d that we cannot respect and seem to respect our wildlife. When you see these beautiful animals close, as I did recently in Galloway, it really is such a privilege. I totally condemn anybody who takes part in poisoning and persecution of these creatures. We should value them, we should treasure them. They are becoming part of our heritage. They are back in our countryside again, and it is tremendous to see them. When the minister appeared in front of the rural affairs committee back in November of last year, he was able to report a downturn in incidents that recorded raptor poisoning, noting the figures that improved from 30 in 2009 to 3 in 2012. Interestingly, however, he said that it goes without saying that we cannot afford to be complacent on how prophetic those comments have proven to be. For hostilities, it seems, have been resumed in big style. 2013 saw a doubling of the number to six, and this year has been even more depressing. Of course, other criminal non-poisoning recorded incidents involving raptors have been on the increase as well, going up from 10 in 2012 to 17 last year. Ironically, that comes against the backdrop of a marked increase in police resources being deployed across Scotland for the purposes of tackling wildlife crime. It is worth noting that an area like Angus, which sadly is a hotspot, those dedicated resources are further supplemented by the community or police officers who are operating in rural parts assisting the work of the designated wildlife crime officer, PC Blair Wilkie. As we all recognise, however, by its nature, getting on top of an issue such as raptor poisoning is hugely challenging. The Scottish Wildlife Trust, the RSPB, both want penalties for such offences to be toughened up. I think that we all have some sympathy with that view, along with who are relevant to the case and where convictions have been achieved, implementing the vicarious liability provisions of the Wain Act, to send the message to landowners that they are responsible for the actions of those who employ them. However, first of all, we must catch those criminals, and the difficulty is that those barbaric practices are mostly, although they are not always carried out in remote rural parts where there is unlikely to be anyone around. Isn't it the case that they will continue down the path that they do, not because of the nature of the punishment that they risk necessarily, but because they believe that there is little chance that they will ever actually be caught? There is a £26,000 reward and offer for information leading to a successful prosecution of those who are responsible for the Black Isle incident. The fact that police thus far have failed to charge anyone possibly illustrates the fundamental difficulty in catching those criminals. That said, when hotspots emerge and there are one or two of those in the north-east of Scotland, then surely those should become the focus of intensive attention and consideration of general licensing arrangement, as mentioned by the minister. However, I think that we also need in the interests of fairness and balance to acknowledge that we aren't talking here about every estate being involved, nor a sizable number of gamekeepers being caught up in those barbaric practises. The reality is nothing like that. There is undoubtedly a problem and an acceptable problem out there, but it is important to get this in an appropriate perspective. The Scottish Gamekeepers Association has demonstrated that when its members are found guilty of this sort of behaviour, it will act. Three SGA members have been expelled from the organisation for wildlife crimes involving raptors in the past 18 months. I know that Scottish land and estates have made crystal clear to their members that there is no place for raptor killing within their ranks. However, of course, that is a serious problem, a serious matter, and we need to find a way to catch the perpetrators and make an example of them. I therefore welcome the measures that are announced by the minister today. However, I wonder also if we perhaps need to consider the introduction of a brief amnesty on the chemical carbifurin. Over the past eight years, some 28 eagles have been found dead on or have disappeared from Scottish grouse moors. I understand that of those 15 were poisoned either by carbifurin or through a lethal concoction involving carbifurin, which is of course illegal in Scotland and highly dangerous to humans as well. Such a measure would undoubtedly prove controversial, and perhaps it is naive to think that people who have gathered such poisons would be prepared to hand them over. However, we have reached the point where any measure, which has the potential to reduce the threat to Scotland's birds of prey, needs to be considered. Having had such an amnesty, we could might I suggest then greatly increase the penalties for being in possession of carbifurin and let alone using it. This debate is timely, as we are in the grips of what would appear to be a serial bird poisoned in a small area of Rossshire. It appears to be an overt act of cruelty, and the perpetrator needs to be caught and feel the full force of the law. It is even more destructive, given the work that has taken place to reintroduce those magnificent birds into the area. That reintroduction has provided many people with a great deal of pleasure, and I for one have really enjoyed watching those birds in Easter Ross. I would ask the Scottish Government to assess the barrier to detection and prosecution in this case, and, if need be, amend the law accordingly. I would also ask for consideration of an amnesty for pesticides and poisoning, and I understand that the minister in his opening remarks talked about removing toxic substance from our countryside. I look forward to hearing what he has to say about that in closing, because a lot of those could be lying about in ouses and barns and disturbed for many years. When they are there, they could fall into their own hands, or indeed the packaging could disintegrate and the poison could become open to birds and animals. An amnesty would make sure that we remove them from circulation altogether. I have the privilege of being the species champion for the Golden Eagle and have, through my work with that species, been given an insight into the value of those birds, not just to our tourism industry but to local people alike. If we look back in history, raptor killings in Scotland, we can trace them back to the 18th century when these birds were deemed by landowners and farmers to be vermin. It was also around this period that game hunting became really fashionable and all birds became a victim of this sport. Displaying such birds as stuffed ornamental pieces was also fashionable during the Victorian era. As a result, in many of those birds became extinct. It was not until the introduction of the protection of birds act in 1954 that poisoning, trapping and shooting of raptors was made illegal. I think that the vast majority of people now recognise the beauty of these birds and really appreciate the protection that they are given. In recent years, police have set up wildlife crime units and they have worked in partnerships with organisations such as the RSPB, SSPCA and the NFU to try and address the issue. The main difficulty in identifying offenders is that those crimes take place in isolated and remote areas. Usually, poisonings are uncovered by pure chance, by hill walkers, by people engaged in outdoor activity and the like. That is why the poisonings in east of Ross are so rare in that a huge amount of birds have been found. Donald Dure said that raptor killing in Scotland was a national disgrace. I think that it is something that we should all be ashamed of and do our utmost to stop this horrible crime. Wildlife is a key element to our tourism industry and with it comes the obvious boost to the economy in sparsely populated parts of the country where scattered communities live. Wildlife tourism is in the increase when we see programmes such as the Hebrides really portraying to the best our wildlife and encouraging people to come and visit the area. We desperately need to come up with a strategy that stops wildlife crimes in our hills and glens. If we do not, the image of Scotland as a land of wildlife, tranquility and beauty will be damaged beyond repair. While