Seòmar agus comataidhean

Absolutely—thank you for that helpful suggestion.

We have covered some action points, but are there any further action points that members wish to suggest, or are we content with where we are? As there are no further comments, we move into private session.

Thank you for that suggestion. The cabinet secretary provided the cross-committee group with an initial response, which formed part of our scrutiny at the cross-committee group. However, it is a helpful suggestion that we consolidate the Government’s position on the recommendations, so I am happy to take that away as an action point. We can come back with a written update on the recommendations, aligned with the work that has already been completed or is already under way—and which the Scottish Government has already provided an update on—along with the outstanding work that you have referenced. I am happy to pull that together for the committee.

Super. On that basis, is the committee agreed to make no recommendations on the instrument?

Members indicated agreement.

Our next item of business is the consideration of a paper on the recommendations of the recent people’s panel on drug harm and deaths. I refer members to paper 2.

As members will be aware, a people’s panel is a form of public engagement that brings together a randomly selected and broadly representative sample of the population to consider and discuss an issue and make recommendations. The Scottish Parliament held a people’s panel on tackling drug deaths and harm over two weekends in October and November 2024. Two additional online sessions were held in November 2024. A summary of the panel process and its outcomes is set out in paper 2.

I invite members to comment on the report that the people’s panel has produced. On behalf of members of the committee, I extend my thanks to all the participants who took part in the people’s panel, as well as the parliamentary staff who organised it. I know that it involved a great deal of planning and logistics work. Having attended a couple of the panel’s sessions, I know that those were great opportunities for the public to come together on an issue that we are well aware of.

Is the committee content to note that the recommendation for an inquiry into drug use in prisons is now being taken forward by us—the Criminal Justice Committee—and that we invite the Parliament’s participation and communities team to let the panel participants know that the recommendation is now being implemented?

Members indicated agreement.

Thanks very much for that update. The access to pensions by Police Scotland officers is an issue that the committee has looked at in the past. On the basis of your update, I am more than happy for the committee to write to Ivan McKee, as Minister for Public Finance, on the issues that you have raised.

Before we move on, I want to confirm that members are happy that the SSI comes into force. In particular, I want to confirm that with Liam Kerr, because he is joining us online.

Good morning, and welcome to the 13th meeting in 2025 of the Criminal Justice Committee. We have received apologies from Pauline McNeill, and Liam Kerr joins us remotely.

Our first item of business is a decision on whether to take in private item 4, which is consideration of our work programme. Do we agree to take that item in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you for the question. The cross-committee group on drug deaths and drug harm, which you are obviously aware of, has had oversight of the journey of the people’s panel, to a certain extent, and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, who currently covers the drug policy brief, has already attended meetings of the cross-committee group and we have taken evidence from him. Likewise, we have invited a group of panel members to contribute their reflections on the panel process to the cross-committee group.

It is certainly the intention of the cross-committee group to continue tracking progress on the recommendations. As you will know from paper 2, the Government has accepted—either in principle or fully—more or less all the recommendations, with the exception of the recommendation that was made about the point that we are discussing today. Rest assured that there will be continued monitoring on the back of the published report.

Our next item of business is the consideration of a Scottish statutory instrument that is subject to the negative procedure. I refer members to paper 1, which sets out the purpose of the regulations. I declare an interest, which is that I am a former police officer.

Do members wish to make any recommendations in relation to the negative instrument, or are we content that it comes into force?

I remind members that, if amendment 200 is agreed to, I will not be able to call amendments 70 and 71.

Amendment 200 agreed to.

Amendments 201 and 202 moved—[Angela Constance]—and agreed to.

Amendment 37 not moved.

Section 47, as amended, agreed to.

Section 48—Rights of audience: advocates

Amendment 38 not moved.

Section 48 agreed to.

Section 49—Statement of training requirement for prosecutors

Amendment 39 not moved.

Section 49 agreed to.

After section 49

Amendment 203 moved—[Angela Constance]—and agreed to.

Section 50—Clerk of the Sexual Offences Court

Amendment 40 not moved.

Section 50 agreed to.

Section 51—Deputy Clerks of the Sexual Offences Court

Amendment 41 not moved.

Section 51 agreed to.

Section 52—Clerk and Deputy Clerks: further provisions

Amendment 42 not moved.

Section 52 agreed to.

Section 53—Sexual Offences Court records

Amendment 43 not moved.

Section 53 agreed to.

Section 54—Sexual Offences Court records: authentication and electronic form

The next group is entitled, “Sexual Offences Court: procedure and records”. Amendment 204, in the name of the cabinet secretary, is grouped with amendments 205 and 206.