That's still very useful to have. I Would just add to that the Put in a plug for the Ron Paul Institute's academic board We have people like professor Klaus Ren who's dedicated his career To promoting a better foreign policy and a brilliant man and also professors Flint and Hillary Leveret Flint is the University of Pennsylvania and Hillary is that teaching an American they wrote a seminal work going to Tehran which argued that We need a Nixon to China moment to have an opening with Iran, which to his credit is something that President Obama did To the consternation of almost everyone in Washington So they get credit for that and I think we're going to have to close out the panel But thank you very much to the panelists Phil Geraldi professor Huntouli. Thank you so much for joining us


you put your card in for me. Petty Officer Christian Bennett has a unique job on board USS Mount Whitney and she's learned a few things working in the ship store. When people find that you're interested in who they are and who they're called, they want to talk and I find that people always come down to the ship store just to talk, you know. They just want to, hey how you doing, you know, I came and bought some chips but I really wanted to talk for about 15 minutes because I know that you're interested. She has a unique opportunity to serve forces from all over the world and she thinks one thing can make all the difference in a customer's experience. I think number one is always important to smile.  Then its whole department has a positive outlook on interacting with our allies when they're on board the ship. We have flags from all over every country that we've been to and I think that it's to show that we are, you know, good ambassadors for the United States. Just a bag of chips and a smile can make all the difference. Petty Officer Emily Williams, USS Mount Whitney.


Y Pwylliannod, ac maen nhw'n gwybodaeth yw'r 17th gweithio ffwyd diwethaf y merthun ddameth i ddweud yn Y Cymru yw 2022. Y agenda item 1 â'r hyn a ddefnyddio viadau ar y cyffredinol â ddifolio. Yn hwn mynd i'r ysbydd i ni i gilydd o 5 ac 6 yna ar y prif. Yr Meddwl Eddard? Dym ni'n ddim yn gwybod, yno'n gwybod Cymru, yna gyda'r ddyddol, mewn bobl ydych chi'n ei gael galle i Gaeliaeth Cymraen, ac nid i ddweud eich frofod i gwneud eich gaeliaeth i gaeliaeth Cymraen, cael y mynd? Maen nhw'n eu prynhawn o hollegydd. Fy er mwyn, i gyda'r llai ymmyngor eich bobl, yma gael ei wneud gyda'r gwneud i gaeliaeth i gaer eich bobl yn gennych gyda'r parwg ddynaf, fel ychydig. Felly, rydw i'n meddwl. Rydw i'n meddwl eu cyfrifoedd yr ysgrifennidau? Mae wneud yn fifio'r wildiau ac i'r byw sy'n gweithio'r cymdeithasolol. Mae hefyd yn gweithio gyasgio'r cyfrif ar gyfer cyfio'r gweithio cyfrif, i ffôr i gael eich cyfrif, i ddargarwydau cyfrif, i gael hynny'r gweithio a'r gweithio cyfrif, a i gael eich gwaith gyflosfiadau, i ffôr gweithio gweithio'r cwmdeithio'r cyfrif. Felly, maen nhw'n gweithio'r Cymdeithasol, Llyw Grwyddyn i les iddangos, o'r lleiw yng Nghymru, ac ydw i'r lleiw ystafell, ac mae o'r leidio ein bod yn fysgr i'i gael ei ddatblygu.  It is brought good cross-party interests, and it has continued into this session, gooding with members that now sit on the RAIN committee and the NSET committees in Parliament. I think it will be good cross-party group and having been a convener of previous cross-party groups and previous members of the committee as well, I recognised that there are a lot of cross-party groups in operation at the moment. Na wnaeth beth y cyfaintio fod yn glas, a'r fawr rai amser, a ydych chi i gais i gith averenes o'r ffartigau ymfermau o bobl hwnnw i ddiddordeb yn ddod o'r ffordd o arddangos gw Dancing Fars. Mae oedd nhw'n fawr i chi, dwi'n nhw'n fawr, dwi'n nhw'n nhw'n nhw'n nhw'n nhw i ddiddordeb yn gweld ar hyn o brin sydd yn cyfrifion gwyllu cyfaintio ar gyfer hyn o gyfrifion hyn o'r mae'n fawr i ddim yn gwneud y cwpio'r ddau'r cwpio? Rwyf wedi bod yn cychydigol cyd-dŷrg o'r sydd wedi'i ddau cyfnodol o'r cyfnodol, rwyf wedi'i ddau cyd-dŷrg o'r cyd-dŷrg o'r cyfnodol. Rydw i chi'n ddim yn gwneud i gael cyfnodol o'r cyfnodol o bob hyn o'r potensiol o'r ddau cyfnodol? Rydw i chi'n ddoch chi'n ddau cyfnodol o bob hyn o'r ddau cyfnodol o bob hyn o'r ddau dweud o'rgynno answered the CPGs. The remit is pretty clear. It brings the advantage. If we brought together a programme of potential events, we would then reach out to others and see if there is interest in hosting some of those jointly. There is much of a clear focus on nature and climate emergency. This is the space that does not exist at the moment for discussion and, I think, to get that joined up. ond bydd o wedi cy客lowania solidarion ac ydw i ddweud blaenonach, safGRM ynскогоw. The Prime Minister has incredible confidence in that very broad Cross-party representation of MSPs of indicated interests, obviously many of them sit on other CPGs but to use that contact as the network. With regard to the Secretariate, which is Scott Links, does he just want to explicar who Scott Link is? The Scottish Environment Link is the umbrella body for the environmental NGOs in Scotland. It is a well-resourced, well-experienced organisation, and it gives staff the ability to discharge the duties of the Secretary of the Interior when they are working with my office. I am pleased to work with the Scottish Environment Link in the past, and I think that it has the confidence by all the members of the group as well. In many ways, when we look at the organisation's list, the participants have given, Doing it because you are forwarding it is further and it is much broader than that, given the Forum Nature of Scotland. I thank you for your comment on the responsibility that you and your office will have with regard to the CPG, which is something I might address at the end but not specifically about your CPG. Do members of the committee have any questions? Felly, rydyn ni'n gweithio i chi'n gweithio cyfnod o'r cross-party group ond cross-party group on rural policy. Rwy'n meddwl i chi'n gweithio, Mark, yn gweithio'r gweithio, ond rydyn ni'n gweithio i chi'n gweithio i chi'n gweithio i chi'n gweithio. And I'm just concerned about the overlap and I'm concerned about how you're gonna manage that because a lot of the subjects that you are relating to are covered within those groups. So could you just explain to me a little bit more about how you've reached out to the other groups to find out and have you been looking at their work programmes to see whether this cross-party group neatly fits in? wedi'u sigud o driffoedd o'r peth o'r hyn o'r rhanol. Mae ydych chi weithio ar ôl y defnyddio'r perthawyr cymryd y cilwyr.سegwnaeth eich gast o adnod, ac mae'r cerfnod a'u glifwyr. Dyma mae'r ddyneb yn ei ddysgu y nature and climate emergencies. Anon przyllкуwys y fawr, mae dweud gallu cuir bath yn dduldio o'r mittaf cyfnod yn bach-gredwol aktarn, rydym ni won't y cryw trademark o esienne cyfffridd ac perióed mahesair hwn i ddod.  