we have to protect those iconic birds for their own survival, we also have to act for the good of our wildlife tourism and the natural heritage of our countryside. The offence of, and a few folk have mentioned this before, the offence of Vicarious liability in relation to the persecution of wildlife. It should have provided additional protection for birds. However, again, we see that it is a very difficult crime to prosecute. There is a defence that they did not know that an employee was engaged in such activity. The other defence is that an individual took all reasonable steps to prevent an offence being committed. This legislation should also be reviewed to ensure that it provides the maximum protection. In conclusion, people involved in wildlife crime are criminals, plain and simple. They are seldom people who farm or care for livestock because they have a natural affinity to living creatures. Although I recognise that a minority do that, others are just bad. They act out of badness with activities such as egg collection, badger baiting and the like. Things that we should all be deeply ashamed of and do everything to stop. The people who commit those crimes also break down the working relationships because they cause suspicion between land managers, conservationists and the community as a whole. There is a duty on us all to stop those crimes and work together to bring criminals to book. Many thanks. Speeches have up to five minutes. Dennis Robertson to be followed by Liam McArthur. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I think that, like all members in the chamber, I think that we are all disappointed and saddened by the recent activity around the wildlife crime, especially within Roshire. I think that I would probably want to begin by endorsing every sentence that Rob Gibson actually made in the chamber this afternoon. It is difficult to follow in some respects because it has been said. However, it is not new, it has not gone away and the criminals are fairly innovative sometimes in how they try and deceive. Only last year, Presiding Officer, a golden eagle was trapped in the Angus Glens, a hotspot, as Graham Day has mentioned. However, that bird was then transported. It had to be transported because its transmitter was on and it was at nighttime and the golden eagles do not fly at night. That bird was transported and then dumped in my constituency in Aberdeenshire West near a Boeing. The bird's legs had been broken. The bird was left to die. Presiding Officer, I cannot for one minute think why someone would do such a thing and why they would not even, why they would try and then take a bird from one area to another to dispose of it. Recently, we have just heard that the sea eagle and my own constituency, the sea eagle chick, has disappeared without trace. We do not know what has happened to the sea eagle. We have no idea, but we do know that there has been activity in that area in the past. Quite rightly, the minister has said that when there is on-going investigations, we should not presume. However, we have to ask why and what has happened to that chick. Last year, a red kite was shot near a Boeing again in my constituency, a female bird who had successfully reared three chicks the year before. It was shot, it was deliberate. I have read the submissions from many of the briefings and the ones from the Scottish Gamekeepers Association that Jamie McRail referred to. Yes, they say that they are doing all they can to try and encourage their members to act within the law. Why should we try and encourage people to act within the law? Surely, we know to act within the law. They have said that about three quarters of the time that when they have their meetings is dedicated to this issue, but they also say in their letter about the general licensing. It does make me question, are they spending more time talking about the licensing and how to obtain it, or are they actually spending time on how to eradicate the well crime, and are they talking to their members to try and ensure that they are acting within the law and trying to ensure that everyone knows about the consequences if they don't? Scottish Landing States have done, I think, a fantastic job in trying to ensure that they members are aware of what is going on. I think that the partnership agreement between the RSPB, the NFUS and others is testament to the fact that we want to eradicate, we want to eradicate, we want to see the end of this apparent crime against our wildlife. Presiding Officer, there may be a case for new legislation, but I think that with the consultation that is coming for the SSPCA to have enforced powers, new powers, I think that we will probably enable better detection. With the DNA in terms of our detection, I think that we will probably catch more criminals, but we need to try and be as innovative as the people committing these crimes. We need to try and ensure that, where those crimes are being permitted enough, if there are hotspots, like Graham Day has suggested, that perhaps we have CCTVs, perhaps we try to ensure that we can actually get the information that we need and that that information is recorded to effect prosecution. Presiding Officer, I support the Government motion and I endorse the motion from the Labour Party. Many thanks, and I now call Liam McArthur to be followed by Dave Thompson. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. There has been a timely debate, I think that the mood throughout has been fairly somber. Can I start by welcoming the Minister's motion, can I also welcome the unequivocal words of condemnation in his opening speech and also his acceptance of Claire Baker's amendment, all of which enjoy the whole hearted support of the Scottish Liberal Democrats? I perfectly understand why he cannot comment on detail on the case in Russia that is perhaps prompted today's debate, but as he himself acknowledged, it's clearly prompted public revulsion and anger, including amongst members of the land and business estates, NFU and SGA, as others have acknowledged. It is also, I have to say, tested the patience of this Parliament, as Zaraf's PB pointed out in their briefing, it's on an unprecedented scale, but it is far from unusual and what we are seeing is maps emerging of hotspots around the country. It leaves us with the question of what more can be done. I firmly believe that the Wayne bill back in 2012 was a very significant step in the right direction. A range of measures that I think will prove beneficial over time, much consideration was given in this debate and previously to the introduction of vicarious liability. I understand that it has not yet been fully tested in law, but I wholeheartedly welcome that move by the minister's predecessor, Roseanna Cunningham, who acknowledged that it was not a panacea. It would not be straightforward to prosecute, but I still think that it was a move in the right direction. The bill left open opportunities to look at other areas where I think that Parliament wasn't yet ready to take a view and wanted further work to be done, penalties available to the courts being one such example. However, there were three areas that I'd like to address where I think we suspended judgment. One was in relation to licensing, one in relation to the SSPCA's role, which is now subject to a consultation, but also the capacity and expertise within Police Scotland, which Christine Grahame alluded to earlier. On the issue of licensing and not the general licence where there's a review, which I very much welcome, I think I was of the opinion last time round that the concerns around the bureaucracy, the penalising of good estates were well made. I was not persuaded at that stage that this was a route down which we wanted to go, but the words of Peter Peacock I will recall from that stage three. I think my own conclusion at that point was that not now, but if and when we have this debate again, the point of departure will be that some form of licensing will almost inevitably be required. I think that the minister appears to have come to very much a similar conclusion at this stage. In terms of the SSPCA's role, again others have pointed to the potential benefit of increasing resources and improving the chances, both of detection and bringing successful cases. I remember back in the consideration of the Wayne