►
From YouTube: COVID-19 Committee - 16 September 2020
Description
COVID-19 Committee
A
I
would
like
to
welcome
allison
johnson
msp,
who
is
a
substitute
for
ross
and
sandra
white
msp,
who
is
a
substitute
for
stuart,
graham
simpson
msp,
who
has
an
interest
in
the
matters
we
are
considering
today
also
joins
us,
and
I
welcome
him
to
the
meeting
before.
Turning
formally
to
the
first
agenda
item,
I
thought
it
would
be
helpful
to
provide
an
overview
of
the
agenda
for
this
meeting.
A
We
will
be
holding
two
separate
evidence
sessions
with
the
cabinet
secretary
for
constitution,
europe
and
external
affairs.
The
first
is
agenda
item,
one
where
we
will
take
evidence
on
two
ssis
relating
to
the
scottish
government's
intention
to
extend
some
of
its
emergency
powers
under
the
coronavirus
scotland,
acts
to
march
2021
and
to
expire
other
powers
in
the
legislation
early.
A
We
will
have
about
45
minutes
for
this
evidence
session
before
formally
considering
each
ssi
in
agenda
items
2
and
3
respectively.
The
second
evidence
session
will
take
place
in
agenda
item
4,
where
we
will
consider
two
maid
affirmative
instruments
made
under
the
scottish
government's
emergency
powers.
Again,
we
will
also
have
about
45
minutes
of
this
evidence
session.
A
I
would
like
to
highlight
that
there
has
been
a
small
change
to
the
latter
part
of
the
agenda.
We
were
originally
scheduled
to
consider
the
health
protection
coronavirus
restrictions,
scotland,
amendment
number
13
regulations
2020
at
this
meeting.
However,
these
regulations
have
now
been
revoked
and
replaced
with
a
consolidated
set
of
regulations
that
came
into
force
on
monday
and
those
regulations
known
as
the
health
protection,
coronavirus
restrictions
and
requirements.
Scotland
regulations
2020
will
be
considered
at
a
future
meeting.
A
A
As
I've
said
this
morning,
we're
taking
evidence
from
mike
russell
msp
cabinet
secretary
for
constitution,
europe
and
external
affairs
on
the
following
instruments:
the
coronavirus
scotland
acts
amendment
of
expiry
dates,
regulations,
2020
and
the
coronavirus.
Scotland
acts
early
expiry
of
provisions,
regulations,
2020,
ssi,
2020,
249.,
cabinet
secretary
is
accompanied
by
an
official
from
the
scottish
government
pamela
wilkinson,
who
is
from
the
coronavirus
legislation,
coordination
reporting
team.
I
welcome
you
both
to
the
meeting
and
cabinet
secretary.
Can
I
invite
you
to
make
an
opening
statement.
B
Thank
you
I'll
divide,
what
I'm
going
to
say
into
the
two
parts
of
your
agenda
and
deal
in
this
instance
with
the
coronavirus.
Scotland
acts
amendment
of
expiry
dates,
regulations,
2020
what
we
call
the
extension
regulations
and
the
corona
virus.
Scotland
acts
early
expiry
of
provisions,
regulation
2020
what
we
call
the
expiry
regulations.
B
I
think
this
is
my
10th
visit
to
the
committee
and-
and
I
will
clearly
be
back
to
talk
about
the
consolidated
regulations
at
some
stage
and
I'm
glad
of
the
opportunity
to
address
these
regulations
they
which
are
significant
because,
as
you
indicate,
they
will
roll
forward
the
these
regulations.
For
six
months,
the
coronavirus,
scotland
acts
were
introduced
in
march
and
may
2020
respectively
to
provide
new
powers
and
measures
to
help
protect
the
public,
maintain
essential
public
services
and
support
the
economy.
During
the
current
outbreak.
B
I
believe
the
approach
you've
taken
is
proportionate
and
appropriate
to
the
scale
of
the
ongoing
risks
posed
by
the
coronavirus.
We've
also
laid
a
separate
set
of
regulations
which
will
expire
provisions
which
are
not
needed
beyond
the
30th
of
september,
reflecting
the
commitment
given
when
the
legislation
legislation's
introduced.
