Seòmar agus comataidhean

Do you have any thoughts about how to communicate with the voters that you represent? As I said, the period could be as little as three weeks. That is unlikely, but it is possible. Are there particular challenges around communication?

That comment about the 40,000 people is very concerning. Does Ethan Young or Jess Garland want to comment in that regard? Are other such figures available or could you provide them to the committee at some stage? If those 40,000 blind and partially sighted people do not have an acceptable form of voter ID, a real barrier will be put up to their being involved in elections.

Dr Clark, your research found that 7 per cent of polling station workers reported at least one case of intimidation, which seems high to me. I have been standing at polling stations for many years, and that seems quite high and is concerning. I can see the need for measures if one in 13 or 14 polling station workers reported voters being intimidated.

Is there a danger that the bill will create a two-tier system with different requirements for UK and Scottish elections? What additional challenges would that create? I asked the previous panel about communication in that regard. The period ahead of a UK general election will sometimes be only about three weeks. What challenges will that create for communication with the voters that you represent?

I should have mentioned earlier my registered interest as a serving councillor, although that is not overly relevant.

My question is on undue influence and on electoral offences and the sanctions around them. Are there any views on the proposed change to the law on undue influence and the new sanctions for intimidatory behaviour? I will ask Chris Highcock first, and I know that Alistair Clark has made comments indirectly on the issue.

I, too, refer everyone to my entry in the register of members’ interests: I am a serving councillor on East Lothian Council.

Minister, you have touched on whether the proposed measures are primarily about protecting public finances, on whether allowing appeals would reduce non-domestic rates income and require the Government to compensate local authorities, and on whether that would be an effective use of public funds. Do you want to expand on what you have said?

Good morning. I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests: I am a serving councillor on East Lothian Council.

The stated purpose of the group is:

“To increase understanding and delivery of a Wellbeing Economy, one which is in service of people and planet and to promote delivery of sustainable, fair and equal economic development, across a range of interest areas public, private and third sector as well as local and national government.”

The wellbeing economy involves an overview of various areas including health, equalities, the economy and sustainability. We recognise that there is some crossover with existing CPGs—for example, those on renewable energy and energy efficiency and on carers—and with groups that were proposed at the time that we made the application and that have now been approved, on a circular economy and on health inequalities. I think that we can work in conjunction with those groups, as opposed to competing with them.

More widely, since being elected around six months ago, we have heard many members from all parties say that they want to move towards a wellbeing economy. One of the purposes of the group is to increase understanding of what a wellbeing economy looks like and to help with delivery of that. It is proposed that the group will have a wide range of participants. The Wellbeing Economy Alliance Scotland will be its secretariat, and our membership will include Scottish Enterprise, United Nations House Scotland and the Scottish Trades Union Congress. Since we submitted the registration form, Queen Margaret University and Public Health Scotland have also joined the group.

I am willing to answer any questions, and I look forward to working with the group.

Does anyone else want to comment on that? It seems not. Thank you.

I welcome the witnesses. I refer everyone to my entry in the register of members’ interests, as I am a serving councillor in East Lothian.

As the convener said, my questions are about the parliamentary process. Has there been sufficient consultation on the proposals? Have the witnesses had sufficient opportunity to comment on them? Would there have been more opportunity for stakeholders to feed in their views if the changes had been introduced via primary legislation? I ask Alastair Kirkwood to comment on that first. Please be as brief as you can.

As the convener said, my question is on the parliamentary process. It is a two-part question. First, was there sufficient consultation on the proposals, and did you have an opportunity to comment on the planned changes? Secondly, would there have been more opportunity for stakeholders to feed in their views if the changes had been introduced via primary legislation? I do not know who wants to answer that first—probably Jonathan Sharma.