Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am sorry to cut across you like that, Mr Burnett.

Andrew Richards talked about the circular economy. I am thinking of some kind of local content requirement, not only to shorten supply chains but—importantly—to catalyse local manufacturing. Should the Scottish Government be looking at something in that space to ensure that we have the drivers in place to support local manufacturing and—if demand is the issue—to drive up demand for it?

Thank you, convener—I am sorry to jump in again like this.

My question is probably most appropriately directed at Andrew Richards, who talked about the race to the bottom and the shift in risk from the public sector to the private sector, and about the need for investment in the construction industry more generally. What could the Scottish Government do to mitigate some of that shifting risk? I am thinking about some of the broader issues around driving up demand, such as the need for retrofitting and house building. Is there space for a national construction company, or something like that, which would allow us to focus and target investment and therefore limit the risk shift that you describe?

I will draw on the evidence that you have produced about medical professionals practising conversion therapy. What sanctions do they face? Does the practice largely go unchallenged because of fear of discussing it?

Thank you—that is helpful.

I have a second question, in which I will seek to draw out some of what Barbara Bolton has just said. What is your response to the suggestion that medical practitioners and psychotherapists could be criminalised if they do not affirm a young person’s gender identity? There is an issue around the balance between consent and affirmation, which can be seen as blurred. Even in law, we cannot legislate for blurred lines.

Thank you both for coming today, and for your powerful and informative contributions, previously and this morning. I am very mindful of the view that we should stop talking and get on. I share somewhat your frustration at the fact that we are still talking about the issue.

Igi Moon talked about the importance of intersectionality. Thank you for raising that issue, because I do not think that we have previously heard the matter being articulated in that way.

My questions draw on strands of what Pam Duncan-Glancy and Jeremy Balfour talked about earlier—in particular, medical professionals, in which I include the full range of healthcare professionals from clinical and medical professionals to psychotherapeutic professionals. How do we provide clarity on what is and is not allowed in respect of that setting being the safe space that you mentioned, and in relation to therapists being able to allow challenging and confusing exploration with patients, clients and survivors? I am interested to hear how you think our definition in law will impact on that.

I thank both of you for the clear summaries that you have provided this morning and for your detailed submissions.

I want to follow up on how legislation might have an impact on healthcare professionals, among whom I would include psychotherapeutic professionals. How can we ensure that the way in which we craft the definition the legislation provides clarity on which practices are allowable and which are not? There is an issue around medical professionals being able to offer support, guidance and advice on a range of options for people who may suffer from gender dysphoria, for instance.

I would be interested to hear your views on how we get that element right so that we ban what we need to ban but do not encroach on some of the very sensitive conversations that a medical professional should have with a patient—with the person in front of them.

I have no relevant financial interests, but I refer members to my entry in the register of member’s interests. I am a member of Unite the Union.

That links to what you said in answer to a previous question around diversification and loves local. There is a huge opportunity there.

I want to extend this a little bit and look more broadly. Decades of business support and economic development have not really changed systemic issues in our economy, with low productivity, stagnating rates of entrepreneurialism and so on. What could we do better in the coming years so that we do not just keep doing more of the same? How can we do that better and in a way that will drive the change in direction that we need, not only around net zero but longer term and more broadly? That question is for Adrian Gillespie and Malcolm Roughead.

We might come back to you on the learning that you get from that tool, because it sounds really interesting.

You both talked about linking economic transformation to community wellbeing. That is really important, and it is a strand of work that is in development around the wellbeing economy. My second question is on that subject. How are you supporting businesses and modelling the leadership to enhance activities in line with the wellbeing economy? I am particularly interested in the links to community wealth building and those kinds of fundamental transformations that will change how people relate to their local economies, never mind a broader economic system.