The topics doesn't list specifically climate emergencies, they lists a lot of topics that are covered by others. The other question that I had in my commune, if I may, was just on the organisation's. On the basis that a lot of the subject areas that you are going to discuss are covered by user groups. Can I ask why you have just gone for environmental groups within the organisations on it and no user groups in relation to the areas that you are discussing, agriculture, agriculture, forestry, national parks? These are the initial organisations that have come together to propose this group and they have a very specific interest around climate and nature and the interrelations between the two. However, membership is open so if other organisations would be interested in coming to the space then they would be welcome to do that and we would welcome broad conversations about how we can tackle both emergencies together. I think for this to be meaningful it would require those groups to come in for us to have proper debate and discussion. Okay, I think that we are on hand with those. Thank you, Edward. Any other questions from the committee? Alexander? Thank you, convener. Good morning, Mark. I think you've outlined the necessity potentially for a group of us to come together and collaborate with other groups and I think that that is an opportunity because some of these are quite long standing who have been looking at the system over the last term and even prior to that. You talk about the interconnections and there's no doubt that there are interconnections as to how that will be the case and you talk about that you want to influence the government policy as to how things go forward. The forum is to discuss that and it will change and how to influence government policy. Can I ask about how you would envisage that taking place and if you have an agenda to that cause of making sure that you are running parallel with government policy or trying to influence government policy, how you would achieve that? I would hope that the government and members of the government would be involved in the cross-party group and indeed I think in one of the early discussions that we had we were intending to invite a government minister. It would be for the government to recognise this group to attend CPG meetings and to respect the work of the CPG and to listen to its work. I would hope that the CPG acting as a forum for discussion around policy ideas and programmes that could be taken forward to tackle nature and climate emergency would be a benefit to officials, the government ministers and others. I think that we want to make this group a success. We want to make it an important forum where ideas can be discussed. I think that from that government can learn and individual MSPs can learn and stakeholders can learn from each other as well. Thank you. Thank you, Alexander. Any other questions? Thanks very much, convener. I am going to be slightly perlkel here in terms of the remit. Would there be items on your agenda going forward in terms of lowland restoration and also lowland deer management as well? That would be up for the members of the group to discuss that in terms of the early agenda topics. We have had some topics that have been discussed already. There is quite a lot of interest, not just in land use but in the marine environment as well, how blue carbon can restore marine environments but also lock up carbon, for example. I guess I would urge you to come to the meeting. If you want a discussion that talks about lowland land use as well as upland land use, then I am sure that that would be very welcome. However, there are clearly topics that apply to the whole of Scotland, and we are trying to get that broad, well-rounded conversation about what the solutions might be and what the challenges might be. Thank you, Collette. I think that it would be disappointing if a proposed CPG did not put out an invite to members of this committee to come along and influence it. Which is useful. I will try my best to sell it. Absolutely. This is not pertinent just to this particular application, but Mark, you are satisfied of the responsibilities that you would take on as conveners and MSPs, both with regard to the requirements of the CPG but also the notice periods. You are happy with that? Absolutely, and I have been a CPG convener in the past. I have resisted taking on too many CPGs as both a member and in any kind of continuing role, but I feel with this one that this is a genuine space where there is interest and enthusiasm for these topics. I am prepared and office is prepared to work with the Secretary to make this a success. Excellent. Thank you very much, and thank you for attending this morning. The committee will consider the application of its next agenda item, and the class will notify you into your course, but I wish you all the best for the rest of today. Thank you very much. I am just hoping you are just going to I would now like to welcome Michael Marra, who is the proposed convener of the second group that is coming before us today, which is Families Supporting Children's Learning. Good morning, Michael. Welcome to the committee. Would you like to explain the purposes and ideas behind your proposed CPG? With pleasure. Thanks for taking the time to listen this morning for the consideration of the committee. Essentially, the cross-party group on families supporting children's learning is to try and bring a focus and a highlight and a forum for discussion for parents, carers, families, parents organisations, MSPs and other interests of group educators and more to discuss and debate matters relating the links between families and the education system. I think that there are a couple of very apparent and current issues. There is a broad reform agenda being pursued by the Government at the moment around education, and it is vitally important, I think, that families' voices are heard within that agenda. Also, there are specific challenges that have been highlighted to the various members who are signatories to the group about the post-Covid environment, the challenges that families have had in accessing schools and education to play their active role in the education of their children, to discuss their education with formal educators in school and to better understand what their role is in the home. Making sure that, in that post-Covid environment and the impacts that we know are long lasting in terms of young people, we can have a positive influence in that area. I think that the pandemic did highlight some of the very specific and real and material role of parents, carers and guardians in education when the formal school settings were not allowed. There are some good experiences that came out of that in terms of the kind of learning that was going on in the home that we need at this moment to capture before they become part of folk memory rather than the possibility of policy. That is an absent moment. Thank you for that. It is a very full paragraph in respect of the application with