Bill, it was pointed out that the SSPCA was able to be involved up to the point of death, but not thereafter. Again, while I saw difficulties with extending that role back at that stage, I am increasingly of the view that this is probably now essential. Finally, to the issue of Police Scotland, we heard evidence at the time that there were areas of good practice, I think up in the north-east was most often referred to as one such example. Ministers promised that, in the creation of Police Scotland, what would be delivered was greater targeted resources and expertise. However, I very much share the concerns that Christine Grahame was alluding to in her intervention. There does not seem to be any evidence of that. The example that I cited in relation to South Lanarkshire is but one example. I have ones from my constituency. I think that there is a pattern building up that this does not necessarily have the priority within Police Scotland, we might hope. In conclusion, as Grahame Bay suggested, there have been recent signs of improvement, but those appear to be on the reverse. Police Scotland is struggling to cope or failing to prioritise. The disincentives in place appear to be inadequate. Meanwhile, public anger is rising and the reputational damage is increasing. I very much acknowledge the steps taken by the Scottish Government today and the strength of the Minister's remarks this afternoon, but we need to up the pace and the intensity and ensure that the worthwhile work that is underway at present is brought to a conclusion and changes are implemented without delay. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Persecution and killing of raptors in Scotland is, as we know, a crime punishable at law, but it is also a crime against God's law. Those beautiful creatures are innocents that God requires us to nurture, support and steward, and it ill behoves anyone to do them damage. The debate is certainly timely, and although the Government is doing much to support wildlife, we must consider what additional measures and resources are required to eradicate for good these moronic crimes, but we must also look at this carefully before taking any action. The mass killing, which has prompted this debate, is very close to home for me, as it occurred exclusively around Conanbridge in Seaforth, which is in the east of my constituency of Skylechabba and Badenoch. The news of the killings, which broke over several days as more bodies were discovered, prompted a meeting on Monday 21 April at the Dingwall Mart, where I and Rob Gibson MSP met with the NFU Scotland, Highland Regional Chairman Jim Whiteford, senior officers from Police Scotland and Farmers from the Conanbridge area to discuss the situation at that time regarding the deaths around the village. The police were not able, like the minister, to tell us too much about their investigations or how the birds died. As a former animal health inspector, I can fully understand why that is the case, but the meeting was nevertheless a very useful meeting. I am also very pleased that a group of local farmers and landowners from the area have come together and have pledged over £12,000 towards the reward fund for information about the deaths of these birds of prey, which I think shows just how seriously they also view this matter. I think that it is important to note as well that all of the birds that were found to have died appear to have died round about the same time. Although bodies were discovered days and weeks afterwards, it was not an on-going continuous poisoning that was running on. It seemed to be one incident and we were only just finding the bodies of the birds. I think that it is important to note that. I am also pleased that the minister has put out the consultation on the SSPCA, which went out on 31 March, with a view to looking at whether it would be wise to extend their investigative authority. However, I would also ask the minister if he has considered, and he may well have done, using the Government and the local authority, animal health inspectors. There is not a huge number of them, but local authorities do have responsibilities under the animal health laws, mainly in relation to animal disease and so on. I was actually in charge of the… Sorry. Jamie McGregor. I thank the member for taking intervention. When he was at the meeting in Dingwall, was it raised that it was some considered it odd that, while there were 16 red kites and six buzzards had been found dead, there apparently weren't any other fatalities such as crows or seagulls? Dave Thomson. Well, there are all sorts of stories and rumours and suggestions about what has happened, flying around. Many, many of them, the member has mentioned another one earlier as well. I think we're better to let the police and the authorities get on with their investigation without speculating on these matters. That's good information that has been passed on to the police, I know, but the best way is to let the police carry out their investigation. As I was saying about the animal health inspector, I hope that the minister will have a look at that. I was in charge of the Highland Council co-ordination in relation to Foot and Mouth back in 2001, where we co-ordinated all the different bodies. So there is a resource there that we could possibly use. Maybe we need to look at consolidating enforcement between the police and local authorities and we're now looking at bringing in SSPCA and so on. I think that whole thing maybe needs to be broadened a little bit. I'll have to disagree with my colleague Rob Gibson here on tourism a wee bit, because the Tolley Centre hosts several thousand visitors a year. The Tolley Centre at Branagh State near Conanbridge, which I opened a year or two ago. Can I just say finally that we shouldn't be knee-jerk reacting to anything here. We need to find out exactly what happened first before jumping to any conclusions about what we need to do. Many thanks. We now turn to the closing speeches. I call on Alex Ferguson. Maximum five minutes please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I begin by saying that I very much welcome this debate just as I welcome anything that highlights the utter iniquity of wildlife crime. But I'm also clear that wildlife crime is the result of the actions of just a very few people. Now in no way does that in any way justify their actions and I join with everyone who totally condemns those actions, especially where poisoning is involved, but we must keep these actions, these crimes in perspective, as I think we have generally done during this debate. However, I think there are some engaged in the debate in the wider country whose comments do not do so. For instance, I do not think that recent comments by an RSPB spokesman stating that levels of wildlife crime were in danger of returning to Victorian levels has actually done this debate any favours because nothing could really be further from the truth. In Victorian times we completely eradicated some species, species that we are now generally strongly supportive of their reintroduction and the subsequent rebalancing of nature that man has done so much to destroy in the past. The Victorian era and the present day do not bear comparison and to make it is in my view simply whipping up feelings, often against the land owning and game keeping fraternity in general in a way that is I think totally unjustified and which is completely contrary to the partnership working that is exemplified through the workings of Paws as recognised in the motion, an approach that I totally endorse. When it comes to wildlife crime of any sort, surely we are all in it together. It should not indeed, it must not become an us and them approach between specific sectors or organisations. This is an issue in which it surely is all of us against a very very few individuals as Rob Gibson and I think Graham Day both referred to. These individuals of course have no respect for the law and even less for the wildlife that the vast majority of us seek to protect and enhance. Up until 2013 indeed, as has been pointed out, we were looking at quite a success story in this regard with raptor poisonings reducing steadily from 30 in 2009 to three in 2012. Sadly there has been a slight increase since then which almost pales into insignificance when placed alongside the truly shocking