Seòmar agus comataidhean

In broad terms, I agree with that narrative. We live in a country where people have the right to protest. I, for one, will always protect people’s right to peaceful protest. We are seeing more protests now. Every weekend, there are several protests and counter-protests, not just in all our major cities but in some of our towns and smaller conurbations. Police Scotland and I, as justice secretary, always have a heightened sensitivity and acuity when it comes to broader threats to communities and, indeed, to our country.

You mentioned the work on counter-terrorism. As I pointed out earlier, cyberoffending is increasing, coupled with online harm, whether that is people seeking to exploit the vulnerable or using online activity as a vehicle for other offending behaviour. Police Scotland’s activity over the summer months around serious organised crime has been well documented and has resulted in around 60 individuals being in custody. Of course, there are also major events.

All of that points to a change that has been coming, particularly around online cyberharm. We live in an increasingly globalised world, and criminals and their activities do not just stop at the border. The co-operation between Police Scotland, the National Crime Agency and police forces across the UK is important, as is the work with our European partners. I have recently been engaged in that, for example with the European Union commissioner for justice. Despite Brexit, which has made our co-operation with European partners more complex, there is still a commitment, and a need that is mutually recognised. We are living in a more uncertain world, and events, wars and disputes across the world can play out domestically, too. There is a different environment; I am focused on that as part of our deliberations in and around the budget.

Given the technical aspects of the question, I will refer to my notes, if you do not mind. Where an application is in progress, the police could write to the gender recognition panel to detail their concerns and would require to have a clear reasoning for doing so. I am not sure that that answers your question—apologies. I am checking with my officials.

I think that Mr Kerr’s question is in relation to whether a registered sex offender who is already in receipt of a gender recognition certificate prior to conviction is still required to notify the police.

I will start, and Graham Robertson can continue. I want to try to keep this as simple as possible. In relation to notification requirements, there is obviously the initial notification following an offence, and people are required to submit a range of information to the police. There are also requirements for people who change their information; Graham Robertson can add to that. We are also looking at further measures in the Crime and Policing Bill. The interactions between the different kinds of legislation are quite intricate, so I will pass you over to Graham Robertson, if you do not mind.

The SSI adds a requirement for someone to notify the police if they apply for a gender recognition certificate when they have been convicted of a sexual offence that requires notification. There is a list of information that they would have to notify the police of. The SSI adds to the long list of information requirements that people have to adhere to a requirement for that person to notify the police if they apply for a GRC. The SSI is focused and specific, and I am not sure what other concerns you are referring to, Ms Dowey.

There are automatic exclusions. Examples of such exclusions include: if the prisoner does not consent; if they are subject to notification requirements under part 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003—that is, if they are a registered sex offender; if they are subject to an extended sentence; or if they are subject to a supervised release order. Those exclusions are to ensure that, where the court has decided that there is an elevated risk and a short-term prisoner needs a supervised release order once they are out, such prisoners are subject to an extended sentence or have to be part of sex offender notification—

The number of people and the resource are increasing. My expectation is that, when a court orders something, it will occur.

Ms Clark makes an important point about confidence in the availability of community disposals, and indeed that is why I have had a particular focus on community justice. However, part of the work of the sentencing and penal policy commission is to examine not only how custody operates but how community disposals are used. In short, much more work needs to be done.

As I said earlier, officials proactively came to me to discuss the content of the DPLR Committee’s report. I have not looked in detail at the concerns to do with the drafting of the instrument, although officials have certainly raised all those issues with me.

I will ask Ms Hutchison and other officials to answer any questions on drafting. I am not a lawyer—I am all about the policy and the intent. I have a prison population that I need to address and, if you will forgive me, that is my priority, notwithstanding the importance of the issue.

I am not conceding that point. The information and advice that I have had is that, although the DPLR Committee and members have raised concerns, I am not aware of any suggestion that we are acting outwith our legal competence or are engaging in any illegality.

I take advice from officials on drafting. Ms Hutchison, do you have anything to add?

On the here and now, the borrowing limits on the Scottish Government, set by the UK Government, are a real constraint. However, what is more specific to justice is the fact that, even were Police Scotland to borrow, that would have to be covered by the justice portfolio, so there is no additionality as a result of borrowing by Police Scotland or other justice partners. We are constrained by the lack of flexibility in our overall—