regard to the proposed discussions, which is helpful. I thank you for that. I take you to the proposed secretariat of Connect. Would you like to put on the record who they are and what the coverage would be from them? Connect is a national organisation that represents parents groups across Scotland. We have had wide discussions with them and they are keen to provide the secretariat function for that group. We will reach out well beyond one individual group and they are well aware of that in terms of the need to engage as widely as possible, but I think that they would provide the right kind of services and focus to that. Essentially, they are an engagement group. There is a group of people who are involved in trying to bring people to the table. I think that we have a representative discussion there well suited to do that work. Are you confident that one of the absences in the application is individuals out with here who would be involved in it? Do you have confidence that Connect can give access for individuals who want to come along? I am presuming that the CPG would also welcome direct contact from individuals who might have experiences to share. I think that that would be absolutely critical to make sure that we have a bred voice. There are certainly voices who feel that they have not had enough representation in the education system and there are some who perhaps feel that they have very well represented in the education system. I think that it is really important that we capture good practice and make sure that we can spread that as widely as possible. I think that Connect are well placed to do that form of engagement work and that has formed a central part of the early discussions that we have had with the organisation about how we make sure that it is a representative voice and as widely as possible to draw on different individuals. That is very helpful. I am going to open up to the committee for questions and now Edward has a question that is all right. Edward, I will come to Bob first who has a question. Thank you for coming along to explain the purpose across part of the group and seek approval. I do have some potential concerns. I put on record the word potential but I do want to scrutinise it. I am always concerned when I see one non-MSP member of a cross-party group. I get that Connect Scotland are an umbrella organisation engaging but I am really keen to see individual groups directly involved in cross-party groups rather than all filtered through one body. I need to get to know Connect Scotland better because I make no judgment on whether a wonderful organisation but I need to tell them a little bit more about them and how they effectively make sure that they can reflect views of what is a massive range of groups and families across Scotland. I would say that their role in this is not to directly reflect those views. It would be to provide the secretary that function and try to bring other people to the table. They are not a rep they will have their own purpose as a group in terms of their own connect but the role that they would play as the secretary in this is very much to help to help to make the organisation of the CPG work but also to help us with broader engagement. The purpose of the organisation, if I can, is to undertake wide surveys and to engage. They have online discussion groups and communities around this area and they have a good reach into lots of parts of the country into a very large number of individuals. It is fair to say that some of those, the nature of their work in terms of talking about how parents and families can become involved in education, I think probably surfaces at times more problems, people who are frustrated around the need to engage in their young people's learning and perhaps find barriers. I think that what I have already said to the convener, I think that it is really important that we both try and draw positive examples as well as people who are finding frustrations. I think that that broader engagement is really critical. I think that part of the set-up is making sure that we can then get this cross-biting group up and running and make sure that we then engage formally with other external groups and stakeholders who have an interest in this agenda. I would say that part of the purpose of this, Mr Doris, is that this particular topic and the discussions that we have had has felt somewhat neglected perhaps in terms of sometimes parents' voices not finding a place within the education policy discussion, and that this is perhaps part of the issue that we need to raise that profile and bring a focus to it, rather than that. That is very helpful in a couple of other questions. First, I am wondering whether you would anticipate that, if we were to look at this cross-party group this time next year, we would see more than connect as known MSP members. Maybe you can address that along with my other question. You mentioned the opportunities for families to engage maybe lacking in the Parliament with cross-party groups, and I do know what obviously you mentioned the cross-party group of the children and young people that exist in the Parliament. So that would have a quick look at their most recent meeting, and I can see that they had youth-linked Scotland at their most recent meeting looking at their pandemic impact study, and at that meeting where families outside and parenting across Scotland. There is an example of parents' groups being able to directly engage with the cross-party group specifically on matters of Covid, which you mentioned is one of the subjects that you are interested in. So I am just wondering whether I do not see connect listed on that. I could be wrong, perhaps I have got that wrong. Have connect tried to maybe join that particular cross-party group to put their experience and network at play, because that would avoid duplication and could enhance that other cross-party group. I am just wondering if you have spoken at other cross-party groups, because it seems like a really obvious vehicle to raise all the issues that you have listed in your application forum. On your first question, I am certainly yes. I think that in the years time that we are looking at this, the involvement of other groups would be a signal of a success in demand in this area. I have to say that I suppose that I am trying to understand what the broader demand is for I would be keen if we could set this up and see whether there is the real demand that I believe there is and that other members have expressed to me that they have seen as well for a particular forum on those issues. So I think that testing that demand through this establishment would be the right thing. I do understand in terms of the other meetings and other forums that exist. I think that there is a frustration, I think, within parts of the communities that we all represent, that perhaps parental voices are not given as the high enough profile within the general discussion. I certainly think that as a member of the Education and