incident in Russia that has killed at least 20 red kites and buzzards. Now that incident is one, I'm sure we all hope, is the one off that Dave Thompson indicated but it is however imperative that the cause and if there is one a culprit or culprits are identified because there will be many invaluable lessons to be learned from this particular incident. It's easy to become a bit despondent on this issue. I don't think that we should be too hard on ourselves. Scotland has a really good approach and a record of approach to wildlife crime and it's an approach on which there is considerable evidence to suggest that it's been working. All trends suffer an occasional blip and we should not lose sight of the encouraging downward trend that was in existence up to and including 2012. It's for that reason that we are, I'm afraid, unable to fully support the Labour amendment to this motion. We believe that existing legislation, especially where it was strengthened in the Wayne Bill, contains the appropriate measures that can be taken, especially as they still have to be tested to their fullest extent. We support increased penalties for those found guilty of these crimes and we will support any measures that help to identify the perpetrators and bring them to justice, including increased powers for existing organisations. In short, Presiding Officer, and in conclusion, we support the Government motion that is before us and we will do so even if amended. We believe that the current work that is being undertaken by Paws is immensely worthwhile and we would encourage continued partnership working to ensure that the downward trend that existed up to and including 2012 is first regained and then maintained. Scotland's wildlife, as the motion says, is indeed remarkable. The mindless actions of a very few individuals won't change that and I have to say that I don't believe, like Rob Gibson, that their actions will have a major impact on tourism because our wildlife is still remarkable despite those unpleasant actions. Let us use the powers that already exist and let us ensure that those individuals get the message once and for all that their crimes are not just against wildlife, they are against Scotland and that, as First Donald Dure and now Rhoda Grant has said, is a national disgrace. Thank you very much and I now call on Claudia Beamish. Six minutes please. Thank you Presiding Officer. The consensus on eradication of raptor persecutions sends a clear message to Scotland today with the strong words from this chamber. It was a positive step that the Scottish Government has produced the first wildlife crime in Scotland report for 2012. As a minister stated in the forward, the aim is to establish a baseline of what is happening in Scotland. That, of course, can be built on in future years. The reports also sent a clear message, like today has, about the importance of tackling wildlife crime generally, and it also provided a clear focus for the rural affairs committee, questioning of stakeholders and of the minister. However, as we have heard today from Rhoda Grant, Dennis Robertson, Dave Thompson and many other members, all is far from well with the foul catalogue of recent attacks on raptors. As has been stressed today, partnership is essential in preventing and detecting wildlife crime. One kind has asked for genuine partnership working with the police and Crown Office, being prepared to accept evidence from NGOs just as such as themselves and RSPB, rather than ruling it inadmissible before it even gets to court. Wildlife crime is so hard to detect, as we have heard, and evidence is so hard to come by that it should be followed up vigorously wherever possible. One kind suggests that one way to approach this would be for poor Scotland to issue guidance and encouragement to NGOs as it already does to the public. The role of volunteers plays a part in partnership, and without their commitment to what is often round-the-clock vigilance, the prognosis would be bleaker. To see peregrins nesting in the cliff crevices across the Clyde and soaring high above is a thrill indeed. They are protected by volunteers, and the falls of Clyde peregrin watch, which was set up by Scottish Wildlife Trust to prevent egg thieves stealing the eggs during the nesting season, has been oversubscribed this year, which shows the public have a very strong interest in getting involved. Other partnerships are also significant. Moreland projects such as the demonstration project at Langham Maw, which I have recently visited, supported by the game and Wildlife Conservation Trust, the Clure States, the RSPB, with scientific monitoring paid for, to take account of biodiversity, as well as protecting hen harriers and other birds, and the diversionary feeding, keeping more grass chicks alive along with other species such as lapwings. Game has not been shot there during the project to enable grass to return to a sustainable number. This is an interesting voluntary model, and I know that the minister has visited the project as well. The need, however, for consideration of the statutory regulation of game shooting should indeed be further explored by the Scottish Government, either for conservation purposes or indeed due to prosecution, if specific estates are named under vicarious liability in the future, which we hope they won't be. The culture has changed radically. Continuing education is essential, but there can be no excuse for any persecution for any reason. Raptor protection and detection of despicable attacks on raptors can only happen in remote rural Scotland if the partnerships which are already having success are further developed. Those birds, which have been discovered, sadly, are unlikely to be the only fatalities as stressed by NGOs in their briefings. Partnership must be adequately funded, and I asked the minister today to reassure the chamber that wildlife crime officers have the resources to do their job consistently, as has been raised by Christine Grahame and other members. The consultation on increased SSPCA powers, highlighted by Elaine Murray, is to be welcomed in this context. The RSPB suggests that the bird of prey crime hotspots piloted by SLE are invaluable in targeting efforts to expose repeat perpetrators in my own South Lanarkshire, Angus, Invernesha and other hotspot areas. It is right that the Scottish Government is reviewing the wildlife crime penalties so that they are more robust and send a clear message. Since Vicarious Liability, which was supported by Scottish Land and Estates, has been on the statute book, there have indeed been no prosecutions, and my colleague Claire Baker has called for a review. Scottish Wildlife Trust argues rightly that any proven crime uses the Vicarious Liability provision to send a clear signal to landowners that they must take responsibility for their staff. Can the minister shed any light on why, apart from the present case in Stranraer, he thinks that there has been no prosecutions under this law? Can the minister also comment on the suggestion made by both Rhoda Grant and Grahame Day and others about a chemical amnesty and whether that would help for the future? There have been some arguments put forward that changes to protection arrangements for some species in some areas—buzzards being a case in point such as in England—might be a way forward, though I understand from Scottish Wildlife Trust that, while a third of pheasant fatalities are on our roads, only 1 to 2 per cent have been recorded as being taken by buzzards. It is significant that the minister agrees to conduct a study of licensing and game bird legislation in other countries, and I think that this is something that we will all be able to work with him on together, I am sure. Finally, our international reputation, in my view, is at stake, to some degree, particularly at the moment, and it is something that the raptor eradication we really have to push forward on because of this. The excitement of seeing the vast wingspan of a red kite overhead at the Loch Ken RSPB reserve in my region is indeed breathtaking. The support of the feeding station is essential. We must not allow our reputation as a wildlife destination for iconic species to be ruined and to become tarnished by these crimes. The raptors deserve our protection, and this is something that we must all work on together. I know that Colin Powell's wheelhouse wind up a debate. Minister, if you could continue until 5 o'clock. