Seòmar agus comataidhean

No—I am asking whether your considerations will be under that bill or somewhere else.

For the purposes of clarity, I was merely echoing recommendation 3 in the report, which requires both the name of the adviser and the rationale behind the decision to be recorded.

I was going to talk about the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 first.

Section 5 of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 gives the power to add bodies for the purposes of freedom of information. A report is produced. This year’s report clearly stated that there had been no new designations. However, during the time that it covered, ScotRail and the Caledonian Sleeper service were brought under the act for the purposes of freedom of information. Why did you not avail yourself of the ability under the act to announce that they were part of the system?

I point out that the minister is here for the Scottish Government.

That is very helpful. It is both fortunate and unfortunate that the first experience that the Parliament has had of reconsideration is in respect of a bill that affects our younger generations. Indeed, I think that they have borne the brunt of the recent period of time, and I welcome the offer to reconsider, review and look into the matter. We will certainly take the minister up on that.

I thank the minister and his officials for attending today.

I have now received apologies from Annie Wells, which I put on the record—she has been unable to attend today, for reasons that I absolutely accept.

I am glad that there is a level of confidence about that, given the importance of any amendment to electoral law. However, does the timetable take into account the registration of electors issue that we have discussed this morning? Does it take into account concerns that we have had over the role of artificial intelligence? Do you view the forthcoming elections bill as quite a tight bill, as is hinted at in some of the responses to the consultation? You have already mentioned provisions on 16 and 17-year-olds, and there are some strong arguments from that group and others about that.

Has your view of the extent of the bill changed, and is that so that we can get it in, hopefully, by the end of next year? I will not quote you on that—aside from the fact that this is in public. Do you still see the bill achieving what you hoped it would achieve when we first talked about the proposals, some 18 months ago?

Thank you very much, minister.

I echo that. The committee has a very strong relationship with you, but there is also a very strong relationship at the clerking level with your officials in respect of the assistance that is given.

I will delve into that, because that gets to the point. Good practice suggests that electoral legislation should be in place at least six months before it is first tried and tested in an election. We are aware of the period that is required in order to get a bill of any size through the Parliament, and we are getting very close to the point at which those two dates will become incompatible—

I want to push you on that, because it is hugely important. There is pressure from both within and outwith this place with regard to an elections bill, but history shows us that rushed elections bills cause absolute chaos on the day.