Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 19 December 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 924 contributions

|

COVID-19 Recovery Committee

Excess Deaths Inquiry

Meeting date: 10 March 2022

Murdo Fraser

Good morning. I would like to follow up on the convener’s questions, both of which are important.

On the data question, the submissions from Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland and Macmillan Cancer Support both make the point that there is anecdotal evidence of people who have been suffering from heart disease and stroke in one case, and from cancer in the other case, presenting later at hospital but, so far, it is only anecdotal and there is not enough data.

First, can Peter Hastie from Macmillan Cancer Support elaborate on that? Also, when would you expect the data to appear? Then perhaps I can go to Dr Francisco Perez-Reche, whose paper suggests that there is a bit more concrete information available rather than just anecdotal evidence.

09:45  

COVID-19 Recovery Committee

Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 10 March 2022

Murdo Fraser

Good morning. It is fair to say that concerns have been raised with us about the proposed change. The Scottish Association of Social Work, for example, has said that witnessing the signature of a named person provides an opportunity

“to verify the named person ... inform them of the role, allow them to ask any questions, ensure they”

understand

“the responsibilities and to confirm that they are competent and able to perform the functions correctly. This is particularly important since there is little guidance around the role and responsibilities of a named person.”

What is your response to those comments? Do you have any concerns that removing such a requirement will mean that people taking on the responsibility of being a named person will not be fully advised of what the role involves? Perhaps Dr Chopra can respond first.

COVID-19 Recovery Committee

Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 10 March 2022

Murdo Fraser

Dr Chopra, before I bring in Dr Smyth, perhaps I could ask a brief follow-up question. Should a named person nominee be required to declare that they understand their role, rights and responsibilities?

COVID-19 Recovery Committee

Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 10 March 2022

Murdo Fraser

I put the same question to Dr Smyth.

COVID-19 Recovery Committee

Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 3 March 2022

Murdo Fraser

I will go back to Professor de Londras to explore further the issue, which we touched on earlier, of the use of the made affirmative procedure. You covered that in detail in your written evidence and you are clearly critical of the overuse of the made affirmative procedure. From a practical point of view, how would you amend the bill that is in front of us in order to reduce the reliance on the made affirmative procedure, which is clearly an objective that you want to achieve?

COVID-19 Recovery Committee

Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 3 March 2022

Murdo Fraser

Thank you. Professor McKenzie Skene, can we have your view on that?

COVID-19 Recovery Committee

Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 3 March 2022

Murdo Fraser

Good morning. I want to raise a slightly different issue—that of electronic notification of bankruptcy documents. I note that the bill proposes to make permanent the temporary provisions in the coronavirus legislation that allow electronic notification rather than service in hard copy. Do the witnesses have any concerns about that being made permanent? Are there any practical implications to it?

Speaking from personal experience, like many of my MSP colleagues, I probably receive hundreds of electronic communications every day and people not infrequently say to me that they sent me an email that I did not receive because it went into the spam folder, was quarantined or, as sometimes happens, disappeared into the ether. How reliable is the system of electronic notification? Are there enough safeguards in the bill to protect people?

10:45  

COVID-19 Recovery Committee

Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 3 March 2022

Murdo Fraser

I might come back to you on the issue of process, but I ask the other witnesses on the panel for a view.

COVID-19 Recovery Committee

Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 3 March 2022

Murdo Fraser

Thank you. That is very helpful.

COVID-19 Recovery Committee

Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 3 March 2022

Murdo Fraser

Good morning to our witnesses. I suppose the key issue that the committee has to consider in relation to the bill is whether the measures that are before us are necessary and proportionate, or whether they represent ministerial overreach.

We have been presented with a lot of evidence from interested parties and from members of the public. A strong theme has come through regarding the issue of civil liberties, which I want to ask you about. The bill will allow the Scottish ministers to impose quite substantial restrictions on people’s activities, as we have seen over the past two years but on a permanent basis. There will be particular impacts in the area of health, where individuals can be required to

“submit to medical examination ... be detained in a hospital or other suitable establishment”,

or be forced to

“be kept in quarantine”.

What is your view on that? Does the bill strike an appropriate balance between the protection of public health and respect for civil liberties? How will the question of proportionality work through in practice?

Perhaps Professor de Londras can start.