►
From YouTube: Portfolio Questions - 16 September 2020
Description
Portfolio Questions
A
Before
we
begin,
can
I
remind
members
that
social
distancing
measures
are
in
place
in
the
chamber
and
across
the
hollywood
campus,
and
please
ask
that
you
take
care
to
observe
these
measures
over
the
course
of
today's
business,
including
when
entering
and
exiting
the
chamber.
The
first
item
of
business
is
portfolio
questions.
In
order
to
enable
all
these
questions
to
be
answered,
I
would
appreciate
short
and
sick
questions
and
answers
to
match
the
first
item
of
portfolio.
Questions
is
justice
on
the
law
officers
and
the
first
question
is
andy
whiteman.
C
Since
september
2018
13
charges
under
section
451
of
the
companies
act,
2006
against
11
individual
accused
have
been
reported
by
companies
housed
to
copfs
of
these
13
charges.
Fewer
than
five
have
been
marked
for
summary
proceedings
of
those
which
have
been
marked
for
summary
proceedings.
Fewer
than
five
have
resulted
in
a
conviction
and
some
are
still
subject
to
live
criminal
proceedings.
B
Andy
weiler:
I
thank
the
lord
advocate
for
that
answer.
I
mean
we.
We
know
for
fairly
certain
that
there
are
thousands
of
companies
in
scotland
committing
offences
by
not
filing
documents
on
time.
Many
of
these
are
scottish
limited
partnerships,
some
of
whom
are
known
to
have
been
involved
in
the
various
activities.
Now
the
lord
advocates
say,
there's
been
continuing
engagement
and
I
welcome
that,
and
I
welcome
the
fact
that
there
had
been
13
reports
now.
B
I
understand
the
crown
office
will
only
consider
criminal
proceedings
where
a
report
has
been
made
to
by
in
this
case.
The
company's
house
does
not
agree,
however,
that
it's
in
the
public
interest
for
the
com
for
companies
how
to
report
potential
breaches
to
crown
office
as
soon
as
possible
in
order
he
can
consider
proceedings,
because
many
dodgy
companies
are
just
being
struck
off
by
company's
house
with
no
opportunities,
I
can
see
it
for
proceedings
or
investigations
or
anything
to
be
to
be
to
be
launched
by
the
ground
office,
not
advocate.
C
C
Continued
liaison
with
company's
house
includes
both
specific
cases
that
are
reported
to
the
crown
and
also
more
general
liaison,
including
advice,
the
company's
house
about
the
evidential
requirements
of
scots
law
in
this
area.
There
are
a
number
of
practical
difficulties
which
affect
the
enforcement
of
these
offences.
C
The
united
kingdom
government
has
consulted
both
on
corporate
transparency
and
on
the
law
on
limited
partnerships.
Cop
copfs
has
invited
has
contributed
to
those
consultation
that
consultation
process,
in
particular,
to
invite
consideration
of
measures
which
would
support
the
enforcement
of
these
particular
offences.
E
E
The
key
appointments
of
the
secretary
solicitor,
senior
and
junior
councils
to
the
inquiry
have
been
made.
Work
continues
on
the
appointment
of
assessors
and
identification
of
suitable
premises.
I
continue
to
lays
closely
with
lord
brachadu
and,
of
course,
we'll
provide
parliament
with
further
updates
in
due
course.
D
Can
I
thank
the
cabinet
secretary
for
that
update,
but
can
I
ask
him
to
confirm
the
potential
misconduct
proceedings
promised
to
the
family
by
the
lord
advocate
in
the
event
of
no
criminal
proceedings
against
the
officers
involved
in
the
detention
and
restraints
of
shekel
bio?
It
would
appear
that
the
crown
office
has
not
passed
the
file
onto
police
scotland
and
to
wait
another
further.
You
know
three
to
four
years
for
proceedings
to
be
considered
would
be
intolerable
for
all
involved.
E
I
would
suggest
to
mark
roscoe
that
he
should
write
to
lord
advocate
on
those
matters.
My
job
was,
of
course,
to
instruct
the
setting
up
of
a
public
inquiry
that
will
examine
the
facts
of
the
death
of
the
tragic
death
of
shaco
bio.
That
will
do
that
in
a
public
way.
It
will
be
transparent
and
therefore,
if
there
are
issues
as
a
result
of
that
public
inquiry,
then
of
course
they
can
be
examined
fully
thereafter.
F
E
We
have
undertaken
and
supported
a
range
of
analysis,
including
research,
into
the
background
of
those
empowerment,
young
offenders
institute
and
scotland,
secure
care
centres
in
may
2018.
We
published
evidence
on
the
links
between
childhood
adversity
and
criminality.
The
need
to
end
poverty
was
also
highlighted
by
the
independent
care
review.
The
evidence
shows
that
understanding
the
impact
of
trauma
and
providing
the
right
support
can
have
a
hugely
positive
impact.
