Seòmar agus comataidhean

We will hear a brief supplementary question from Ross Greer.

We are not talking about making buffer zones smaller. As a response to what was a criminal act, a buffer zone would be extended on a ministerial decision, rather than through Parliament making such a decision.

I call Ruth Maguire.

Given the caveat that there would be further consultation, how would the Scottish Government ensure that human rights were respected within any change, given that that would extend the buffer zones into many more premises and cover a much wider area across the country, particularly in urban areas?

Minister, you will be aware that the committee has taken evidence on the definition of protected premises. In both oral and written evidence, we have had very different views. Some stakeholder organisations were keen that the definition be expanded, while others were very much against that and were troubled by it. Could you outline the steps, planning and consultation that the Scottish Government will undertake to inform any decisions about extending the definition of protected premises?

David Torrance has a question.

Emma Harper has a supplementary question.

I am keen to hear your views on whether the meaning of protected premises should be broadened. You spoke a bit about that in response to Sandesh Gulhane’s question about coverage, particularly in urban areas, where large parts of towns and cities might be covered by a buffer zone. Have you given some thought to what impact capturing more protected premises under the bill might have on the rights of anti-abortion protesters or vigil holders?

There is no law saying that, if someone happens to be standing there, I could complain to the police that they are silently praying and trying to intimidate me or change my intent to access the service.

Is that correct under current legislation or did I pick that up wrongly?