Seòmar agus comataidhean

The work has been really good and I welcome your opening statement, Baroness Kennedy. You challenge men to support the legislation that you are proposing; I support it and I am sure that others do, too. I am sure that I speak for colleagues—members, clerks and other workers—when I say that we should feel uncomfortable as men. That is important. Bill Brash is sitting there smiling.

Do you think that the additional resources will have to be tailored specifically to criminal justice? I am thinking, for example, of diversion schemes that would deal with misogyny for young people who get involved in that kind of trouble. Alternatively, do you think that more general work on changing the culture needs to be done in schools? Do we need a bit of both?

With regard to remand, which is the first issue that is highlighted, I wonder whether it would be worth mentioning in the “Notes and additional information” column the extra £3.2 million that has recently been announced for diversion from prosecution. I know that it is mentioned somewhere else; in fact, I have just scrolled down and seen the reference to

“a further £3.2m for bail supervision schemes”.

I am content that it is mentioned in the document, but I wonder whether the first box in that section might be the best place to put it. I think that that would make the point more clearly—although, if anyone disagrees with me, I say again that I know that reference is made to it elsewhere. However, the first box is about remand, and the key issue in that respect is getting

“details from the Cabinet Secretary on how he plans to tackle remand numbers”.

As he has made an announcement on that very matter, it should be mentioned there.

Thank you. Does Sarah Axford have any views on that final question?

Thank you.

Your answer leads me on nicely to my final question, which is about bringing the provisions in section 21 into force, which we have touched on already. The Scottish Government has expressed a policy concern about bringing those provisions into force because of the fear that children could end up with multiple support workers. In my experience, it is not uncommon for children to have multiple professionals or agencies working with them. Is that a valid concern in this context, or is it more about having an integrated approach to addressing the issue? That question is for Dr Barnes Macfarlane.

Thank you.

It is fair to say that we have covered a lot of ground. I apologise in advance about the two questions that I will ask, because some of the issues have already been covered.

However, I will ask again about child welfare reporters. I was on the committee that considered the previous legislation, and we had a lot of discussion about that subject, as the witnesses will probably remember. We have talked a bit about who child welfare reporters are—whether they are legal professionals, social workers or psychologists—which was discussed when the bill was being considered.

In broader terms, do you feel that we now have the correct approach? What are the main features that the child welfare reporter system needs to have in order for it to be a success? Sarah Axford, I will come to you first.

Good afternoon. I thank the witnesses for all their evidence and answers so far. It has been a really worthwhile session, as was the previous one.

The difficulty with asking questions last and being the only member taking part remotely is that a lot of areas have been covered in great depth. I appreciate that. I had questions about how young people can be helped to give their views, but we have covered a lot of that. Some really good examples have been given in relation to pets and the use of tables. When I was a social worker, the big table in the room was always an issue in children’s hearings, so it is great to hear that we are moving on from that.

I will focus my substantive questions on legal representation. I am happy for the witnesses to answer in any order. In your experience, how common is it, in practice, for children and young people to be legally represented at children’s hearings and tribunals? When they are, what are the advantages and drawbacks of that?

Good morning. Unfortunately, I do not have a dog to represent at the committee.

I have some questions about the restrictions, but I also want to pick up on some details from last week’s evidence. As Jamie Greene and Pauline McNeill indicated, industry representatives gave powerful evidence, which the minister will have read. What was most striking was that that was the only evidence that we have heard that has been counter to the bill. All the other evidence that we have heard from stakeholders has been very supportive. I know that you are pleased about that.

The Republic of Ireland and other countries were mentioned last week. What evidence was taken from those countries as the bill was developed? I know that there is more or less a full ban on fireworks in the Republic of Ireland. The evidence that we heard last week challenged the committee in our scrutiny of the legislation. A black market has formed in Ireland, which you have talked about a little.

The clerks asked for and got information from Ireland, which I have scanned through. There seems to be a mixed picture regarding firework incidents, seizures and the value of items seized. There is a general downward trend, although the figures go up and down from year to year. There has certainly been an overall decline in prosecutions, from 11 in 2015 to two in 2020, which is good. That seems to be the general trend.

Most importantly, the Government inspector of explosives at the Irish Department of Justice told us:

“While instances of illegal firework use do still occur in Ireland, in particular in the run up to Halloween, the Department believes the restrictions in place considerably mitigate against their widespread misuse, and the associated distress and risk they can cause to public safety and property.”

That seems positive, given the evidence that we heard last week.

What evidence or information do you have from other countries? That came from the Republic of Ireland; I think that Hawaii was mentioned last week.