Seòmar agus comataidhean

Hi, Katy. The membership of the proposed group does not include a representative from the Conservative Party. Is there a particular reason for that?

I am pleased to propose amendments 56 and 57, having raised the issue of post-legislative scrutiny of the bill alongside my colleagues on the Criminal Justice Committee in our stage 1 report.

As a committee, we spent considerable time discussing the data available on the impact of fireworks and the importance of a post-legislative scrutiny review of the bill’s implementation. I therefore welcome the minister’s response to our recommendations on those issues, her willingness to give them further consideration and the opportunity to meet her to discuss them further.

Amendments 56 and 57 seek to place a duty on Scottish ministers to report to Parliament on the operation of the bill’s provisions within five years following royal assent. As we heard from the minister at stage 1 and as is outlined in the bill’s accompanying documents, it is expected that the provisions will come into force over the first two years following royal assent. In practice, that provides three years for gathering the required information and for monitoring and reporting on any change. That appears to me a proportionate timescale to allow for the implementation and initial operation of the proposed measures and, therefore, to ensure that the report that is submitted is sufficiently detailed and worthwhile. Amendment 56 also sets out that the report would be required to include appropriate information about criminal proceedings and convictions, the number of incidents in the reporting period and, importantly, the views and experiences of people in Scotland on how firework use has been impacted in their communities.

Amendment 129, in the name of Mr Greene, would, like my amendments, require Scottish ministers to

“review the operation and effectiveness of this Act.”

I believe that we are aligned in our desire to make certain that the legislation is working as intended, and to afford Parliament due levels of scrutiny, but I consider that commencing the reporting period on the day of royal assent, as set out in my amendments, will mean that there is no delay. The period is easily understandable and will not be tied to individual provisions coming into force. In my view, my amendments improve the transparency of the bill’s implementation, allowing members to develop a full understanding of how requirements are being met and to ensure that the legislation is working effectively.

I hope that members will support amendments 56 and 57.

Good morning, Franziska. It is so lovely to hear about Freiburg’s approach to being a sustainable city. I also understand that it is the sunniest place in Germany, so it sounds like a lovely place to live.

I want to ask about procurement. Freiburg’s website states that the sustainability of municipal properties and procurement has been a key consideration for many years. What changes did you make in your organisation and your working culture to establish a programme of energy efficiency improvements and changes to procurement practices?

It is great to hear that. Do you measure how much of your supply chain is procured locally so that you have supply chain visibility?

That is very interesting. Thank you.

I am conscious of the time. However, if any of the other witnesses want to come in, I do not want to exclude them.

Good morning. It is lovely to meet you all online and in person. I will touch on accessibility and what we have done about that so far. Would you like to see any of those changes continue? How can we enhance or tweak what we do? Some of you have touched on it. Today, there are six witnesses at the meeting; four of you are online and two are in the committee room. Do you think that that is the right balance? To contextualise that, is there anything else that we can do to enhance your journey to interact with us here, in Parliament?

I totally concur with everything that everyone has said: it was an excellent visit. It was amazing to hear about the recidivism rates that the Wise Group has, which are fantastic and a measure of how good the organisation is. I was blown away by the amazing plethora of talent and experience that the mentors have. Some of the services that the Wise Group provides through the Prison Service, such as the email a prisoner scheme, are fantastic.

I was totally taken by the Wise Group, and I have emailed Charlie Martin and Sean Duffy to see whether, during recess, I can visit for a full day to see the work that they do. I will keep in touch with them.

You have touched on distress brief interventions. Are they awarded to people in custody? Do third sector organisations come in during their period of custody? Can you talk about the level 2 aspect, too?

I also want to ask about the pilot schemes that you have already touched on—the DBI scheme and the mental health pathway pilot. How effective have they been? What lessons have been learned about what can be done better? For instance, notwithstanding the involvement of the national health service, the police and the Scottish Ambulance Service, should a dedicated emergency service line be put in place? Would that be effective as far as mental health responders are concerned? Can John Hawkins respond to that?