Young People's Committee and yourself in the Parliament, Mr Doris, that that is something that we could perhaps reflect on more broadly. You have cited one specific example of a recent meeting. I have to say that I am not entirely clear as to how I can ask Connect whether that was a meeting that they were aware of and engaged in, but there is a broad, as I say, this is not just about Connect as a body or a forum for them. I think that this is a specific forum for those issues about the long-term policy trends, the engagement of families in education policy and the education of their young people in Scotland. I certainly understand that it is a broad, many education touches on many areas of policy and clearly there will be different forums for it. Given that a specific focus around that would be the right thing to do. I mean, I do not doubt the importance and the goodwill and the public interest in all of this, but we are going to get to a stage where there are more cross-party groups in the Arab backbench MSPs in this Parliament. There is a real onus on us to make sure that there is not duplication, quite frankly. I am concerned. I looked to Connect's page and I saw my own child's parent council was listed there. I am not sure if they have listed all the parent councils in Scotland or if individual parent councils have a voice. I am unsure what Connect's involvement has been with other cross-party groups. Having looked at their website, they are clearly a very worthwhile and important organisation, Mr Maras. I do not cast any doubt upon that, but I sometimes feel and this may be not directed at your proposed cross-party group. It is maybe using this public forum convener to signpost to other MSPs in the Parliament some issues that we have that perhaps we need to find out the demand is before we bring a cross-party group for approval. That is not specific to this cross-party group, Mr Maras, I should point out, but there is a real frustration amongst the committee. I will bring you back into reflecting those points, but I cannot deny the significant importance to making sure that parents, families and communities have a direct voice at this place and that Connect is clearly a really strong, valuable and worthwhile vehicle to making that happen. I absolutely agree with you that that is the intention of this cross-party group. There are tensions about how cross-party groups operate more generally across the Parliament. I wonder if you would reflect on that idea of gauging demand before bringing cross-party groups and maybe leasing more carefully with other cross-party groups before proposals are brought forward to this committee? Michael, just before you answer, what I would say is that you are obviously aware of the questions raised about CPGs and, in particular, the balance of work that MSPs have to undertake. So I am more than happy for you to give your views to this committee, but it will form part of our business going forward. But not to detract from Bob's question, it would be interesting about that outreach and the confidence that you have that there is an interest from individual parents, from groups of parents, out of this place. I would say that there is, and I have to say in conversations with other members. I think that and certainly the members on this committee would be happy to hear your views directly on it, but I think that the other members I have spoken to in their caseload in terms of people coming to them and addressing these issues with them. I think that there is a need in the demand, and I think that we would see it well used. I have to say within that that if it worked, we were to find, Mr Doris reflects on it, that in a year's time there are almost sets of tests for what this looks like. I would feel that if, in a year's time, if it was not a forum that was working successfully and it was felt that it was duplicating other work, I would happily recognise that. I suppose the very purpose of this is that there is an issue around families feeling that they do not have a voice and are represented in that broad discussion. Finding a place for that within the Parliament to test that ground would be the right thing to do. The very least to test it, Mr Doris and the convener, if I may, to see whether that is demanded. I have always been somebody who says that if something does not work, we should stop doing it, frankly. I do not think that we do that enough in public policy, so I am not intending to think that this would be something if it does not have success that the Parliament should persist with it for the long term, but I do think that it has. It will give an opportunity, particularly at this moment, for particular issues of concern and we can see what life it would have after that point. I want to ask has been eloquently put by the deputy convener, and I bet Michael, you wish you had got this up and running really early on when we were not worried that there were more cross-party groups than backbench MSPs, and I think we are into triple figures now, which causes us concern. I note, just as an observation, that a lot of your members are sitting on more than four cross-party groups, and I think four is probably pushing it if you are going to get full attention. My question is, I am actually taken by the subject area that you want to look at. What I would like to know a little bit is every local authority has a different approach slightly within that, and what I want to know is how you are going to rope in, if I was being peracule, the highlands into what is something that is going to be happening down in Edinburgh, and how you are going to include the Ornian Shetland, who might have a slightly different approach than the Western Arts. I think that there are very pertinent points. Actually, the variety of engagement mechanisms with different local authorities used for families and the extent to which they are. Of course, that practice varies from school to school, from institution to institution, nursery to nursery, to different places of different approaches, and how much the parents and guardians families of young people are involved in their education. There is a plethora of different wide variety of practice across the country. It is partly about understanding what works and what can best be achieved. I think that there is frustration that comes with perhaps those different practices. It is not to say that we should have a universal approach, but it is about understanding what does work and where success is. That does present a problem, but it is part of the focus of the committee to try to understand what works and how, to what extent we can encourage and recognise the primary role of the family as educators and where young people spend their time, far more time in the family home, learning far more in essence than they do in a formal setting, particularly in early years. The outreach point that Mr Mynton makes in terms of how to be engaged with more remote and rural communities, clearly those will have their