Seòmar agus comataidhean

George, do you have to travel to Ireland to auctions, or is it done online?

It has come up previously that there have been protests for eight years now at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital, and that that specific issue was one of the reasons why 150m was not considered to be adequate and 200m was agreed. At other hospitals, the zone might not need to be 200m, but will depend on the hospital’s periphery.

I am thinking about the ability to extend or reduce a zone or to add a new site. I used the example of a new hospital—a replacement service in another area. One concern was about the Scottish ministers making that decision to extend or reduce the area without going through further parliamentary scrutiny. Sandesh Gulhane spoke about further scrutiny through statutory instruments or making sure that wider consultation was under way. Might we need to consider that as we move forward—or would it potentially incur delays in establishing new, enhanced or reduced zones?

Good morning to my colleague on the other side of the table. You have clarified the issue of 200m zones being established in Scotland, when 150m was part of the original consultation. From my asking the minister about it, I think that the 200m decision was related to the Queen Elizabeth university hospital. Is that correct?

In Scotland, 200m would be established as the safe zone—is that right?

Also related to my previous question to the minister, I would like to ask you about signage in those areas. My understanding is that some people think that that would just draw more attention to a site that provides healthcare services. What are your thoughts on signage?

Good morning. I am interested in the decision to set the safe access zone at 200m, as is proposed in the bill. How did you come to make that choice, given that legislation elsewhere sets out other sizes—for example, 50m or 150m? What evidence led to the proposal to establish 200m zones in Scotland?

What about signage for the zones? When I spoke to NHS Dumfries and Galloway, I was told that signage would shine a beacon of light on the services that are being provided, which would draw attention to them and make the healthcare that is being provided more “in your face”. What are your thoughts on signage around zones?

So, the proposal would be to have a map, or the creation of an area, attached to an NHS facility’s website, without necessarily putting up signage at 200m—or an extra distance—around a facility?

It is a wee quick question on the back of Ruth Maguire’s questions about the west of Scotland and other existing laws, such as the Public Order Act 2023. You said earlier that the bill is about preventing any act of intimidation, harassment or influence from happening in the first place, instead of having to go after a person after an act has taken place.

I know that other countries have created similar legislation. For 30 years, I would go into the operating theatre in the morning; I would sometimes see protests next to my place of work, and I was a young woman when I worked in California. This is about intimidating people who are accessing their workplace as well as those accessing health services, and I am interested to know how we learn from other countries and the legislation that they have implemented. How can we do that, and how can we then use post-legislative scrutiny to see whether further information needs to be added or things need to be revised?