In
scotland,
we've
seen
a
dramatic
change
in
the
youth
justice
sector,
including
an
87
reduction
in
the
number
of
under-18s
in
custody
between
2006
and
2019.
F
Keith
brown
can
I
thank
the
cabinet
secretary
for
that
answer.
He'll,
be
aware
that
in
clip
manager,
my
constituency,
which
has
significant
challenges
in
relation
to
poverty
and
levels
of
adverse
childhood
experiences,
and
despite
the
often
ill-informed
comments
about
young
people
we
see
in
the
media,
not
one
person
under
the
age
of
18
has
been
sentenced
to
imprisonment
or
admitted
to
secure
residential
care
since
2015.
F
E
Well,
the
member
raises
an
exceptionally
important
point
and
and
some
fantastic
efforts
by
the
local
stakeholders-
and
let
me
pay
tribute
to
all
those
involved
in
this
vital
work
of
the
members
constituency
and
indeed
right
across
scotland
and
turning
people's
lives
around.
They
also
minimize
the
number
of
future
victims.
I
think
that's
what
we
forget
when
we
invest
in
people,
whether
it's
young
people,
or,
indeed
not
so
young
people
in
terms
of
rehabilitation,
everybody
wins
out
of
that.
E
Society
wins
out
of
that,
because
there
are
less
victims
of
crime
and
since
2011
we've
seen
major
sustained
reductions
in
the
numbers
of
young
people
across
scotland
being
referred
to
court
and
being
sentenced
to
custody,
we're
committed
to
learning
from
good
practices
in
areas
like
clack
manager
and
applying
that
across
scotland
with
confidence
that
the
whole
systems
approach.
It
gives
us
a
sound
method.
G
E
Serious
christine
graham,
will
have
heard
last
week's
debate,
and
I
thought
it
was
a
very
good
debate
and
I
thought
the
tone
of
the
debate
from
right
across
the
chamber
was
very
good
and
what
I
promised
to
do
and
committed
to
do
in
that
debate.
In
fact,
I
committed
to
do
this
before
the
debate
was
to
listen
to
all
the
stakeholders
involved,
those
who
are
critical
of
the
bill,
those
who
wish
to
see
some
changes
and
amendment
to
the
bill
they
are
being
listened
to
and
will
continue
to
be
listened
to.
E
And,
yes,
you
know
I'm
looking
at
all
of
the
sections
of
the
bill,
but
I
can
confirm
I'm
also
looking
at,
of
course,
the
starting
up
offences
which
include
the
likely
threshold
in
terms
of
stirring
up
hatred.
So
I
can
confirm
that
is
one
area
that
is
being
explored
and
looked
at
and
of
course
I
will
come
to
parliament
with
an
update
in
very
short
order.
I
hope.
G
E
Secretary,
so,
as
I
say
remember,
I
am
listening
carefully
to
that
comment
and
comments,
similar
comments
that
have
been
made
around
the
stirring
up,
offense
justin,
and
perhaps
the
counter
argument,
if
I
may
is
that
we
have
had
a
racial
stilling
up
offense
now
for
almost
35
years,
that
racial
stilling
up
offense
threshold
is
behavior,
that's
threatening
or
abusive
or
insulting.
It
has
an
additional
threshold,
but
also
is
not
just
intent.
E
So
there
is
an
example
we
can
look
to
and
hence
why
the
protections
we're
looking
to
afford
others
other
vulnerable
groups
and
other
protected
characteristics
is
broadly
based
on
the
racial
standing
up
offense,
it's
not
exactly
a
mirror,
but
it's
broadly
based
on
that.
Notwithstanding
all
of
what
I've
just
said,
this
is
an
area
I
am
exploring
I've
committed
to
the
parliament,
particularly.
E
H
Keep
reciting
officer,
I
agree
with
the
cabinet
secretary.
I
think
it
was
a
good
debate
last
week,
but
following
the
revelations
this
weekend
that
the
hate
crime
bill
has
received
the
largest
number
of
written
responses
in
the
history
of
devolution
and
that
the
justice
committee
was
not
in
fact
aware
of
this.
H
When
agreeing
its
timetable,
does
the
cabinet
secretary
now
consider
that
a
sensible
way
forward
might
be
to
fundamentally
rethink
the
approach
to
the
stirring
up
part
of
the
bill
and
must
ensure
that
the
other
parts
can
be
sufficiently
scrutinized
and
legislated
on
to
tackle
the
pernicious
hate
crime?
We
all
wish
to
address
cabinet.
E
E
Care
for
his
questioning
the
tone
of
his
question
as
well.
I
thought
the
arguments
that
he
was
making
around
timing.