The
power
should
not
be
in
place
for
longer
than
they
are
needed,
and
I
hope
that
is
a
useful
introduction
to
to
to
what
we're
going
to
discuss
today.
A
A
B
This
virus
is
still
very
dangerous.
It
is
still
killing
people
globally.
It
is
spreading
again,
as
we
know
in
scotland,
and
we
will
do
anything
we
can
to
prevent
its
spreading
in
an
uncontrollable
way,
and
we
look
back
to
what
took
place
in
march
and
we
recognized
that
the
actions
we
took,
which
were
very
very
difficult,
were
actions
that
succeeded.
But
we
don't
want
to
have
to
go
back
to
those
level
of
actions
if
we
can
possibly
avoid
it.
A
Thank
you
for
that
answer.
Can
I
move
on
to
the
issue
of
public
consent,
because
last
week
we
heard
some
quite
stark
evidence
from
professor
linda
bald
about
her
concern
about
potential
unrest.
What
were
her
words
in
the
context
of
a
declining
gradient
of
public
support
in
scotland
and
actually
across
the
uk?
B
I
think
you
know
the
the
police
have
operated
exceptionally
well
in
these
matters.
You
know
there
have
been
those
who
wish
to
go
out
and
to
demonstrate-
and
that
is
absolutely
their
right,
but
there
are
both
of
those
who've
gone
and
demonstrated
and
then
recognized
that
this
is
highly
highly
dangerous
and
the
situation
they're
in
is
highly
dangerous
and
it's
best
to
keep
to
the
regulations.
B
Nobody
likes
this
or
wants
this.
I
mean
every
single
one
of
us
on
this
committee
and
suddenly
you
know
I
count
myself
as
amongst.
That
number
wants
this
to
come
to
an
end,
but
it
won't
come
to
an
end
by
simply
wishing
it
it'll
come
to
an
end
when
we've
taken
the
actions
that
we
need
to
take
collectively-
and
I
think
the
vast
majority
of
people
in
scotland
recognize
that
and
of
course
there
will
be
political
differences
on
this.
A
D
B
Well,
I
think
you
know
you're
right
to
say
that
the
stop
the
clock
provisions
are
being
suspended
and
I
think
you-
and
I
would
be
glad
that
that
is
the
case.
I
think
it's
really
important
that
that
takes
place.
Could
I
perhaps
ask
pamela
to
say
a
word
in
detail
about
that
particular
issue,
because
it
is
a
it
is
an
important
one.
It's
one.
B
We
want
to
think
about
think
through
very
carefully,
and
I
think
we've
talked
about
these
provisions
on
every
occasion,
though,
we've
talked
about
reporting
as
well,
and
I
think
that's
right
to
do
so
because
they
are
very
sensitive
and-
and
there
are-
and
there
are
justifiable
concerns
both
about
their
existence
within
the
bill
and
now
about
whether
there
would
be
a
a
set
of
actions
that
would
allow
them
to
be
reinterpreted.
So
perhaps
I
could
say
a.
D
Word
thank
you
camp
secretary,
the
the
main
provisions
which
are
being
covered.
There
relate
to
guardianship
orders
and
the
section
47
certificates
under
the
the
first
scottish
act
and
as
and
the
deputy
and
the
cabinet
secretary
have
mentioned.
Those
are
being
proposed
for
dispensing
that.
Will
that,
should
those
provisions
be
required
again
at
a
future
point,
they
would
be
required
to
be
instigated
through
regulations
in
terms
of
how
the
kind
of
thresholds
are
in
place
for
considering
whether
those
measures
should
be
used.
B
I
think
we
would
have
to
be,
and
and
as
partners
right,
we
said
this
would
have
to
come
back
in
form
of
regulation.
We
would
have
to
have
clear
evidence
that
the
system
was
not
able
to
cope.
Now.
That's
not
the
situation
of
the
present
moment.
The
scottish
courts
are
dealing
with
guardianship
applications
in
entirely
the
way
that
they're
used
to
doing
so.
D
I
thank
the
cabinet
secretary
and
pamela
wilkinson
for
their
comments
here
and
that
commitment
to
provide
more
written
information.
