Seòmar agus comataidhean

This question is probably for Sheriff Mackie. Given that, as we have just heard, the bill is about changing our approach to 16 and 17-year-olds, is there an argument for introducing elements of restorative justice into the children’s hearings system, beyond what is in the bill?

I suspect that I know what the witnesses’ answers to my first question will be, but I am going to ask it anyway. What are your views on the definition of a “child” being someone of 18 or under, given your experience of dealing with that cohort? Laura, would you like to go first?

You indicated earlier that the move to have young people and children housed in the sort of environment that Kevin Northcott described is desirable.

Perhaps someone could write to us with that information.

What would 2,000 cases compare to currently? What percentage would that increase be?

I have a daft laddie question. Can you paint a picture of what appropriate trauma-informed transportation is? Can you define it for the benefit of people who do not have an understanding of that?

How secure is secure accommodation from the perspective of the public?

Does anyone have anything to add to that, or does it summarise where you all are on the question?

Why is appropriate trauma-informed transportation not available in Scotland? It does not seem to be a particularly challenging thing to set up.

Sitting in there may be the child victims—or the alleged victims—in all this. They could wait eight and a half months for justice, which they may not see completely in the end. By what amount, roughly, does the modelling suggest that the numbers could increase?