I
could
understand
where
he
was
absolutely
coming
from,
but
I
hope
he
would
also
understand
the
counting
argument,
which
I
thought
was
best
articulated
by
victim
support,
scotland-
that
if
we
delay
this
bill
beyond
this
parliamentary
term,
those
who
need
the
protections
the
most-
and
I
think
we
would
agree
at
a
time
where
the
atmosphere
can
be
very
febrile,
very
hostile
for
minority
groups.
E
Then
they
will
be
waiting
even
longer.
For
that
and
therefore,
for
me,
my
commitment
is
to
come
to
this
parliament
as
soon
as
I
can
before
the
oral
evidence
stage
at
justice
committee
with
some
proposed
changes,
it
will
then
be
for
the
parliament
and
ultimately,
the
parliament
will
decide
what
the
timetable
of
this
bill
should
be.
I
am
in
there.
E
I
am
beholden
absolutely
to
them
in
terms
of
is
the
first
part
of
his
question
about
this
being
the
most
controversial
bill,
and
there
was
so
many
submissions,
2000
plus
admissions
to
the
bill.
My
job
is
is
not
to
to
avoid
businesses.
My
job
is
to
make
sometimes
extremely
difficult
decisions
and
make
sure
that
we
have
legislation
which
will
be
both
effective
and
also,
in
this
case,
of
course,
protect
people's
rights,
and
I
go
back
back
to
that
quote
by
the
american
author
albert
hubbard,
which
says
to
avoid
criticism.
E
I
Thanks
very
much
can
I
thank
the
justice
secretary
for
confirmation
that
he
has
responded
to
the
call-
and
I
made
in
last
week's
debate
to
come
forward
ahead
of
the
justice
committee
stage.
One
oral
evidence
with
proposed
changes
to
particularly
part
two
of
the
hate
crime
bill.
I
noticed
he's
referred
on
a
couple
of
occasions
to
coming
forward
to
parliament
as
soon
as
possible.
I
wish
I
could.
I
hope
I
could
press
him
a
little
more
on
on
when
and
how
he
intends
to
come
back
with
those
proposals
to
parliament.
E
Again
again,
ultimately,
these
will
be
decisions
for
the
parliament
and
the
bureau
to
take
my
proposal.
My
suggestion
would
be
doing
another
ministerial
statement.
I
think
that
would
be
the
correct
approach
to
take
because
it
would
give
as
many
members
as
possible
the
chance
to
ask
questions
and
scrutinise
what
I'm
bringing
forward.
E
If,
if
the
justice
committee
wished
me
to
come
to
the
committee
thereafter,
I
would
be
more
than
happy
certainly
to
do
that.
What
I'm
looking
at
in
terms
of
timing
again,
I
would
have
to
speak
to
parliamentary
business.
They
would
have
to
speak
to
the
parliamentary
bureau
and
get
agreement
from
parties
across
the
chamber,
but
ultimately,
I'm
looking
to
do
this
as
soon
as
I
possibly
can
to
give
the
justice
committee
as
much
time
as
possible
in
advance
of
all
evidence.
E
Sir
well,
let
me
first
reiterate
and
be
clear
in
the
message
that
myself,
the
first
minister,
the
chief
constable
lord
advocate,
and
indeed
many
others
right
across
government.
I
hope,
have
been
very
clear
and
right
throughout
this
pandemic
and
indeed
before
that
domestic
abuse
and
stalking
will
not
be
tolerated
in
our
society.
But
particularly
during
these
unprecedented
times
when
we
know
there
is
a
greater
potential
danger
for
victims,
regardless
of
local
restrictions.
E
Our
response
remains
unchanged
and
we
encourage
victims
to
come
forward
and
to
seek
help.
The
domestic
abuse
and
stalking
charges
in
scotland,
2019
2020,
referred
to
by
the
member
that
publication,
provides
an
early
indication
that
scotland's
new
domestic
abuse
laws
are
encouraging
victims
to
come
forward
and
report
these
crimes,
while
providing
police
and
prosecutors
with
greater
powers
to
target
those
who
engage
in
coercive
or
controlling
behaviors
towards
their
partners,
or
indeed
their
ex-partners.
E
It's
worth
noting
that
the
publication
covers
a
period
up
to
the
end
of
march
2020
and
does
not
reflect
the
full
covered
lockdown
period.
We
remain
committed
to
tackling
all
forms
of
gender-based
violence
and
will
introduce
parliamentary
introduced
legislation
to
this
parliament
on
domestic
abuse
protection
orders.
Within
this
parliamentary
session.
J
Evidence
secretary
for
his
his
answer,
we
know
these
crimes
can
have
a
devastating
impact
on
those
affected.
So
can
the
cabinet
secretary
advise
the
chamber
how
many
police
officers
and
staff
have
been
trained
to
identify
signs
of
coercive
and
controlling
behavior,
and
can
he
also
outline
how
the
new
domestic
abuse
bill
will
build
on
these
protections?.
E
Can
I
thank
angus
mcdonald
for
for
that
question,
because
the
training
for
police
officers
was
a
really
integral
part
of
making
sure
that
we
got
this
bill
right.