own particular challenges in terms of involvement of young families in the young people education that are different to urban environments. I think that it would be absolutely right to address that within the group. We have to make sure that we have online meetings and access available, whether that be in a hybrid format as well as just in the Parliament, but giving it the impriture of the Parliament in terms of this formal setting where we can have these discussions is vital and important. I will leave it there except to say that I will be watching closely at the end of a year to see how you have managed to integrate. Michael, I am taken by the fact that you say that if you do not think that it is working, you will not continue it. That is honest and helpful, and it makes it easier for me to give it a go. We will come to that in the next bit. It is more an observation, Michael, and it is one that I do with every proposal that comes forward with CPGs. It is the actual gender balance on the members of the group. I note that there is only one female on there who is currently on Matleave. Have you put it out there to see whether there is a more gender balance representation on there? Definitely more work to do in that regard. The conversations that I have had with colleagues who expressed some of the similar concerns that Mr Mountain said that I am on so many CPGs already, but it is a really important topic. I am keen to hear and attend and see that that works. Certainly female colleagues who have spoken to a very much of that view, but perhaps have been less inclined to put their name in the first instance in terms of having signed up to many already. I think that there is work to do. It is certainly fair to say that the secretariat is female-led and that that would provide an initial certainly balance to the leadership of the group, but there is more work to do. I appreciate that. I will push contribution rather than leadership. I feel that I have been good-cop and bad-cop all my life. I would like to acknowledge that Megan Gallacher, who is listed as the new cross-party, who should be approved as co-convener of the children and young people's cross-party group. I am sure that it will lead to some strong partnership working. It may acknowledge that there indeed is a gap, but it was not for me to say that. It was for me to ask the question and for you to make the case that there is a gap, Mr Marra, but my question is that, given the significant changes that there is going to be to Scotland's education system, we will both sit on the education committee and the key role of parents and families, whether that changes to assessment, changes to senior phase within school, the SQA. Of course, it is important that parents' voices are heard, so what kind of priority would you give those on-going changes to the work of the cross-party group, should it be approved? Thanks for the reflection on the crossover between Megan Gallacher's position on how both recognise the absence. It is a point well-made, and I am sure that you have perhaps been in my own case. However, in terms of the gap, that is very much something that I was focusing on in the initial picture, I suppose, to put it that way. That reform agenda, which I have mentioned already, is absolutely critical. We should not underestimate the scale of the potential changes that the Government could bring to the table. We are involved in a national conversation, or just kicking off a national conversation stimulated by Ken Muir's report. It is vitally important that families are involved in that, because it is vitally important not just that they have their role as educators but that they are recognised within that process and supported, but that families have faith and buy-in to the education system and that they understand the role it has and the changes and what effect it will have and impact it will have on their family and their young people in years to come. The formal engagement in making sure that there is a space to do it—I have to say at times that it is perhaps something that, during this conversation, I am reflecting on more the absence of parental voices in some of the conversations that we have within the Parliament on those specific reform agendas. Where are we? The Education and Young People Committee in the Parliament commonly has, whether it be in rightly so, trade unionists, youth voice in terms of the youth Parliament, other learners and we do engagement on that basis, but we seldom have structured or outreach conversations with families specifically about how they are involved in their education and the impact that it will have. Even perhaps in reflecting how we ask the Parliament to better reflect those voices, I think that that would be critical. If we are going to make that reform agenda work, I think that doing that work is going to be absolutely central. I think that you have a comment or question. Yes, thank you. Mr Marra, I think that you do identify a gap in the process. There is no denying that. I think that the families that do engage at the moment with this process are those that maybe have youngsters who have a challenge or a need or a disability. They are much more likely to be much more highly engaged in ensuring that their needs for their child or their children are being addressed. The engagement is important, but there are already elements within families, guardians and parents that do not engage because they are hard to get and schools identify that as a problem already in making sure that they get the basics for all children to cover. I see where you are trying to take this and I think that it is very laudable to try to take it in that direction, but there is a concern that it would not necessarily capture all. How are you going to ensure that the engagement is meaningful and that the individuals, the parents, the guardians and the families really feel that their voices are being heard and are making a difference? I think that there is a very pertinent point in terms of the mix of parental voices and family voices within that in terms of what comes to prevalence in different areas and places. I think that Ms Alexander is right in putting some families with a particular strong set of needs who have to become particularly strong advocates for their young person within the education system, but I think that we also recognise that there are middle-class voices where there are parents who have a more prevalent voice within certain establishments because they are more adept advocates for themselves in the situation that their own families face. There are challenges in making sure that we have a real bred voice, but that is identified within the description of the work of the CPG. That is about trying to ensure that we have a bred and a representative bred rather than just people who have a specific and long-standing advocacy around particular issues. It is absolutely right that those voices are heard and we should applaud those parents and families for being