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and thank you very much to my fellow MSPs for attending and taking part in this important debate today, and indeed for the quality of the speeches and the thought that they had put into them. It was good to hear so many personal experiences, the Lane Murray's experience, I think is one that stick with me, and I look forward to seeing red kites in the field myself at some point in the future. It is important that Parliament is able to send a clear, unambiguous message that there is no excuse for persecution of our birds today. I very strongly welcome the broad support from all parties in the chamber today in the condemnation of the kinds of crimes that have been committed recently. Obviously, we are still awaiting the outcome of the investigations in particular, but we all will need to leap. As Dave Thompson said, we need to let the police do that work and give us the truth of what has happened. I certainly agree with those who say that Scotland has much to offer, but Alex Ferguson and indeed Rob Gibson raised it first. The fact that Scotland has a lot to offer in terms of a tourism destination, but I think that we run the risk if that goes unchecked of damaging the reputation of our country, particularly those who value coming to Scotland to see our wildlife. I think that we all reveled in the Hebrides programme last year, which was a fantastic tribute to the quality of the environment that we have in Scotland, and let's not see it tainted by things like raptor persecution. Illegal killings affect Scotland's reputation as a brand, and that is something that we need to send as a message to all those who are involved in conducting it that we will not tolerate that. Recent events involving red kites, buzzards, peregans and seagulls show that a range of species are at risk, including some of the rarest birds in Scotland. I have already gone through in the speech, but just to recap, we have introduced vicarious liability. Parliament has endorsed the Wain Act, and we will see what comes of that in due course. We have asked SNH to examine how it can restrict the use of general licences. We have reason to believe that there is a wildlife crime that has been conducted. With support from the Lord Advocate, we have signalled to police the encouragement to use a full range of investigative techniques to tackle wildlife crime. I am looking forward to receiving Professor Poustie's deliberations on wildlife crime penalties. I detect a strong sense in the chamber today that people are supportive of strengthening action, where that is deemed to be necessary. I am sure that Professor Poustie will have reflected in that, too. Public consultation on extending powers of Scottish SPCA is something that I promise to come back to when I address a couple of points that have been raised by Clare Baker and others. The length of consultation period is genuinely an attempt because of the complexity of the issue, the strong feelings on both sides and the strong public interest in this particular subject to allow the maximum possible scrutiny. I have borne the criticism in the past of previous bills and processes of not giving adequate consultation. I am not sure whether Mr Ferguson or perhaps others have done that. I think that it is important that we give an opportunity here for such an important issue for the public and, indeed, stakeholders to have their say. Mr Robertson, I thank the minister for taking the intervention. Will the minister agree with me that we have an opportunity before us with the introduction of the agricultural shows coming into this season to promote the consultation and to raise the aspect of wildlife crime and how people can get involved? I think that that is a very sensible point that Mr Robertson makes. It is one that we want to have a strong broad-based representation from all views across the industry and, indeed, from stakeholders in the conservation area. I will take that one forward and see what the possibilities are. It is also worth pointing out that there are a number of comments about the potential for anamnesty in relation to the disposal of toxins. I am thinking, specifically, as was identified by Graeme Dey in relation to car perfume. Indeed, there are other poisons, as people were aware, that affect wildlife. My officials have been tasked at looking at an existing scheme to do precisely this. When I spoke about this at the wildlife conference at the Scottish Police College last week, I reiterated that possessing such a substance was an offence, but it was also a risk to those who work in the vicinity of it and, indeed, their families. I am not naive enough to think that everybody will hand over their supplies as and when we will be able to get something put in place. However, those who do not, and I think that that is the point that Mr Dey made, need to take cognisance of the fact that, if they ignore the opportunity to surrender such material and they are found in possession of it, I think that it would be reasonable to suggest that more severe penalties might follow. We have to reflect the fact that we need to find a means by which people can be encouraged to volunteer the material so that it can be surrendered and do it in a way that is safe and does not expose police officers or others to the dangerous chemical. We will look at extending existing schemes, as I say. We have obviously had a number of comments about the SSPC, and I just want to return to that in respect of it. I think that it does potentially pose some advantages and disadvantages, so I think that that is why we need to be clear on what role it can provide. There is potentially a broader—as we have said in the consultation—a broader range of situations open to the SSPC, for example, where there are no live animals present, currently they cannot intervene at that point. An additional specialist resource might be made available at no cost to the public purse to address the point about the degree to which we have adequate resources to detect and indeed prevent wildlife crime, and potentially quicker response times and circumstances where police resources are restricted. I would point out to Liam McArthur and to others who have talked about it—and Christine Grahame, indeed—that there were, as I understand it, a total of 41 individuals involved in the search in relation to the farms involved with Russia, while I am not going to detail what they found or did not find. There were 41 people involved, and that shows a sense of the resource that was dedicated to that investigation. We are able to pull in, as I think the point was made, about community officers, not just the suspicious wildlife crime officers but non-specialists as well, to support the police in their investigations. Dave Thompson mentioned animal health inspectors. I do believe that I will look at the issue that he has raised, but we did involve Arpid staff indeed in the issue in Russia. There were Arpid staff who came in to support the police with that investigation, as did SSPCA, RSVB personnel as well. We are already trying to maximise the number of individuals that are involved, but I will take forward the point that he raised and see if there is any mileage in that. I have a couple of minutes left, Presiding Officer, just to raise a couple of other points that have been mentioned by members. Jamie McGregor has strongly welcomed his support for the issue that he has taken today, raising the seagull action plan, an issue in relation to those who are crofting and farmers. I think that it is an important issue. We have had a scheme in place to support farmers and crofters who can demonstrate that their livestock has been affected by seagulls, and we are looking at the next possible steps to continuing similar support going forward. We need to make it clear to people that there are avenues that can come to SNH for advice and support if there are encountering problems with any form of raptor that is perhaps impacting on their livestock. It is not an excuse to go to persecute them, very briefly, if you may. Thank the minister for taking that intervention. Would he therefore agree that it is quite important that, before any reintroduction, such as the