I'm
just
looking
at
a
response
that
we've
received
a
written
response
committee
received,
I
think,
just
yesterday
from
the
scottish
human
rights
commission
following
their
oral
evidence
last
week,
and
I
suppose
I
should
just
relate
to
how
the
emergency
divisions
interact
with
other
decisions
and
other
pieces
of
legislation.
D
B
Well,
I
respond
to
this
in
two
days.
One
is
you
know,
human
rights,
you
know
have
absolutely
not
been
suspended,
so
we
would
want
to
see
the
the
rights
of
individuals
to
be
fully
and
completely
respected
during
this
process.
So
if
there
is
any
evidence
that
that
has
not
taken
place,
then
there
is
legal
remedy
in
those
circumstances.
B
The
second
one
is,
you
know
if
the
human
rights
commission
and
the
law
society
you
wish
to
specifically
refer
to
this
taking
place
and
specifically
seek
independent
review,
then
you
know
I
would.
I
would
recommend
that
to
the
appropriate
minister,
I
in
a
sense
I'm
at
these
events,
the
catch-all
minister,
you
know
with
talking
about
the
generality
of
it.
I
I
think
it
is
very
important.
The
minister
for
mental
health
and
health
secretary
are
engaged
in
that
process
and
I'm
sure
they
would
be
so.
D
Thank
you
cabinet.
They
can
just
find
a
word
from
me
and
notes
in
the
last
society
of
scotland
submission
that
they
do
say
without
access
to
robust
data.
We
cannot
substantiate
these
concerns,
so
it
looks
to
me
like
there
is
perhaps
a
feeling
that
there
isn't
enough
data
available.
So
I
think
we
do
need
to
build
confidence,
and
I
would
appreciate
if
the
cabinet
secretary
could
take
that
back
to
the
relevant
ministers.
Thank
you.
F
So
my
question
is
going
back
to
the
important
issue
of
buy-in
and
when
we
had
professor
linda
bold
at
the
committee
last
week,
I
noted
that
she
said,
and
I
quote,
we
need
to
take
a
nuanced
approach
to
communicating
to
different
groups
in
order
to
maintain
support
the
cabinets
that
could
comment
on
that
and
in
his
response,
assuming
he
agrees
with
that
indicate
how
the
scottish
government
is
planning
to
do
that
very
thing.
Thank
you.
B
Well,
I
think
the
response
has
been
nuanced
from
the
very
beginning,
and
I
agree
with
linda
bold.
I
mean
this
is
this
is
not
a
you
know.
I
may
have
described
myself
as
a
catch-all,
but
this
is
not
a
catch-all
approach
that
you
would
take.
You
would
want
to
focus
upon
individual
groups.
I
mean
there's
been
some
unfortunate
publicity
about
your
young
people
and
young
people's
inability
to
keep
the
regulations.
B
A
helpful
nuanced
response.
I
think
we
have
to
recognize
that
young
people
have
found
this
very
difficult
and
and
perhaps
more
difficult
than
other
parts
of
society,
and
therefore
how
do
we
help
them
and
how
do
we
persuade
them
that
this
is
is
necessary?
I
I
each
of
us
as
constituency,
msps,
will
have
seen
particular
cases
from
people
which
you
know
our
heart
goes
out
to
I
I
have
a.
B
I
had
an
approach
just
this
very
morning
from
somebody
who
who
cannot
see
their
their
mother
in
a
in
a
home
in
the
way
they
wish
to,
and
I
think
we
have
to
do
two
things
we
have
to
persuade
people
on
the
individual
with
their
individual
problems.
The
reason
why
those
restrictions
still
exist.
The
reason
why
we
would
want
to
make
sure
that
the
possibility
of
transmission,
for
example,
back
into
nursing
homes,
would
be
a
very,
very
bad
thing
to
happen,
and
therefore
we
need
to
be
very
careful
in
terms
of
visiting.
B
We
need
to
persuade
people.
As
I
know,
the
first
minister
has
done
by
means
of
her
your
daily
briefings
to
go
into
the
detail
of
why
certain
regulations
are
in
place
and
persuade
people
who
are
you
know
involved,
for
example.
The
aberdeen
case
was
an
example
who
have
been
involved
in
actions
which
are
not
helpful.