There
would
have
been
potentially
unintended
consequences
if
we
had
enacted
the
bill
before
that
training
had
taken
place.
To
answer
this
question
directly.
More
than
14
000
police
officers
and
staff
across
police
scotland
completed
the
domestic
abuse
matters.
E
Training
further
to
this
training
of
around
700
domestic
abuse.
Champions
will
sustain
change,
identify
and
address
good
and
poor
practice,
as
well
as
support
and
offer
guidance
to
their
peers
as
well.
In
terms
of
the
very
last
point
in
in
his
question,
as
I
mentioned,
and
as
announced
by
the
first
minister
and
program
for
government,
the
bill
that
we're
looking
to
introduce
will
impose
restrictions
on
a
suspected
perpetrator
of
domestic
abuse,
including
removing
them
from
their
home.
E
They
share
with
a
person
at
risk
and
prohibiting
them
from
contacting
or
otherwise
abusing
the
person
at
risk,
while
the
order
is
in
effect,
the
bill
will
also
facilitate,
when
appropriate
processes
for
changes
to
be
made
to
social
housing.
Tenancy
agreements
to
help
victims
stay
in
their
own
homes
by
giving
powers
to
remove
perpetrators
from
tenancy
agreements,
so
these
measures
are
intended
to
further
protect
people
at
risk
of
domestic
abuse
and
enable
them
to
take
steps
to
address
their
long-term
safety
and
particularly
in
relation
to
housing.
E
Cabinet
secretary
well,
I
am,
of
course,
sympathetic
to
the
impact
of
the
borders
health
measures
on
holidays.
I
know
the
member
will
understand.
Of
course,
our
overarching
priority
must,
of
course
be
to
protect
public
health
decisions
on
additions
and
removals
from
the
country's
exemptions
list
are
based
on
the
latest
evidence
available
about
the
number
of
cases
about
transmission,
about
the
importation
of
risk,
the
in-country
controls
and
a
range
of
other
factors
as
well.
E
We're
continuing
continuously
keeping
the
list
of
country
exemptions
from
the
quarantine
requirements
under
review,
but
it
is
based
on
public
health
and
the
risk
that
international
travel
may
well
pose.
To
that.
This
does
mean,
of
course,
that
the
list
of
exam
countries
can
change
relatively
quickly,
because
the
situation
a
country
can
change
at
quick
notice.
As
the
first
minister
and
I
have
said
previously,
our
advice
to
people
right
now
has
to
be
to
think
very
carefully
about
non-essential
foreign
travel.
Given
the
gravity
of
the
situation
that
the
world
is
facing,.
A
E
Secretary,
so
a
couple
of
points,
I
would
make
first
and
foremost
where
we
can
get
four
nations
alignment.
That
is
something
we
strive
for,
and
the
vast
majority
of
cases
when
it
comes
to
countries
we
we
manage
to
to
get
a
significant
degree
of
alignment,
I'm
afraid
and
on
certain
occasions
we
won't,
and
that
won't
be
for
any
malicious
reasons.
That
will
be
because,
for
example,
the
data
of
inbound
transmission
in
cases
in
scotland
may
be
different
to
the
picture
in
wales,
on
northern
ireland
or
or
indeed
england.
E
So
it's
for
very
understandable
reasons,
and
there
never
certainly
isn't,
from
my
end
any
concern
where
we
don't
manage
to
align
with
other
countries
in
in
that.
In
that
regard,
in
terms
of
the
more
detail
of
his
question,
I
mean
the
operation
of
any
air
service
is,
is
a
matter
for
that
individual,
ailing
quarantine
requirements,
and
indeed
even
fco
advice.
They
don't
actually
prevent
an
airline
from
from
operating
any
flights.
The
scottish
government
itself
doesn't
have
the
power
to
prevent
flights
from
operating.
E
Passenger
rights
in
relation
to
aviation
are
covered
by
european
regulations
which,
in
the
uk
are
overseen
by
the
cea.
The
civil
aviation
authority
there's
further
information
on
passenger
rights
available
on
the
caa
website.
Although
the
regulation
of
consumer
protection
is
the
responsibility
of
the
uk
government
under
the
scotland
act
2016,
the
scottish
government
has
taken
on
responsibility
for
consumer
advice
and
advocacy
the
scottish
government
funds
a
consumer
service
that
provides
clear,
practical
advice
on
all
consumer
issues.
Your
constituents
may
therefore
wish
to
contact
advice.
Direct
scotland
and
their
contact
details
are
online.
L
E
The
2018
act
makes
it
mandatory
for
the
corps
to
consider
in
every
case
whether
to
impose
a
non-harassment
order
to
protect
the
victim.
The
2018
act
also
provides
that
where
such
an
order
is
not
made,
the
court
is
required
to
explain
the
basis
for
that
decision.