reintroduction of seagulls, perhaps an impact study is done on what they are likely to eat before they eat it? As the member probably knows, there have been two studies already done. One in the Gerlock, which looked at the impact of seagulls and revealed that there was not the perceived impact on livestock that had been suggested. Just from my closing remarks, I want to identify that there were a couple of points made. Langemuir, I certainly recommend people to visit Langemuir to see what can be done in terms of diversionary feeding to help hen harriers in that case to coexist with a sporting estate. We also have initiatives such as Wildlife Estate Scotland, which has been put forward by Scottish Land and the States, which also has value in allowing land of the states to demonstrate that they can coexist happily with a vibrant raptor population and to work with conservation interests to make sure that both their sporting interests and wildlife are protected. I welcome the very strong signal that the Parliament has sent today about the condemnation of wildlife crime and in particular raptor persecution. I endorse the words that have been mentioned by my colleagues across the chamber and hope that it strengthens as strong signal as possible to those who are permitting crimes to take place on their land or carrying them out themselves. That concludes the debate on wildlife crime, eradicating raptor persecution from Scotland. We now move to the next item of business, which is consideration of a business motion <IP_ADDRESS>, in the name of Joe Fitzpatrick, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a revision to the business programme for Wednesday 7 May. Any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press a request to speak, but now, and I call on the minister to move the motion. No member has asked to speak against the motion FRI now, but I put the question to the chamber. The question is that motion <IP_ADDRESS>, in the name of Joe Fitzpatrick, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is there for agreed to. We now move to decision time. The first question is that amendment <IP_ADDRESS>.1, in the name of Kezia Dugdale, which seeks to amend motion <IP_ADDRESS>, in the name of Aileen Campbell, on the national youth work strategy, our ambitions for improving the life chances of young people in Scotland, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The amendment is there for agreed to. The next question is that motion <IP_ADDRESS>, in the name of Aileen Campbell, as amended, on the national youth work strategy, our ambitions for improving the life chances of young people in Scotland, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is there for agreed to. The next question is that amendment <IP_ADDRESS>.3, in the name of Claire Baker, which seeks to amend motion <IP_ADDRESS>, in the name of Paul Wheelhouse, on wildlife crime, eradicating raptor persecution from Scotland, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The Parliament is not agreed. We move to vote. Members should cast their votes now. The result of the vote is an amendment <IP_ADDRESS>.3, in the name of Claire Baker, as as follows. Yes, 99. No, 0. There were 11 abstentions. The amendment is there for agreed to. The next question is that amendment <IP_ADDRESS>, in the name of Paul Wheelhouse, as amended, on wildlife crime, eradicating raptor persecution from Scotland, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is there for agreed to. That concludes decision time. We now move to members' business. Members should leave in the chambers, should do so quickly and quietly.


In this presentation, we will take a look at multiple choice questions related to budgeting, going through those questions, and then practicing test-taking skills with them. First question, a plan that lists operating expenses expected that are not including and the selling expenses budget A, overhead budget, B, sales budget, C, cash payments budget, D, cash receipts budget, and E, general and administrative budget. Let's go through this again using the process of elimination. A plan that lists operating expenses expected that are not included in the selling and administrative expenses budget. Now that's a kind of a strange type of explanation here, but we can see we have operating expenses. Operating expenses are usually, if we think about the income statement of a multi-step income statement, we typically think of selling and administrative type expenses as the operating expenses, and then they eliminated the selling expenses. So it sounds kind of funny to think about it, but we're talking about operating expenses. So if we go through these then, A says overhead budget. Now we might think, maybe that's selling and admin, but that usually goes into the cost of goods sold actually overhead, but, and then B says the sales budget, and we're talking about operating expenses. So I don't think it's going to be B, the sales budget, C says cash payments budget, and we might think, you might have payments in there, and D says cash receipts budget. This is expenses again, so we're probably not talking about money coming in. That would be kind of income typically. And then E says general and administrative expense budget. So there's an expense, some type of expense budget, and it is an operating expense. So I'll keep that one for now. AC and E, let's go through it again. A plan that lists operating expenses expected that are not included in the selling expenses budget, is it the overhead budget? We're talking about operating expenses. This is typically cost of goods sold. So I don't think it's that one. C says cash payments budget versus E saying general and administrative expense budget of the two, ease and expense. So again, note they kind of listed this directly what it is on a multi-step income statement. They're operating expenses typically consisting of selling and administrative expenses. They then eliminated this selling expenses, which leaves us with the general and admin.


Raxler, and the mystery of where and indeed what Raxler is, is the single biggest mystery in Elite Law. If you're unfamiliar with the legend and background to Raxler, I have linked to a couple of useful videos below that will give you more in depth information. Suffice to say it's been a thing in Elite Law since the very first game back in 1984. Indeed if you look in the right hand panel of your ship in the Codex Knowledge Base you'll find an entry for Raxler. No other mystery from Elite's Law has made it into the Codex, just Raxler and the dark wheel, more on them in a moment. No one outside of Frontier currently knows what Raxler actually is and many a valiant commander has ventured into the black looking for it, without success. Here is what we do know to be absolute and simple facts. David Braben has confirmed that Raxler is out there and that Frontier know where it is. Michael Brooks, one of the original team that worked on Elite Dangerous has also confirmed its existence and said that Frontier won't be giving any clues to its whereabouts but that quote, you have to make some of it a tiny bit obvious just so people know what they're doing. He did also say that it's quote in the milky way and it's a journey that everyone has to travel for themselves. So my personal take away from all of those comments is that it's a thing, it's in the milky way somewhere and there's likely to be a thread in the game that we can pull at to find it. So what is the dark wheel? Even a cursory glance at the Law of Raxler within the Elite Universe will bring up swift mention of the dark wheel. The dark wheel is a legendary group of explorers, adventurers and truth seekers that, prior to Elite Dangerous, operated entirely in the shadows. These days they appear to be a minor faction in Shinrata Dezra. Whilst it's not officially confirmed that the dark wheel in Shinrata is one and the very same, it seems unlikely that there would be an imposter or a duplicate placed in the game by Frontier. It has always been believed that one of the major goals of the dark wheel organisation is to uncover the mystery of Raxler. It seems sensible to me that if there is a thread to be pulled at to unravel the Raxler Enigma then the dark wheel would either know the whereabouts of the thread or indeed they themselves are the thread. So what is turning