Seòmar agus comataidhean

The analysis of the harm and of the benefits for young people of being located close to their community or in their community makes sense. It is reasonable and sound, and I will draw on your expertise on that. However, I worry about some of the language and the talk of a forced reduction, which it feels to me is the case with some of the numbers. If those young people have nowhere else to go, should we not welcome them here? Is it your contention that, by being less welcoming in a legislative framework, we can force the United Kingdom Government to do better? I wish that it would do better, but is that the contention? It feels to me that, if we make the process more difficult, we could put more children at risk, whether they are from south of the border or not. Megan, I was particularly concerned about your language.

I would contend that things are not managed well in every circumstance. I suppose that nothing can be—mistakes will be made, and there will be problems. I have dealt with constituency casework that has involved very difficult situations in which those things have not been managed. Essentially, there were voluntary dispensations that fell between the cracks, with local authorities not having the resource to carry things through. Is there nothing that we could do in the bill to further strengthen the support for managing the arrangements between victims and perpetrators who are in the same community?

As bodies that are involved in the dispensation and use of secure accommodation services, are you concerned that capacity in secure accommodation and residential care might be impacted by cross-border placements in that the number of available bed spaces might be reduced? Your organisations are involved in sending young people into such places. Does the capacity issue concern you?

In recent years, the Scottish Government has had a policy to fund a last-bed provision in secure accommodation. Kenny, you mentioned an issue to do with finding capacity. However, I am told that there is some dubiety as to whether that policy will be continued. Would it concern your organisations if that last-bed provision to find a place for a person was not continued?

That is useful.

There is a fair amount of commentary there about communication and the right to information. In this area, I am particularly concerned about child victims of child crime.

Will you give us your reflections on the management of relationships? Many of the victims will be living in the same communities as children who are the perpetrators of crimes, who might end up going to the same school or living in the same street as the victims of what are sometimes very serious crimes. How are those processes managed, and can more be done to achieve better outcomes? I ask Katy to start.

I accept that we do not want that to happen, but can you address my point about the cross-border placements?

Are there concerns in your organisations that some of the institutions may be becoming reliant on cross-border placements for their financing? The committee has heard in other evidence that many people are concerned about and critical of the situation in the regime south of the border. We have heard that, frankly, it is right for Scotland to offer safe havens for some of the young people concerned but that there may be an issue to do with the finances of some of the institutions. Have your organisations reflected on that? Do you have any concerns about it?

Certainly.

My questions are on cross-border placements, which the bill seeks to regulate. Perhaps the representative from each organisation could speak to the complexities and challenges that it faces in managing the processes for such placements. By that I mean those that cover, for example, young people whose cases are disposed of in England or Wales but who end up living in secure or supported accommodation in Scotland.