the advocates for their young people, but making sure that we have that representative bred voice in our system is really the purpose. It is not easy if it is easy. It would already be being done, but I do believe that there are some places where it is done better than others and it would be good to see if we can learn as a parliament and as a policymaking community how that can be supported. Thank you for attending this morning. I do, as a final comment, which you heard with regard to the last proposed CPG, have a proposal to have co-conveners, but you understand the individual responsibility that an MSP will have as a convener to ensure that the group is compliant and that you respectfully and hurriedly and on time respond to any emails that this committee through its clerks should send you. Thank you very much for attending this morning and we will take the decision in the next agenda item. The clerks will notify you in due course, but thank you for coming in today, Michael. Thank you. We will now move to agenda item three, which is to consider whether to accord recognition to the proposed cross-party groups on nature and climate and family supporting children's learning. Before formally putting that, would anyone like to make any comments with regard to the proposed CPG on nature and climate? It's not for me to object to any particular cross-party group, but I would like to echo convener what you've said and I think all of us feel is there are a huge amount of cross-party groups. The one on nature to me actually is doubling down on what's being done by other groups. Doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, but I think that the committee will have an obligation at the end of the first full year to look at all these committee groups, to see cross-party groups, to see whether they're actually working properly and achieving their aims, because I'm sorry, convener, I cannot see how MSPs in this Parliament, and there are notably ones who are, I wouldn't say committee hoppers, but are committee members, cross-party committee members or group members who must be snowed under. In fairness, I do for and I am snowed under, so I just have that concern. I don't want to vote against it, I think if they'd come in in the first tranche, they probably would have got an easier ride. Unfortunate for them, it's in the last tranche, but I do think we need really to do some work in this committee and I know you acknowledge this on how they're all working, because I fear for them. I'm very grateful for that. Are there any comments about that specific proposed CPG before I had formally put it to the... Well, are we in agreement to a called recognition to the proposed cross-party group on nature and climate? Yes. Excellent. I'd now like to invite comments from members with regard to the proposed CPG on family supporting children and learning. I do think that there's a genuine gap within the Parliament in relation to this area and cross-party groups. I think that there's a strong case to be made. I felt a little bit guilty, making those comments to Mr Marra, but I suppose the point I was trying to make is that we need to make sure that we scrutinise each and every cross-party group that comes before us very carefully, and Mr Marra did amply well in demonstrating that need, just because you ask certain questions and I say that it doesn't mean that you don't support the intention of the cross-party group, but it's maybe, and it's but unfortunate for the witnesses that came today to propose the cross-party groups, that it's maybe again just reflecting that this Parliament and previous incarnations of this committee have taken a permissive view to cross-party groups. If you forum them, we shall grant them, and they shall happen irrespective of whether there's enough MSPs to make them meaningful. That's not a reflection on the two witnesses that we heard from today, whom I'm sure we'll do a sterling job with those cross-party groups. Just to say it, I do see a gap with Covid and with the significant education reforms that there's a real service to the Parliament and the cross-party group. I may even join it myself, but it's important that whoever comes to this committee to propose a cross-party group will scrutinise it pretty carefully. I would agree that Mr Marra has identified a gap in the system, but I have some reservations as to how successful it could be. We've heard about how different local authorities do different things and how some individuals within that processor are much more aligned to lobbying and making things happen. I acknowledge that. I think that it's courageous to try and do this, but I think that it would be advantageous to see what happens after its first year to see whether it has actually made the impact that it's intended to do so, or if it ends up being a slightly geographical impact on certain areas that may be more aligned to doing something rather than covering the whole area. However, I do think that there is merit in giving it the opportunity at this stage to go forward, but as I say, its future will depend on its success. That's very helpful. Any other comments? In fact, just before I put it, I think that what you raised, Bob, is very important. I think that the people who take an interest in this committee, who I know are wide and varied, will be very aware of our growing concern. I think that we articulated it very early on, and perhaps sometimes protecting MSPs even from themselves, because this is a difficult and challenging job. However, there is an important role of CPGs as giving access to this Parliament and a voice into indeed government and something that we will be returning to in the near future when we look at this once a full year has passed from CPG registrations. I think that comments that you make, Alexander, about looking at CPGs after a year to say, wave, you've got to, and indeed your comments about reaching groups that otherwise are sometimes very hard to reach. It was quite refreshing for Michael to commit that, if nothing has happened, it will wind it up. That's the first time I've heard that in an application, but it gives it a bit of confidence. Are we happy to accord recognition to the proposed CPG? Yes, I'm grateful for that. Just before we move into private session, this is the last public committee meeting where the committee has been supported by Joanna Hardy, Joe Hardy, who has been a valiant stalwart behind the scenes for just over seven years, three sessions. I think, certainly from my huge experience of chatting to her, if you want to have an expert on the code of standards, you can go no better than to find Joe. So can I thank you for all of your efforts, particularly since I became convener because I found it enlightening, helpful, and rightly at times you place the taxing questions to be considered. But on behalf of previous committees and this committee, can I thank you very much for all your huge work supporting it? So thank you. I will now move this meeting into private.