the wheel? In May this year, after quietly recruiting several large player groups within the game, Commander Kai Zen of the Elite Week podcast announced an initiative to expand the influence of the dark wheel faction out from the only two systems that they were at the time present in, that being Shinrata and LFT 926. The thinking being in simple terms that one of the major ways we as players can interact with the game universe is via the background simulation, the socio-political back and forth that happens as a result of the actions we take in the Elite Dangerous Galaxy. Every trade, every kill, every passenger run or mission that you do in Elite has an effect on that political back and forth and increasing the influence and power of a given faction in the game is one of those effects. If the dark wheel is searching for Raxler it makes sense that expanding their power, presence and influence in the game would help drive positive results in that direction. It certainly seems more likely than a random player out in the black suddenly stumbling one day into one of a trillion planets that happens to be called Raxler. There are of course a number of ways this could go but it's hoped and it is just a hope that Frontier has left something in the game that can only be triggered, uncovered or unlocked by the presence of the dark wheel faction. What that something is we don't know, it could be a system permit or a special mission or an item, the simple fact is we just don't know but unless we try at the very least we'll never know that this was the wrong thing to do and that alone makes it worth the effort. Now at this point we're going to move into some possible spoiler territory so I want to give you fair warning, if you're sensitive to that stuff look away now, we're also going to delve into some tin foil hat theorizing that grabbed us by the face this week. Still with me? Ok. It's worth noting at this point some interesting facts. The lore based legend of the game states that the dark wheel has a hidden starport in a system and that that starport orbits the 8th moon of a gas giant. A bug that caused carrier cartographic systems to be able to see past the system locks on sun systems was recently very quickly stamped on by Frontier but not before images of the system map relating to LFT 509 appeared on reddit. LFT 509 is just 70 light years from Shinrata and the only known occurrence of the dark wheel faction in the game. In that system is a gas giant that has 8 moons. One of the moons is the moon of a moon but there are 8 bodies ultimately orbiting a gas giant. According to the star map it is aligned to the Federation, it has a democratic government and an economy and yet it has a population of zero and the system map shows no starports whatsoever. Here's another thing. When I started researching this video I went looking for the screenshot of that system map from LFT 509. In searching for it on Google I stumbled across a recent reddit post by Commander Darth Balls. In the post the good commander notes that they'd somehow uncovered a system map from LFT 509 well over a year ago when idly researching the systems that the Thargoids were at the time attacking. The research the good commander was conducting was attempting to uncover any pattern to the seemingly random Thargoid attacks. According to the commander's research if you draw a line between the weakly attacked systems and connected them up there was almost always a permit locked system near the intersection of all the lines. If you then used the same method and connected all those permit locked systems with lines of their own a very tenuous argument could be made and I would stress very tenuous that LFT 509 was in the middle of all those permit locked systems. We looked at it here and it was difficult to see the connection Thargoids LFT 509 surely not until I moved the camera to put my back to Barnard's loop where we think the Thargoids live. If you look at the targeted systems from the perspective of Barnard's loop this is what you see. Whilst not definitive proof it certainly made the rabbit hole we found ourselves going into much more compelling. So where are we with all this? It's my personal feeling that Kaizen and the Turning the Wheel initiative absolutely has value I'd go stronger than that in fact until someone can prove otherwise I personally think expanding the influence of the Dark Wheel is absolutely the first step on the path to finding where and what Raxler is. I do think we're looking for the Dark Wheel's base of operations and I think the 8th moon of a gas giant is where we'll find it. Is it LFT 509? I think LFT 509 is definitely worth scrubbing off of the list. As for the tin foil hat Stargate like spatial coordinate Thargoid attack stuff the problem with that is that when you're looking at a 3 dimensional ball of dots it's very easy to find the pattern that you're looking for. It's very easy to see what you want to see and I'm acutely aware that we're eyeing LFT 509 as a suspicious candidate and then in danger of arranging the dots in the sphere to show us what we want to see. However right now I don't have a better theory that is telling me anything otherwise So until that theory is eliminated or replaced with something more compelling than that is the rabbit hole I'm going into. But what do you think? Do you think any of this has any value? Let us know in the comments and if you want to get involved in turning the wheel yourself then there's links below to take you to the Elite Week Discord. If you're in the market for a quest in the game this could be it. That's it for now. Thanks very much for watching. We'll be back later this week with more videos. Until then, O7 Commanders, follow the greens on the way out and do keep clear of the toast rack. We very much look forward to seeing you next time.


Your buddy over there. Yeah, you know he said it's gonna be weird if we win But do you have any problem beating him? No, I don't have any problem beating him But you know it is our families are close, you know my wife his wife and his so this guy was the assistant coach Or he was a coach at North Carolina now He's with Liberty his name is Scott the coach of North Carolina is Scott so the two Scots know each other and this Should be a friendly matchup bottom of the fifth inning and the wrap the lefty just pouring strikes into the zone got a Little frisbee pitch. That's a ball and that is a swing and a strike 79 miles per hour Next batter fouls one to the left side and the coach that we just heard talking He's gonna pick it up and you say hey stop pause pause pause pause pause. I got something to show you I got something to show you look at this ball. There's stuff on it. I'm says, oh, no come here Come here. Come here You got to look at this ball and then everyone's making a face And everyone's making a lot of faces in the back. I'm like, oh drama, oh No Holding the ball very delicately Not to touch the spot the umps get together. They look at it What could this be? I'm just saying it doesn't look good umpires talking saying what do you think it is? Let's do this after the game. Let's not do this now Ruin this young college kids life. So the coach comes out the other Scott And he says check his bat Check his bad. He's got Scott Scott Scott Scott Scott relax. You're all good. Nothing's happening. The pitcher wrap He's like, all right, you guys so we're good They throw the ball back to the dugout and then he gets back on the mound. He's like I'll just Probably get you guys out with ease now. Meanwhile, the third base umpires like hey, don't worry. I'm watching him Oh, yeah, so he does anything up here anything silly. I'm watching. Don't even worry. I got him Scott says you got to be kidding me Go walk down there Which I don't know what that means, but it looks very much. He says go walk down there. I have no idea wrap Little he was wearing two hats. Don't think he is just a ridged brim strike one or strike two strike three Because he had the foul ball on him. Wow, you're out chump next guy strike one strike two and Another foul ball hits a player in the chest knocks him down. Oh my god Yeah Yeah, this is a coach screaming we wear that baby, which I don't know if that's a thing to be proud of Um, or whatever. I don't even know what that is two two. They get him out Wrap gets out of the inning and the coach.  You gotta check the bat. They check us We're gonna check their guys something like that umpire says. Oh, I know. I know. I know scott I know. I know. I know and then he takes the ball That's by the opposing dugout and says get that out of there. We don't want you checking him again And that's basically it It's basically it I think the consensus is Is that he says the coach shouldn't have done that so public because they're young kids But I have no idea Kind of an interesting thing. I don't think the scott's are as friendly as they said they were I that's just my one guess I don't think Weird if if we win, but do you have any problem beating him?  So special guys special programs. So well, it's always somebody's got to lose So hopefully it's him. Yeah, I don't know man I'll publicly say in their picture might be cheating thing Off base