There
is
a
statutory
reporting
requirement
and
the
2018
act,
which
requires
the
scottish
ministers
to
publish
a
report
on
the
operation
of
the
act
three
years
after
its
commencement.
L
Can
I
thank
the
cabinet
secretary
for
that
and
note
that
last
year,
a
similar
parliamentary
question
here
in
the
chamber?
I
was
pleased
that
there
was
agreement
to
look
into
this.
I
am
continuing
to
hear
reports
that
there
is
an
apparent
reluctance
by
the
courts
to
issue
nhos,
despite
there
being
a
clear
presumption
in
the
2018
act.
Can
I
ask
the
cabinet
secretary,
if
he's
aware
of
this?
Is
it
in
fact
the
case
and
how
this
is
being
addressed
by
the
government,
the
crime,
prosecution
service
and
the
lord
advocate.
E
Well,
can
I
thank
linda
fabiani,
first
of
all
for
her
persistence
in
raising
this
issue,
because
it
is
important-
and
I
know
when
the
act
was
or
when
the
bill
was
going
through.
Parliament,
linda
fabiani,
took
an
active
interest
in
standing
up
for
victims
of
domestic
abuse.
In
this
regard,
in
terms
of
my
own
consideration,
we
are
closely
monitoring
the
numbers
the
report
is
due
to
be
published
in
april
2022.
E
I
can
say
that
we've
seen
the
numbers
of
non-harassment
orders
increase,
which
gives
me
confidence,
would
it
increase
to
the
level
that
I'd
like
it
to
see?
I
I
I
will
take
that
away
and
look
at
it
again
what
I
would
ask
linda
fabiani.
Perhaps
we
can
do
this
off
off
line
if
she
was
able
to
provide
even
some
of
those
anecdotal
pieces
of
evidence.
E
I'd
be
more
than
happy
to
take
that
forward
to
my
colleagues,
both
in
the
crown,
but
also,
of
course,
in
the
judiciary,
and
I
must
of
course,
at
this
point
underline
that
decisions
about
non-harassment
orders
are,
of
course,
ultimately
for
the
judiciary
to
decide
on
and-
and
I
am
not
and
would
not
seek
to
influence
that.
But
clearly
it
is
an
area
of
intense
focus
and
interest
for
us
in
an
issue
that
we're
monitoring
closely.
M
E
Secretary
well,
my
sympathies
and,
I
suspect,
all
the
sympathies
of
all
of
us
in
this
chamber
remain
with
the
family
of
craig
mcclelland.
I'm
aware
that
craig's
family
requested
a
full
review
of
the
decision
by
lord
advocate
not
to
hold
an
fei
into
the
circumstances
of
craig's
death,
and
that
has
concluded
that
there
was
no
basis
to
overturn
the
original
decision.
E
The
decision
is
to
whether
or
not
to
hold
an
fbi
is,
of
course,
won
solely
for
the
lord
advocate
to
take,
and
is
the
decision
taken
independently
of
government
in
respect
a
further
inquiry
that
might
fall
to
the
scottish
government
to
instruct.
As
I've
previously
said,
I
don't
believe
that
a
full
public
inquiry
is
appropriate.
There's
been
a
criminal
prosecution,
two
independent
reports
by
the
inspectorates
and
two
follow-up
reports
by
the
independent
police
and
prison
inspectors,
which
have
prompted
significant
change
and
additional
safeguards
within
the
hdc
regime.
A
M
Thank
the
cabinet
secretary
for
the
answer.
No
family
should
go
through
what
the
family
of
craig
mcclelland
have.
No
one
should
have
to
bear
the
pain
of
losing
someone
so
cruelly.
No
one
should
have
to
endure
the
intransigence
of
a
system,
that's
preventing
them,
getting
the
answers
they
need.
Now
that
the
lord
advocate
has
made
his
decision.
It
is
down
to
this
government
and
this
government
alone
to
decide
whether
there
will
be
an
independent
public
inquiry.
M
The
government
have
opposed
an
inquiry
before
and
they
also
posed
a
change
in
the
law
to
make
fatal
accident
inquiries
mandatory.
In
light
of
the
lord
advocates
decision,
will
the
cabinet
secretary
reconsider
the
government's
position
today
and
does
the
cabinet
secretary
not
agree
that
it's
difficult
for
people
to
have
confidence
that
lessons
have
been
fully
learned
if
the
family
of
craig
mcclelland
don't
have
confidence
that
lessons
have
been
fully
learned
cabinet.
E
N
E
That
is
a
decision
ultimately
for
lord
advocate
to
make,
as
I've
said
in
my
answer
previous
to
this,
that
there
has
been
a
criminal
prosecution,
a
number
of
reports.
Looking
at
the
htc
regime,
there
have
been
changes
to
the
htc
regime
at
the
time.
Unfortunately,
of
of
craig's
tragic
murder,
there
was
around
about
300
people
on
home
detention,
curfew,
there's
now
closer
to
around
80
people
out.