Museum, a center for culture where you can explore history, experience art, and discover new ideas through world-class exhibits, programs, and events right in your own backyard. Learn more at longmontmuseum.org.


In the technology world, in the mining and process metallurgy world, there are actually not all that many women. And these days people are really concerned about why that is, and I think there are many reasons. When I started working in the 1970s and 1980s in the workplace you would find lots of pin-up girls, naked women, pictures on the wall. I used to have a very rude drawing on my wall and the women who would join the workforce at that time would clearly have to put up with that. When I went to Sudbury in 1988, the manager of the smelter there, a man named Jose Blanco, a very, very good guy, had pushed all that out of the smelter so that all the calendars were gone. He was probably one of the exceptions to have done that by 1988. I don't think we really got civilized until the 1990s. Certainly not in maybe the late 80s as when the civilization started. At the same, interestingly enough, about 2005, one of the employees, a male who was working in a plant in Wales at the time, called me up and he was complaining about the naked women in the calendars in the workplace in Wales in 2005. So I don't know where Canada goes in the scheme of things but certainly in 2005 they were still there and I think I'm sure they have gone by now but it took a while to do that. I read an article recently that women are very big into engineering that is connected with sustainability, any sort of engineering that is connected to biological fields, I believe, in the education system than more women than men. In the mining it is about, I don't know, something like 20%, perhaps, maybe even less, I think it's less now, maybe 17% women in schools in mining. And it's a real shame because we're not taking advantage of that part of the world's expertise.


We wanted to kind of look at the things that make Docker so good and so consistent. Obviously one of the things that he does as we talk about in the throwing chain reaction is he has a very consistent setup. If you look at this throw or any of the throws really throughout the season you'll notice that the beginning and the start he's very comfortable with the discus and as he moves himself into position he kind of goes here with his arm swing. He's going to go what we call as our three position start. He's going to set up the throw. He's going to take a long pre-wind, a long wind and you're going to notice now one of the things that we say is a little tricky to understand is when we see a throw we're trying to maintain the center line at the start of the throw and he does do that. You'll see that he has movement here but you're going to notice the key thing is when he moves the hips he creates a ton of separation and stretch reflex between the hips and that is going to help him create what we refer to as that big pillar too and so as he creates this shift to the left again getting around the left leg is the big key for any throw or so are the entry side so we're going to notice the length of the entry arm. We're going to notice how the position of the foot is turning ahead. It's past nine o'clock so one of the things you're going to notice too is the weight is forward how he moves right hip with the left foot so as he moves into the throw you're going to notice that he's really leading and this left side is pulling everything long and into the middle of the circle. He's going to get an incredibly wide sweep you're going to see that high wide sweep leg knees are out and you're going to notice that how high the foot is and how level the foot is at this point. The position of the knee driving doping down into the throw he's really pushing that knee to the sprint point you're going to notice that we see the left arm and sweep leg counter balance and again notice the angle of the body and the discus back this is what we refer to as pillar three this is where he's applying speed into the throw and this is where we look at the transition so now he's going to start transitioning from the sprint leg to the middle right the delivery leg and so you're going to notice this is where the rewrap occurs he's going to keep the shoulder long and away you can see the high point of the discus back here and this is the key noticing where he loads and lands he stays on the ball the foot and that knee from this point is just going to continue to be really pushing ahead of the toe throughout the throw you'll notice that that's another difference when we broke down the daniel stall so consistent and it's that that constant acceleration and lack of hesitation and you're really starting to see this with dockers over the last couple of seasons now look at how he stays on the right you're going to notice he lands on the ball he's got that high point here he's got the left arm is really counter balancing him over the right leg which enables him to keep his chest over the right knee and so at this point you're going to see how the knee is going to be moving ahead and watch the elevation of the heel so you'll see that the knee and you'll see that the hip are going to be driving into the throw and the direction that they're going to be facing so as he comes down you'll notice this is what we refer to as pillar four and there's five we notice the block foot coming flat to the ground the elevation of the delivery leg heel so again that's the push of the knee and the hip into the throw and then you're going to see how he maintains that heel that foot on the ground pretty through this point through the delivery but he'll elevate whereas stall will keep it down even a bit longer so Frederick keeps the left arm a little wider and again but you're going to notice the contact at the delivery point both feet are still pretty much on the ground and look where the hip is facing the hip is facing into the sector down this way and that pulls the disc is forward and that's why you see most elite throwers their release is at this point right you're going to see that right back here he's moving so fast so on this breakdown you're going to see that the hip is ahead and the shoulders ahead and that's what creates the whipping motion of the discus and you can see it's not the motion of throwing this way is rotating all the way through so that the discus whips around now let's let's go back and this was what they had called they had initially called it a foul if you look on the throw it's all pretty clean you can see that there was clearly no foul and obviously the video review show there was no foul he's a big dude and he is super strong and super athletic so you know this is a guy that's probably what he's right about six eight and he weighs 340 pounds or so so just just a giant man again i think one of the things that goes on here what trumps everything stall is rock and the beard but in all seriousness one of the things we look at is he's a big guy and he maximizes those levers so look at the look at the length that gets set up you see how he's going to wind set that position and then you're going to see that same length right from here to here you see how he's maintaining