Seòmar agus comataidhean

The final question that I want to ask is one that I asked the previous panel and the panels last week. It is about your interlinking with the other justice agencies. You heard this morning’s evidence, and I assume that you tuned into the police’s and the fire service’s evidence last week. You all seem to say very similar things; it is a very bleak picture, and there is no getting away from that. Have you thought about how a flat cash settlement will impact on the police, the courts service—from which we have heard this morning—the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service and other criminal justice agencies? How do you take that into account in your budget considerations?

I had a supplementary to Pauline McNeill’s question, but it has partly been covered. I would still like to ask it, but I can come in later.

That is what I was going to ask about. You have already covered the matter, so excuse my naivety. Is there no way out of the contracts? Is that basically it?

Good morning, panel, and thanks very much for your evidence so far. I looked to ask a supplementary question earlier about Lady Dorrian’s work, which the committee is very interested in and supportive of, but it has been covered. I am actually glad that the convener did not bring me in, because I would have stepped on my colleague Rona Mackay’s toes. I wanted to clarify that point.

I have two broad questions that are not really related. First, do you have any idea what the impact might be on revenue that is raised through fees in civil court cases if the current inflationary cycle continues beyond 2023? What impact could that have overall?

You said that the service will continue to prioritise criminal cases, and particularly the most serious ones. I think that everybody would agree with that and there would be no argument about it. That implies that the civil stuff might take more of a back seat, for want of a better expression. However, civil cases create a revenue stream for you as well. If they take a back seat but they create revenue in an already constrained budget, have you thought about how that could play out?

My other question is about the interplay between different parts of the justice sector. I have asked previous panels about that, and we will hear later from the Scottish Prison Service, which is another key player.

When you make budget decisions and consider ideas, do you take into account some of the things that you might have heard from the police and the fire service last week—and that you might hear later from the Scottish Prison Service—to do with how everything is interlinked? If they all get flat cash settlements, how does that impact on you?

You described that as a low-level example, but it is a really good one. In my days as a criminal justice social worker years ago, I would be down at the courts. Police officers were often there for the whole day and they would say, “This is the third time this month that I have done this.”

I understand the penalties argument, but on reputational damage, I think that the public knowing that we were talking about billions in taxpayers’ money would negate that argument. I accept it if the cost of coming out of such a contract will end up outweighing any benefit that might be achieved. I understand that.

I really appreciate that response. I am conscious of the time, so I will hand back to you, convener.

Good morning. I had a few questions about accountability, but a lot of the issues have been covered, so I will ask a question on the back of what Karen Adam asked about. It involves an area that you always highlight, minister, and is a difficult one from the public’s point of view.

Generally, the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament have a range of policies with human rights at their core. However, when the policies are implemented by local government or other public sector bodies, the human rights element does not always seem to be present on the ground. Could you comment on that? In your response to Karen Adam, you talked about how difficult it is to follow the money to see whether it is being implemented in that way. Is there something that we can do to ensure that all bodies are working together to implement policies in a way that has human rights at their core?

Last week, I raised an issue concerning a mobility hub in my constituency. I was not looking for an intervention on that issue, but I can inform the committee that, following that discussion—about an hour and a half after the end of the meeting—I received an email advising me that the campaign to save the service had been successful. I do not know whether someone somewhere was watching the committee meeting, but I thought that the committee might be interested in what happened, and I want to put on the record my thanks to the committee for allowing me to raise the issue, as it is plausible that that discussion played a part in saving the service.

My question is not about the mobility hub, which has now been saved; it is more about the general idea of how the Parliament’s good human rights policies can be implemented across the board. I know that there are difficulties with funding and so on.