Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have a brief final question. What you are describing is an approach that has to be person-centred in order to meet the needs of particular individuals. Is that what we should aim for no matter what, whether someone lives in a city, a village or a remote rural or island setting?

I do not want to put words in your mouth, but you talked earlier about the flexibility of using regulation rather than primary legislation. In the sort of cases that I mentioned, would that flexibility in using regulation be helpful in allowing necessary adjustments to try to drive out such situations?

My next question again goes back to a point that Ms Horwitz made but is for Ms Crichton. Ms Horwitz quoted Scottish Legal Complaints Commission data on certain aspects. When gathering that data, did you ask a question about trust in the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission? If so, what were the findings from that?

I want to go back to a point that Dr Scott made about the lack of voices of lived experience in some of the work that has been carried out thus far. Would you like to comment on what we should do and what the Government should do to gather up the views of those voices of lived experience when it comes to setting regulations or when we are looking at flexibility and revisiting regulations at a later point? How do we best access those voices of lived experience, including the voices of many of the women for whom you have advocated over many years?

A design such as Social Security Scotland’s has made for a much better system.

Thank you. I will be brief, convener. Ms Hynd and Ms McCrossan, I am pleased to hear you use the term “citizens” rather than “customers” because it annoys me when councils refer to citizens as customers.

My question is about front-line staff, who are immensely important in terms of picking up difficulties. Are your front-line staff in Edinburgh trauma informed? Have they had trauma-informed practice training? That can often be immensely useful for picking up mental health difficulties that folks may have.

I have a brief question about the green skills aspect, which we have touched on already. Many of the jobs and courses that we have fit well with the green skills agenda. From talking to an oil and gas company last night at Scottish Renewables, I know that a direct move could be made from the work that they do now in oil and gas to the work in renewables.

Does the skills sector—whether that be SDS, the colleges or the universities—recognise that that is the case and that some of the adaptation that needs to be undertaken is pretty small indeed?

You mentioned the Glasgow aspect of data gathering. In my own patch in the north-east of Scotland, Opportunity North East does similar things.

The intelligence and the data are good, but are some of our institutions talking enough and—this is probably more important—are they listening to businesses about their future needs?

Thank you for your indulgence, convener. I will have to leave the committee soon, I am afraid.

You make some great points. You mentioned the Scottish Mental Health Law Review and Lord Scott’s report, which is huge. I am probably one of very few folks to have read it cover to cover more than once—that was because of a previous role that I held. There will be legislative changes as a result of that, which will bring about a lot of good. If we were to put too much into primary legislation, that might lead to a lot of bad.

As a former money adviser, do you think that you and your colleagues are listened to enough when it comes to the formation of legislation? Do you think that you guys should play a part in creating secondary legislation that is flexible enough to deal with the challenges and changes that we have seen in recent times?