So
the
t
the
regime
has
been
significantly
tightened
in
terms
of
home
detention
curfew,
so
the
system
has
been
improved.
E
I
remember
writing
to
the
family
of
craig
mcclelland
alongside
other
partners
answering.
I
think
it
was
around
about
34
questions
that
they
had
to
ask
at
the
time,
and
if
there
are
further
questions,
of
course
for
the
prison
service
or
anybody
else,
then
I'm
sure
the
prison
service,
or
indeed
if
it's
for
government
will
look
to
respond
to
those
questions.
But
at
this
stage
I
do
not
think
a
public
inquiry
is
needed
or
appropriate.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
We
now
move
on
to
questions
on
constitution,
europe
and
external
affairs.
I
remind
members
that
questions
four
and
five
and
questions
six
and
eight
are
grouped
together
if
members
other
than
those
asking
the
initial
questions
wish
to
request
a
supplementary
question
on
any
question.
They
should
press
the
request
to
speak
button
in
the
usual
way
or
press
r
in
the
chat
box
if
remote.
O
P
Design
officer
as
minister
for
parliamentary
business,
the
last
discussion
I
had
with
the
commissioner
was
a
telephone
call
on
the
21st
of
may.
My
officials
had
to
catch
up
with
the
commissioners
management
team
on
the
same
day
and
of
course
they
continue
to
engage
with
the
commissioner's
office
regularly.
O
I
thank
the
minister
for
that
answer.
The
government's
track
record
on
foi
compliance
was
already
shaky.
The
information
commissioner
found
that
different
rules
were
applied
to
requests
from
people
with
a
platform
and
in
emergency
legislation.
Scottish
ministers
tried
to
reduce
public
access
to
information
and
staff
were
then
taken
out
of
the
foi
sorry
out
of
the
foi
unit.
A
transparency
is
more
important
now
than
ever
so.
Will
the
minister
commit
to
comply
with
the
legislation
and
fully
staff?
The
scottish
government's
foi
unit
minister.
P
Presiding
officer,
the
commissioner's
recent
report
noted
very
clearly
the
improved
performance
of
the
scottish
government
in
this
regard
now
beatrice
wisher
is
right
to
say
that
staff
from
the
foi
unit
were
redeployed
to
other
other
areas
of
government.
I
made
no
apologies
for
that.
We
were
and
we
are
in
a
pandemic,
so
roughly
half
of
the
staff
in
that
unit
were
deployed
to
other
duties.
They
are
gradually
returning.
We
will
staff
up,
but
to
be
clear,
the
priority
of
this
government
is
dealing
with
the
pandemic.
First
and
foremost,.
Q
A
Q
S
Now
presiding
officers,
scottish
ministers
and
officials
meet
their
eu
counterparts
on
the
regular
basis
to
promote
scottish
fishing
interests
and
other
priorities
in
line
with
the
democratically
expressed
issues
of
people's
scotland
relate
our
farm.
Opposition
to
brexit
of
particularly
concern
is
a
grossly
reckless
null
deal
taken
by
the
uk
government,
which
would
devastate
the
interests
of
the
scottish
seafood
sector
and
our
coastal
communities
and
put
it
as
calm
as
700
million
pounds
worth
of
seafood
exports
to
the
eu.
R
S
Well,
I
would,
I
would
respond
in
two
ways:
I'm
not
negotiating
with
the
eu.
Every
discussion
I
ever
have-
or
the
first
minister
had
others
predicated
by
that
remark,
but
to
hear
a
a
tory
msp
talking
about
the
undermining
and
gross
betrayal
of
of
anybody
is
rich
on
a
day
when
the
actions
of
the
uk
government
being
demonstrated
at
westminster
are
to
destroy
completely
destroy
the
devolution
settlement.
Michelle
valentine
should
be
apologizing
to
this
chamber,
not
asserting.
I
Brazilian
officers,
the
cabinet
secretary,
should
be
aware:
brexit
poses
the
real
threat
to
the
ability
of
both
the
catching
and
the
processing
sectors
to
recruit
the
workers
they
need.
Unfortunately,
fishing
crew
do
not
feature
in
the
uk
immigration
shortage
of
labor
less.
Can
mr
russell
advise
what
discussions
the
scottish
government
is
having
with
uk
counterparts
about
how
the
pressures
facing
the
fission
sector
might
be
met,
perhaps
through
regional
variations
to
allow
specific
needs
in
different
parts
of
the
uk
to
be
met,
cabinet
sector.
S
The
member
makes
a
very
good
point
and,
of
course,
the
ben
mcpherson
who
dealt
with
migration
issues.
I
think
said
last
week
that
he
finds
it
impossible
to
get
a
discussion
or
a
meeting
with
eu
with
uk
ministers.
So
that
is
the
reality
of
how
the
uk
treats
the
scottish
interests
in
these
matters.
