Seòmar agus comataidhean

No, no—I absolutely take on board what you are saying. I go back to your statement that “multiple strands” are needed. In my view, the bill is just another strand that we, in this Parliament, need to have for preparedness. We can, by all means, go back to preparedness in the physical sense, with hospitals and healthcare—we can do all those things separately. The bill simply means that, in a legislative sense, we are preparing ourselves for the future so that, in the event of another emergency, we have the legislative competence to enable us to deal with it in this Parliament. Is that a fair assessment?

We have mentioned the cost of living crisis, but what causes people to get into debt in the first place? I remember the debates about short-term loan companies charging interest at 2,500 per cent and so on. Will people who are struggling to cover their cost of living go in that direction? Jamie MacNeil, what do you think?

Thank you very much.

For a layman such as myself, what immediately springs to mind is that if someone who had Ebola, for instance, comes into the country, they could be required to take a medical intervention in order to protect the public. Is that what that means?

On what the Gates foundation said in 2019, am I right in thinking that the preparedness that we had was UK-wide and was therefore more about what Westminster was prepared to do? Scotland did not have that same legal preparedness and the bill brings us into line with Westminster. Is that correct?

I fully take on board everything that you have said; that is why I made my comment at the start.

David Menzies, how will the bill help with the situation in which we find ourselves right now? I will come to Abbey Fleming very briefly once David Menzies gives his answer.

Thank you. I think that you wanted to come in, Abbey. Please be very quick, though, as we are getting short of time.

We are talking about debt in broad terms. It strikes me that debt is one of the most significant strains on a person’s mental wellbeing—it is a massive issue. We are talking in abstract terms about the power to serve documents to a bankruptcy process electronically or by post and so on. All of those discussions are abstract, but we must keep in our minds that this issue is about people and what they are living through.

We have probably now covered the matter of whether the documents should be issued electronically or by post. We have also covered the power to hold meetings remotely or in a physical location. Dealing with those issues is the purpose of the bill. However, I would like to get a general sense of how you feel that people are coping with their debt right now, given the circumstances that we are living in. Abbey Fleming, would you like to talk about that first?

So, people who fear and oppose the bill could not say that it would allow the Government to force people to get a vaccination, but if someone came into the country with an infectious disease that we do not have a control for, it would allow the Government to take action on that. Is that a fair assessment of what you have said?

The witnesses have already given us a huge amount to think about. Professor de Londras, you talked about forcing people to have a medical intervention. Will you clarify what that means, please?