Why
that
behavior
needs
to
change
in
order
to
have
a
limitation
on
transmission,
just
as
we've
done
in
in
lanarkshire.
B
You
know
where
the
the
atlantic
show
in
glasgow,
where
the
the
scientific
evidence
about
the
means
of
transmission
is
different,
is
to
be
clear
to
people
why
it
is
in
households
that
the
problem
occurs,
not
necessarily
in
licensed
premises
and
also
to
do
it
in
a
variety
of
different
ways.
I
took
part
in
the
phone
calls
on
friday
evening
with
msps
and
mps
from
lancashire.
B
You
know
who
were
given
an
early
opportunity
both
to
know
what
was
happening
and
to
ask
questions
that
equally
public
messaging
is
very
important,
but
so
is
example,
and
that
actually
means
politicians
and
others
explaining.
You
know
what
it
is
and
themselves
expressing
their
own
fears
and
reservations,
we're
all
human
beings.
So
nuanced
is
bright,
careful
is
right,
honest
and
straightforward
is
right.
F
And
thank
the
cabinet
section
for
that
answer
and
as
regards
his
comments
on
young
people,
I
entirely
agree
with
that.
I
was
listening
to
a
very
interesting
discussion
involving
young
people.
I
think
it
was
in
the
call
k
radio
program
on
monday,
where
you
know
the
point
was
repeatedly
made
that
they
want
to
do
their
best
and
they
want
to
participate
as
as
citizens
in
in
the
the
efforts
of
us
all
to
to
do
what
we
can
to
tackle
the
virus
and
the
cabinet's
actually
referred
to
daily
briefings.
B
Yes,
I
think
you
know
many
people
have
observed.
Many
independent
experts
observed
that
the
television
briefings
have
been
very
helpful.
They've
also
been
you
know,
they've
put
the
scottish
government
on
very
under
very
considerable
scrutiny.
You
know
the
first
minister
has
been
answering
between
10
and
20
media
questions
on
almost
any
issue
on
a
daily
basis
and
how
anybody
could
say
that
that
escaped
scrutiny
just
actually
baffles
me.
So
I
you
know,
I
know
that
they're
being
broadcast
this
week.
B
I
hope
they'll
continue
to
be
broadcast,
and
I
know
many
people
who
you
know
are
not
politically
sympathetic
to
me
or
to
you
or
to
anybody
with
our
views,
have
found
them
very
helpful
and
are
fundamentally
assuring,
and
I
hope
they
will
continue.
That
would
be
the
sensible
thing
to
to
to
do,
and
I'm
I'm
pleased
that
people
like
in
the
world
have
recognized
the
importance
of
that
and,
of
course,
they
have
to
be
treated
responsibly
as
they
have
been
treated
responsibly.
F
I
thank
the
campaign
for
the
answer
and
hopefully
we
will
see
the
briefings
continue
to
be
broadcast
by
whoever,
because
I
think
it
makes
a
fundamental
difference
and
if
we're
talking
about
buy-in
and
the
need
for
people
to
understand
the
messaging,
I
think
it's
entirely
irresponsible
to
withdraw
that
that
opportunity
for
people
to
do
that,
and
so
hopefully
we'll
see
those
broadcasts
continue.
Thank
you.
Computer.
B
Well,
I
would
hope,
mr
curry,
that
was
not
the
case
and
clearly
I
would
encourage,
given
that
this
is
the
the
the
provisions
the
stop
the
clock
provisions
are
being
suspended.
I
would
hope,
as
we
have
been
told,
as
I've
indicated,
that
we
are
going
back
to
what
we
would
call
normal,
though
nothing
is
normal
and
that,
therefore,
all
the
circumstances
will
be
taken
into
account.
The
the
intention
is,
there
is
no
halfway
house
between
what
you
know
was
in
the
provisions
and
what
was
the
normal
activity?
B
There's
no
gradation
in
that
the
office
of
the
public
guardian
has
been
clear.
What
is
available.
You
know
it
is
quite
clear
that
the
intention
is
to
have
this
operating
properly.
If
it
is
not
operating
properly,
that
would
be
in
itself
a
statutory
offense
I
mean
it
would
be.