The
members
also
right
to
reflect
that
it
doesn't
matter
how
much
fish
you
can
catch.
T
P
President
officer,
I
am
aware
of
a
range
of
views
on
this
issue.
I'm
certainly
aware
that
there
have
been
calls
for
an
enhanced,
informative
procedure
for
to
apply
where
provision
is
made,
which
amounts
to
substantial
policy
considerations
or
something
similar.
That
would
be
very
difficult
to
operate
in
practice.
P
Given
how
subjective
that
test
is
and
how
difficult
it
would
be
to
divide
applying,
it
would
effectively
involve
a
subjective
assessment
of
whether
any
provision
meets
the
test
and
that
could
open
the
door
to
speculative
legal
challenges
where
it
could
be
argued
that
a
different
procedure
should
apply.
So
what
we
have
is,
we
think,
a
an
appropriate
and
proportionate,
workable,
effective
solution
here,
and
I
I
hear
the
conservatives
disagree.
They
have
every
right
to
disagree
and
they
can
disagree
during
the
committee
process
but
presiding
officer.
V
Thank
you,
presiding
officer.
It
will
not
be
possible
to
align
with
every
new
eu
law.
Some
will
only
operate
properly
in
the
eu
itself
and
some
will
be
in
reserved
areas
and
there
may
be
practical
or
resource
constraints
in
relation
to
others,
but
we
do
intend
to
seek
the
closest
relationship
possible
with
the
eu
and
the
uk
withdrawal
from
the
european
union
continuity.
Scotland
bill
will
provide
the
basis
to
do
this
by
secondary
legislation.
U
V
Can
I
say
to
morris
golden
that
he
should
remember
what
our
constituents
voted
for
in
2016..
They
did
not
vote
to
leave
the
european
union.
They
did
not
vote
for
a
paragraph
from
westminster
on
this
parliament's
powers.
They
did
not
vote
for
antoli
government
and
nor
had
they
endorsed
a
heart.
Brexit
scottish
government
will
fight
to
maintain
scotland's
international
reputation
in
the
teeth
of
a
government
who
are
now
intent
on
by
their
own
admission,
breaking
international
law,
siding
officer.
It
is
clear
that
the
continuity
will
threaten
the
tories,
so
terrified
are
they
that
they
would.
V
V
Thank
you,
presiding
officer.
The
scottish
government
has
always
had
to
work
hard
at
influencing
eu
laws
in
less
formal
ways,
as
it
was
with
the
uk,
which
was,
of
course,
the
member
states
that
end
british
government
officials
and
ministers
will
continue
to
engage
with
their
counterparts
where
possible.
Mr
lockhart,
however,
raises
a
very
relevant
and
a
welcome
point.
The
best
way
to
influence
the
direction
and
content
of
future
eu
laws
is
to
be
a
full
equal,
independent
member
of
the
eu.
Q
Q
A
V
Officer
the
continuity
bill
does
not
require
scotland
to
align
with
any
or
all
of
these
measures.
It
instead
allows
us
to
assess,
on
a
case-by-case
basis
and
applying
our
judgment
and
common
sense.
Whether
a
lining
would
be
in
scotland's
best
interest
or
not.
The
democratic
accountability
will
always
remain
with
scottish
parliament
and
in
assessing
whether
or
not
to
align
with
any
given
eu
member.
We
will
look
at
a
range
of
factors
such
as
the
practical
implications,
economic
and
social
benefits
and
the
costs
resource
implications
and
any
impact
on
scotland's
future
of
the
accession
to
eu.
W
The
the
tories
seem
to
be
having
a
good
chuckle
to
themselves
there
on
the
suv
brexit,
but
can
ask,
can
I
ask
the
minister
I
speak
to
many
people,
many
constituents
who
are
concerned
that
we
are
looking
at
much
reduced
environmental
standards,
poorer
food
standards?
Are
they
right
to
be
concerned,
minister.
V
Supplementary,
he
is
absolutely
correct
that
our
constituents
have
extreme
reservations
about
this.
I
don't
know
about
his
inbox,
but
I
have
been
inundated
by
concerned
constituents
and
who
are
worried
about
food
standards,
for
example,
and
they
are
right
to
be
concerned
about
this.
This
is
a
paragraph
on
the
scottish
parliament's
powers.
We
have
made
it
clear
that
scottish
government
is
not
going
to
stand
for
it
and
we
will
challenge
it
and
work
against
these
measures
every
opportunity
possible
and
in
terms
of
the
continuity
bill.
S
Yes,
there
is
no
doubt
about
that.
The
legislation
is
fundamentally
inconsistent
with
the
devolution
settlements
and
their
operations
since
1999
they
would
centralize
power.
In
the
uk
government
and
uk
parliament
cut
across
devolved
powers
by
imposing
a
blanket
constraint
on
devolution
and
on
the
democratically
elected
members.
