Meeting of the Parliament 26 June 2025
I ask those who are leaving the public gallery to do so as quickly and quietly as possible as we move to the next item of business, which is a members’ business debate in the name of Douglas Ross on motion S6M-17969, on action to address the impact of gulls in Scotland. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
I invite Douglas Ross to speak for about seven minutes in opening the debate.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes with concern the reported changes to the approach taken for granting licences to control gulls in recent years by NatureScot, which, it understands, has led to fewer licences being approved, as demonstrated by 2,041 licences being granted in 2023, but this figure falling to 505 in 2024; understands that communities and businesses in Moray, Nairn and Inverness have had significant problems with gulls in recent years, but that many communities across Scotland also experience similar problems; believes that Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) funding and Common Good Funds should not have to be spent on continually seeking licences to control gulls that display dangerous and aggressive behaviour that are a risk to all, but particularly the young and older people; is concerned that NatureScot reportedly does not fully acknowledge and respect the views of local people and businesses when considering applications to control gulls that are causing significant problems; notes the calls for more robust action from the Scottish Government and NatureScot to protect humans and businesses from what it sees as the menace of dangerous gulls, including the Scottish Ministers taking action through a section 11 order under the Natural Heritage (Scotland) Act 1991, and further notes the calls for a review by the Scottish Government, preceded by a public consultation on the grounds for legal control, with a view to permitting control to tackle significant nuisance caused by gulls, and on the separation of the licensing of control measures and the nature species conservancy functions of NatureScot, in light of reports of an inherent potential conflict between the two and widespread concerns of many constituents that NatureScot neglects the former while preferring the latter.
12:48Motions, questions or amendments mentioned by their reference code.