It
would
be
against
the
the
rules
that
exist.
So
I
I
hope
that
the
I
don't
think
sheriffs
are
ever
willingly
allowing
their
hands
to
be
tied
and
I'm
sure
they
wouldn't
be
in
those
circumstances,
and
that
would
be
the
normality
of
the
situation.
B
C
B
Well,
I
would
hope
so
I
mean
you
know,
I
I
think
we
then
go
from
being
concerned
about
the
effects
of
the
emergency
legislation
to
the
situation
of
whether
that
is
you
know
how
that
how
the
system
operates.
That's
essentially
a
different
question.
It's
a
question,
that's
quite
legitimate
and
should
be
addressed,
and
you
would
I
I
can
understand.
B
We
have
in
a
sense
taken
that
away,
and
it
is
then
to
to
it
is
important
that
the
system
operates
as
it
should
operate,
and
I
think
all
of
us
would
want
to
see
that
happening.
A
number
of
things
were
legislated
on
which
were
very
difficult.
I
mean
you
know
you
and
I
both
recognize
that
in
terms
of
this
issue
very
difficult
indeed,
we
would
want
to
make
sure
that
the
difficulty
ended
and
ended
in
a
way
that
the
full
rights
of
individuals
were
restored.
And
that's
that's
what
our
intention
is.
H
Convener
and
good
good
morning,
cabinet
secretary
in
your
remarks
earlier
on
you,
you
mentioned
yourself
having
been
contacted
by
constituents
who
have
an
elderly
relative
in
a
home
and
some
of
the
frustrations
that
people
have
in
in
visiting
them.
And
similarly,
I
think
many
of
us
have
had
similar
representations
and
families
are,
I
guess,
asking
and
comparing
the
restrictions
that
are
currently
in
care
homes,
although
they
vary
and
from
home
to
home,
compared
to
visiting
the
same
elderly
relatives
in
hospital,
which
are,
of
course
quite
different.
H
Is
there
more
that
can
be
done
around
visitation
in
in
care
homes?
And
are
you
looking
specifically
at
the
communication
to
families
around
these
issues
because,
as
you
know
yourself,
it
is,
you
know,
deeply
upsetting
and
you
know
genuine
concerns
being
raised
about
quality
of
life
issues
for
for
those
in
care
homes.
B
C
B
A
an
understandable
con
consistency
between
visiting
in
a
care
home
and
visiting
in
a
hospital,
or
if
there
is
an
inconsistency
that
it
is
an
understandable
and
justified
inconsistency,
is
an
important
one.
I
think
what
I
should
do
is
agree
that
that
needs
to
be
raised
again
with
the
with
the
cabinet
secretary,
and
I
hope
that
she
would
address
it
and
perhaps
come
back
to
you
with
with
detail
of
of
how
that
has
arisen.
B
Care
homes,
of
course,
are
run
in
different
ways.
The
issues
of
infection
control
are
common
to
both,
but
of
course
there
are,
there
are
differences.
I
think
the
best
thing
to
do
is
for
gene
freeman
to
look
at
that
again
in
the
light
of
what
you've
said
and
to
come
back
to
the
committee
about
it,
but
what
we
would
try
and
do
is
to
as
far
as
is
humanly
possible,
commensurate
with
the
risk.
B
We
believe
that
exists
to
ensure
that
the
maximum
flexibility
exists,
because
there
is
a
matter
of
of
mental
health,
of
well-being,
wider
well-being.
That
is
very
important
here
and
we
don't
want
to
stand
in
the
way
at
all.
I
mean
there
are
it's
not
the
same,
but
there
are
similarities
with
issues
of
funerals
and
waitings.
Nobody
wants
to
be
in
a
position
to
say
to
people.
H
Very
much
that-
and
these
issues
are
not
easy
and
and
that
balance
of
risk
is
a
very
difficult
one.
I
wanted
to
raise
one
other
separate
issue
that
we've
had
and
the
evidence
provided
it
to
us.
We
had
evidence
from
the
british
federation
of
housing
associations
who,
like
the
the
evidence
we
had
from
systems
advice.