that length so we always talk about in our system we want a long setup so we're going to have a long entry and this is all part of getting on balance notice that length that's a great counterbalance when you see the left arm counterbalancing the discus he's going to be setting up a really nice radius and he's setting up a really nice orbit so you see that high point here and you notice that as he comes along we talk about this the first pillar we talk about setting up the second pillar we talk about is setting up maximum power that's getting the axis to rotate around and so the thrower can drive into the throw and this is one of the things that clearly stall does extremely well and if you notice with coach veston's athletes they all have a similar looking technique again i think that's a thing coach v has a system so you're going to notice when you look at any kind of coach they're going to have a system all coaches have a system one of the things that i think coach v talks about is you know keeping level level shoulders and level hips and you can see that stall does that very well and then he's going to be able to move around that axis again we call that pillar two we set and then pillar three is dropping in you're going to notice that stall really does create that nice sprint he's really moving in and you notice again our two level lines of these guys staying here you're going to notice that shoulders and hips again are pretty level what's the key of all this how do we simplify it we've got to get on balance so we set up our start this is one of the things we talked about and we get on balance so once we get on balance now speed is able to be created because now you can actually come out of that imagine a sprinter coming out of the box and if he's leaning to the side he's going to be stumbling he can't be efficient in that linear motion forward if the hips are going this way and they're trying to go this way you're not going to be able to create a sprint that's the same thing in the rotational throws the hips have to be moving in that linear position to the center of the circle so you're going to notice that here one of the things that we've we've seen to think that looks a little different is stall has in my opinion on this throw he has a little bit wider sweep than he has had in some of his previous years and I think this looks exciting because this to me looks like he's throwing huge throws really effortlessly he's banging 68 midgers 69 meters 70 this is a second time over 70 meters this year he just the next day after this 71 meter throw the very next day within 24 hours basically throws 69 meters and rumor has it that there was a foul over 70 as well so a slight foot foul so this guy is on fire throwing extremely well and it's going to be really exciting so the point is here is as he comes to the sprint you're going to see that once you create that linear motion and you're able to create speed and everything's moving efficiently you're going to notice that stall is able to how this his sprint slash block leg you notice how as the foot touches down look at how much the left is with him a lot of times there's something we call the back in where you see young throwers and you'll see young throwers and what they'll do is they're going to back in so they're kind of turning one side and they're leaving the leg back they're not moving the whole system of the hips and that's one of the things again having met and gotten the opportunity to speak to coach V about how they kind of train he's looking at that that level hip and shoulder position something we've included in our system you know that we've we've taught for a lot of years as well but just using different vernacular I think coach V's is very easy you know concept to grasp makes total sense but if you don't set up this position here correctly that's going to be very difficult to maintain level because if the hips are falling across the circle then you're going to have the athlete you're going to have diverging force and you need converging energy in the throw and that's what creates speed so again once we create balance you're going to see stalls extremely balanced great tension you're going to notice this next piece that he sets up you're going to see everything pretty level notice that length again that we saw in the beginning of the throw he's maintaining that throughout the throw and then right here he's going to come around and then you're going to see you're going to see this position we talked about this with Valerie Allman and you see here's that 70 meter look at that that axis and look at how everything squares up so this is going to enable everything how we get that vertical axis so that we can generate power we call this pillar five and this is now he's creating blazing speed now he's going to be able to rotate and take the throw out and again you're going to see the block arm is see it it's long it's stops he's going to have the shoulder stop the block stop here and then everything is moving out and around and he's creating that really nice long path you see that discus is right on the tip of that arrow so the keys again how does he get there this is our opinion again what we're looking at is this is a tremendous throw we're not trying to say oh we should do this or you should do that we're trying to say we think this is what they're doing these are the key biomechanical points you see these are good looking positions why they're happening and generally that's going to be the most important thing as you're developing throw or to understand a lot of these core things how are you going to get on balance how are you going to create speed when those things happen in your balance you're going to be able to come through and typically smash the delivery and that's what you're seeing pretty consistently we saw he's throwing these big throws week in and week out and it's really cool to see so that's our kind of our rundown again huge congrats to Daniel and coach v and global throwing and again with a year where we've had such limited competitions to watch and everybody lost seasons it's really a nice relief to get some of these types of results and see these things happening and really excited when the season can get back to normal congrats to those guys hopefully you guys enjoyed this video be sure to give us a thumbs up comment below share this video to give a little love out there and we will see you guys on the next video


Welcome back for another edition of Titans Takes presented by Kroger. It is Oilers Week as it's homecoming. Former Oilers players and Titans players back in the music city enjoying the weekend prior to the Atlanta game. I don't know the other judges. I was only all of them. I played ten years and never missed a game. That uniform will always be hung proudly in my home. The great Billy White shoes Johnson finds out that he is being inducted into the Oilers Titans Ring of Honor. Titans and Tails Tito's Dog Day was earlier this week. That's it for Titans Takes presented by Kroger. We look forward to seeing you at the game on Sunday as the Titans take on the Falcons. They have on those Oiler uniforms from 1981 through 1998. The classics. We'll see you Sunday. Tighten up everybody.