Here
it
reserves
state
aid
and
it
would
give
uk
ministers
sweeping
new
powers
to
allocate
funding
in
devolved
areas
in
scotland
without
the
oversight
or
consent
of
anybody.
In
scotland,
uk
ministers
talk
of
a
power
surge
to
devote
administrations,
but
it
is
very
misleading.
S
The
powers
that
the
uk
has
listed
are
already
devolved.
The
bill
makes
it
clear
that
state
aid
is
to
be
removed
from
being
a
devolved
power
to
become
a
reserved
power.
It
also
grants
greater
powers
for
uk
ministers
to
bypass
evolved
decision.
Making.
This
bill
is,
without
a
doubt,
the
biggest
threat
to
the
evolution
since
1999,
and
we
will
vigorously
oppose
it
at
every
turn
and
in
every
way
possible.
X
S
I
think
it's
absolutely
clear
that
any
and
all
of
the
decisions
of
the
kurdish
parliament
that
can
be
overturned
or
undermined
by
the
internal
market
legislation,
I
noticed
evidence
being
given
to
the
finance
and
constitution
committee
this
morning.
Regarding
taxation,
the
20
members
are
sitting
in
the
in
the
chamber
giggling
away
at
themselves
because
they
know
that
their
jacket
is
on
a
sugary
nail
on
these
matters
and
they
know
perfectly
well.
S
The
letter
highlighted
the
way
in
which
the
mutual
recognition
model
set
out
in
the
bill
cuts
across
the
democratic
choices
of
devolved
parliaments
and
raised
serious
concerns
about
the
way
future
trade
deals
made
by
the
uk
could
impact
on
lower
standards.
It's
already
been
indicated
by
the
uk
dropping
public
health
priorities
in
pursuit
of
a
trade
deal
with
japan.
S
We've
been
clear
with
the
uk
government
that
the
common
frameworks
program
that
we
have
engaged
in
in
good
faith
over
the
past
two
years
are,
is
what
is
needed
to
manage
the
practical
and
regulatory
impact
of
the
uk
leaving
the
eu,
as
was
always
envisaged,
and
the
proposals
that
are
being
put
forward
by
the
uk
government
instead
present.
As
I
have
said,
a
significant
threat
to
devolution
and
the
rules
and
responsibilities
of
this
parliament
and
the
scottish
government
and
to
the
everyday
lives
and
expectations
of
the
people
of
scotland.
Y
I
thank
the
cabinet
secretary
for
that
answer
widely
and
correctly.
This
bill
can
seem
as
incompatible
with
devolution,
bad
for
business
and
consumers,
dangerous
for
the
environment
and
an
impediment
to
necessary
and
effective,
devolved
public
health
measures.
What
action
will
the
scottish
government
take
to
stop
the
conservative
government
in
london
unilaterally
and
arbitrarily
imposing
its
will
on
scotland
against
the
wishes
of
the
scottish
parliament
and
the
scottish
citizens
who
sent
us
here?
S
Westminster
in
the
house
of
commons,
it
would
be
good
to
think
that
all
elective
scottish
representatives
were
standing
up
for
scotland
and
therefore
one
could
look
across
the
chamber
at
the
scottish
conservatives
and
seattle.
They
prepared
to
stand
up
and
defend
evolution.
Alas,
you
know
they
will
be
found
wanting.
Regrettably,
in
that
matter,
when
it
goes
to
the
house
of
lords,
we
expect
that
there
will
be
vigorous
opposition
lords,
not
least
because
the
the
bill
also
breaches
international
law,
and
that
is
admitted
by
the
uk
government,
and
then
we
have
not
ruled
out.
S
Signing
office
of
the
scottish
government
has
frequent
discussions
at
official
interior
level
with
the
uk
government
in
relation
to
the
eu
exit
negotiations.
I've
said
earlier,
but
despite
the
scottish
government's
best
efforts
since
the
beginning
of
the
brexit
process,
the
uk
government
continues
to
refuse
meaningful
engagement,
which
is
needed
to
ensure
that
the
uk
position
identifies
protects
and
promotes
scotland's
interests.
Given
the
way
the
uk
government
has
consistently
ignored
the
wishes
and
interests
of
the
people
of
scotland,
including
the
extraordinary
decision
to
end
the
transition
period
during
a
global
pandemic.
S
N
S
I
have
to
say
to
mr
alley:
you
bet
I
will
I
make
those
representations
all
the
time
and
will
continue
to
make
them.
It
is
without
doubt,
despite
what
the
uk
conservative
government
says
or
the
scottish
conservatives
say,
this
is
a
major
threat
to
devolution,
and
there
is
nothing
this
that
the
scottish
parliament
is
doing.
That
is
not
threatened
by
it.
It
is
certainly
more
than
likely
that
public
services,
like
the
national
health
service,
will
be
assaulted
by
this
bill.