H
You
are
welcoming
of
efforts
to
support
tenants
who
have
rented
years,
and
you
know,
recognize
very
much
the
the
difficulties
and
making
sure
that
the
tenants
who
are
struggling
to
pay
their
rent
are
supported.
However,
they
raise
an
issue
around
the
eviction
notice
period
for
cases
involving
serious
anti-social
and
criminal
behavior.
They
specifically
asked
for
it
to
revert
for
to
one
month
from
three
months
now,
like
many
other
msps,
you
may
have
had
some
cases
raised
with
you
yourself
around
and
we're
talking
very
much
extreme
end
of
anti-social
behavior.
H
Here
again.
Is
that
something
that
the
government
is
looking
at
and
because,
clearly
for
those
tenants
living
around
someone
who
is
exhibiting
this
extreme,
antisocial
behavior,
with
no
end
in
sight
that
can
be
extremely
challenging
and
particularly
when
people
are
at
home
more
at
the
moment.
So
is
that
something
that
is
being
kept
under
review.
B
Yes,
I
think
all
of
us
are
likely
to
have
heard
from
housing
associations
in
our
own
areas,
who
are
very
supportive
of
tenants
who
want
to
make
sure
that
nobody
suffers
as
a
result
of
the
the
hardship
that
the
the
current
virus
has
brought
an
inability
to
pay
rent.
But
they're
also
aware
that
there
are,
you
know,
very,
very
small
numbers,
but
there
are
those
who
will
take
advantage
and
exploit
any
situation,
and
you
know
we
all
know
as
msp
still
the
horrific
results
of
of
anti-social
behavior
from
from
your
neighbors
from
hell.
B
B
B
But
I
know
that
kevin
stewart
you
brought
forward
some
new
housing
proposals
at
the
beginning
of
september,
which
you
also
assisted
on
some
of
the
points
that
the
federation
of
housing
associations
were
addressing,
and
I
know
he
will
keep
under
review
the
ability
to
deal
with
anti-social
tenants
and
the
ability
of
the
housing
associations
to
operate
because
they've
also
had
restrictions
on.
You
know
how
they
can
operate.
They've
had
difficulties
because
you
know
they've
been
trying,
quite
rightly,
to
ensure
that
people
work
from
home
there's
been
lots
of
difficulties
for
the
housing
associations.
B
They've
they've,
adapted
well
and
they've
worked
very
hard.
We
want
to
keep
listening
to
them.
We
want
to
protect
tenants.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
the
tenant's
hardship
funds,
for
example,
is,
is
it
works
up
well,
but
in
the
end
we
cannot
allow
people
to
make
other
people's
lives
an
absolute
misery,
and
that
is
an
issue
that
has
to
be
dealt
with.
A
I
I
The
the
cabinet
secretary
will
no
doubt
be
aware
of
the
public
concern
around
the
exemption
from
the
covered
restrictions
for
ground
shooting
in
england.
That
means,
whilst,
for
example,
if
you're
off
walking
in
the
hills
you're
bound
by
the
rule
of
six,
but
if
you're
out
shooting
grouse,
you
can
be
in
a
group
of
up
to
30
and
I'd
just
like
to
ask
the
cabinet
secretary.
Will
this
activity
be
exempted
from
the
rule
of
six
in
scotland.
B
The
rules
in
scotland
are
slightly
different
and
therefore
you
are
able
you
are
able,
for
example,
to
go
to
the
hills
in
slightly
larger
groups
or
go
into
the
countryside
in
slightly
larger
groups,
and
let
me
be
entirely
specific
about
that.
Under
the
the
restrictions
and
requirements.
Scotland's
regulations,
which
are
the
new
regulations
that
the
convener
referred
to.
There
is
a
paragraph,
and
I
want
to.
I
want
to
read
it
to
you.
B
For
the
purposes
of
paragraph
one
be
five
and
six
an
activity
or
exercise
is
organized
because
organized
activity
or
exercise
is
allowed.
If
a
person
who
is
responsible
for
carrying
on
the
business
or
providing
a
service
if
it
is
organized
by
a
person,
who's
responsible
for
carrying
on
a
business
or
providing
a
service
person,
who's
responsible
for
a
place
of
worship,
charity
rather
not
for
profit
organization,
club
or
political
organization
or
the
governing
body
of
a
sport
or
another
activity.
