Seòmar agus comataidhean

Absolutely. However, if somebody turns up with a placard—let us say that there is no CCTV—and you need witnesses, could it be that it is the department that makes the complaint and the witnesses only come forward to further the case?

I declare an interest as a practising NHS GP and, particularly pertinently at this meeting, as a member of the RCGP.

I have basically the same question for Colin Poolman and Chris Provan. Colin, your submission says:

“RCN Scotland supports the intention behind the Bill.”

Do you support the bill as it is written?

We can pick that up with the panel, too. Chris Provan, your submission says:

“RCGP Scotland agrees with the purpose of the proposed Bill”.

So, I ask you the same question: do you agree with the bill as it is worded?

That is a huge concern to me. The situation may be obvious at the Chalmers centre in Edinburgh, for instance, because there are only so many services that are provided there, but I am not sure that it is the point of the bill to prevent people from turning up to protest about other issues at a big hospital that provides a lot of services. Are there any mitigations or ways that we could prevent such protests from coming under the bill?

I am sorry, but could you explain the ballot part of that?

Absolutely. The bill includes the 200m zone, and it includes what happens in people’s own residences. I would like to hear the witnesses’ opinions about the decision to say what people can and cannot do in their homes, given that we are talking about banning of picketing and of using pictures of fetuses in the street, for example. It seems to be sensible to include that, but my understanding is that the bill would be the only such legislation that includes people’s homes or private residences. What is your opinion of that?

Can I ask a question specifically about that? If one was stopped while driving a car, would the police officer not be entitled to ask, “Do you know why I have stopped you?” Is that not similar?

Thank you so much for telling us your stories and what happened.

I declare my interest as a practising NHS GP.

This is a hypothetical question, so if you cannot answer it, do not feel that you need to answer it. The protests that you faced very much involved things happening—Lily’s partner at the time was approached. What impact would silent prayers and vigils potentially have had on you? Obviously, that did not actually happen.

Thank you—that is very helpful.

I open this up to other members of the panel. The bill before us contains provisions that cover putting up posters or signs within private dwellings. We can fully understand the reasons for that. My question to all the panel is whether you think that it is proportionate to have such provisions, and whether you feel that they have been balanced appropriately with the right for people to do almost what they want in their own property.

I want to say that, as a GP, when a woman comes to me to ask for an abortion, it is not just a case of saying yes and moving on. There is a conversation to be had, because it is about safeguarding. People can conscientiously object, but they have to pass that patient on to somebody who can have that conversation. That is quite important.

I want to talk about human rights. I am going to ask some really difficult questions, which could potentially be quite triggering. There is a group of people, in our country and especially in America, who feel that human rights begin at fertilisation—that the embryo is a human with rights and that, in essence, what is occurring is murder. When someone has a view that is so strong and so set that they use a word like that, they want to be heard. They want their human rights and the human rights of the foetus or embryo—whatever term we or they want to give it—to be heard. What is your opinion about what I have just said, and what would you say in response?