Hey, this is Brett, and this 2017 Ram Promaster City is stock number 13440Z. I am here at Summit Automotive in Phan Lack, Wisconsin, your new and used Ram and Promaster City headquarters. This 2017 Ram Promaster City has the 2.4 liter multi-air engine. This vehicle has been fully safety and inspected by our service shop, has a fresh oil and filter change, all the fluids have been checked and topped off, and it is 100% ready to go. I'm going to go all the way around in this video, inside, start it up, and take a look under the hood to give you the most accurate representation of the vehicle possible. Bright white is the color, and I shoot all my videos in 4K, so if you have HD capabilities, turn them on now, because it is your best way to check out the quality, condition options and cleanliness of the vehicle before seeing it in person. Going down the driver's side here, all the panels look really clean, I didn't see any major dents or dings, lots of area for signage on there, you get the nice full roof rack as well. Going down the rest of the driver's side here, doors look really good, as does the fender. If you like the video, you can subscribe to my YouTube channel, which is youtube.com slash Summit Auto. Click the bell notifications, you'll get updates on the videos I do each and every day here at Summit Automotive. Very nice down that side, this one has the steel rims with the wheel covers, and it has unoroyal tiger paw, these look like almost brand new tires on here. Just about all the tread, I wouldn't be surprised if we put those on in our safety inspection. These are 215, 55R16s, and once again they're unoroyal tiger paws, like new on the front here. Front fender is in great shape, headlight lenses are nice and clear, the front bumper is in fantastic condition, it's never been drilled into. The hood is in really nice shape as well, didn't see any major dents or dings on there, and the passenger side front fender, nice condition as well. Passengers side front wheel cover, no major scuffs or scrapes, and as you go down this side of this 2017 Ram ProMaster City, take note of how clean the body is, how reflective and mirror-like that paint is. I take these HD videos, so if you are far away or even if you're close by, just cannot make a trip down, but you're still interested in purchasing the vehicle. You can see the vehicle, hear the vehicle, and have confidence in what you're looking at before you even get here, so when you do get here, there's absolutely no surprises and you can make a smart and informed buying decision from wherever you're at. If this video helps you make that decision, let your salesmen know that you saw the video, it was helpful and that bread sent you. Back wheel cover is in nice shape as well, and these back tires are just as new as the front tires. You can still see the little wear knobs on there. Those are brand new tires. We put those on in our shop, in our safety inspection. This one has a little bit different setup in it, so we do have the seats for the second row and they do fit in there. We also have all the seat belts and the hardware that goes with that, but you can see that somebody has put an Adrian steel shelf back here with a closing locking area. With that shelf there, the seat doesn't quite fit in there properly. If you wanted to take that shelf out, you could put the seats in and then you'd have a passenger van, but the seats do come with this vehicle just so everyone is aware, but they're very nice and clean back here. Those doors slide nice and smoothly. Really the only imperfection I saw in the van is there's one little ding right there, but other than that, very nice and clean. Rear bumper is in excellent condition. It does have the backup parking sensors and you do get a receiver hitch back here. Back up camera, you get the, what is that, probably a 60-40 split on the door. But you do get the glass with the rear defrost in there. Here's a little bit better look at that Adrian steel shelf back here. Like I said, you can take that out. Looks like it's bolted to the side there and maybe a couple screws on the inside of there as well. But like I said, we have all the hardware for the seats and the seat belts and everything like that. So definitely that stuff all comes with it. When you close these, these doors also open up all the way so you can open them up like so. If you've got a pallet or something to load into there, it makes it a lot easier to do that. And you can see that they shut nice and smoothly. The rear doors are in very nice condition as well. And for full disclosure, this back wheel, just as nice as the rest. And on the rest of the side, doors all look really good on this side.  Sidecaron airbag, driver seat, head adjuster, or maybe that's just for the backrest. Comes with floor mats, power windows, power locks, and power mirrors. We'll hop inside, check out the miles, the radio, and everything that this van has to offer on the interior. You can see that this one has low fuel. We're going to be putting fuel in it right after this video. There we go. 32,571 miles on it does have the outside temperature display. The engine cluster is very nice and clean. It does come with the leather wrap steering wheel, cruise controls on the right, Bluetooth and audio controls on the left. You get the 5-inch touchscreen radio, AMFM radio on there. This is also where your backup camera is going to show up. And that is working nicely. Down here, your climate controls.  Your side format and seat are in excellent condition. Headliner is in nice shape and you do get map lights right there. We'll start it up and take a look under the hood. Starts right up. No check engine lights or anything like that. I would personally like to thank you for checking out the video today and hopefully from this HD video, you've been able to verify the quality condition options and of course, cleanliness of this van all the way around inside and out. Under the hood, you have the 2.4-liter multi-air engine. Engine bay is very clean, it's very smooth. Once again, this van has been fully safe and inspected by our service shop. Has a fresh oil and filter change, all the fluids have been checked and topped off. There is the emissions sticker. Has four brand new tires. And this van is 100% ready to go. I would highly recommend it from a quality and condition standpoint and to see more pictures of this van or one of our other 550 new and used cars, trucks, SUVs, minivans, cargo vans. You name it, we got it. Go to that website right there, summitauto.com, full pictures and descriptions of every single vehicle we have all at summitauto.com. And if you'd like to check out more HD videos, you can go to youtube.com slash summitauto. Click the bell notifications. You'll get updates on the videos I do each and every day here at Summit Automotive as well as one of the largest catalogs of vehicle walkarounds on YouTube. So that's pretty sweet. In fact, in a second you'll see a link to subscribe to my YouTube channel on the upper left to link to more ProMaster City vans I've done in the upper right, a link to this vehicle on our website on the lower left, and a link to one of our latest YouTube videos on the lower right. Click those, check us out. We're super excited to help you with this Ultra Clean 2017 Ram ProMaster City in bright white clear coat. Thanks again for checking out the video. Remember to like, subscribe, and share on the YouTube channel. I really appreciate it. Thanks again.