So
people
can
go
in
larger
groups,
socially
distance
for
organized
hiking.
B
A
a
variety
of
other
activities-
angling
golfer-
all
covered
by
that
and
in
those
circumstances
any
legal
activity
is
covered
by
that
now.
Shooting
is
a
legal
activity,
so
no
circumstances
it
could
take
place
and
you
would
have
to
make
shooting
an
illegal
activity
in
order
to
stop
it.
But
there
is
no
specific
exemption
to
the
rule
of
six
and
I'm
sure
you
know
we
would
want
to
make
sure
that
people
could
go
walking.
I
I
think
the
point
I'm
trying
to
make
cabinet
secretary
is
you
kicked
off
your
remarks
this
morning?
Referring
to
you
know
the
need
for
balance,
but
we're
continually
weighing
up
balance
and
risk,
and
public
health
is
our
utmost
priority
at
the
moment,
and
annabelle
ewing
rightly
referred
to
the
need
for
public
buy-in,
but
you
will
understand-
and
I'm
sure
you
do
too,
that
when
we
receive
more
sponsors
from
constituents
who
are,
you
know
very
upset
that
they've
been
unable
to
gather
in
the
numbers.
I
They
would
wish
to
mark
extremely
important
occasions,
organized
activity,
but
they
activities
which
can
hardly
be
called
essential
occurring.
You
know
that
that's
a
very
difficult
thing
for
us
to
explain
a
child
cannot
a
child
doesn't
have
a
private
garden.
A
child
could
be
celebrating
their
birthday
on
their
own
because
their
parents
don't
have
the
means
to
pay
a
birthday
party
organizer.
I
B
What
does
exist
in
the
regulations
is
the
ability,
for
example,
of
a
church
group
or
a
church
walking
group
to
go
and
walk
in
the
hills,
and
if
we
were
to
say
that
could
not
happen,
you
know,
then
I
think
we
would
be
attacked
in
another
and
distinct
way.
If
I
do
not
believe
that
exemptions
for
shooting
are
the
right
thing
to
happen.
I
entirely
agree
with
you,
but
equally
you
cannot
legislate
solely
on
the
basis
of
dislike.
B
You
have
to
legislate
in
a
fair
and
inequitable
way
and
in
these
ways,
and
as
I
point
out
if
people
can
go
and
walk
and
organize
groups,
if
people
can
golf-
and
I
know
many
people
have
taken
advantage
of
this
to
golf-
if
people
want
to
go
and
as
a
club
go
out
together,
then
they
can
do
so
in
a
regulated
way
and
and
we
cannot
stop
them
doing
that.
Indeed,
we'd
be
encouraged
to
allow
them
to
do
that,
but
there's
no
organized
exemption
in
scotland
or
shooting.
I
Cabinet
secretary,
I
mean
action
for
children
have
raised
their
concerns,
that
for
those
children
who
cannot
afford
to
take
part
in
organized
activity
for
which
you
pay,
you
know
perhaps
sports
clubs,
perhaps
dance
classes,
and
while
they
can
mix
at
school,
they
cannot.
They
can't
play
in
the
park
or
with
their
friends.
You
know
they
can't
have
a
kick
about
of
a
football.
I
think
this
is
a
serious
concern
and
I
wonder
if
the
cabinet
secretary
is
aware
of
his
government's
intentions
to
look
at
this
again.
I
B
Well,
it
is
not
less
risky
in
children
playing
in
their
gardens,
but
you
know
there
is
a
need
to
ensure
that
in
communities,
for
example,
things
can
be
organized
and
I
know
communities
that
do
that
who
can
organize
and
help
others
and
help
children.
I
believe
that
every
child
should
have
the
opportunity
to
celebrate
their
birthday
and
I'm
sure
everybody
would
try
and
do
so.
B
I
don't
think,
there's
a
direct
equivalence
and
I
think,
if
you
make
this
direct
equivalence,
then
you're
not
doing
a
service
to
the
many
many
people
who
want
to
make
sure
that
children
are
treated
equitably
and
well
and
that
children
are
given
the
opportunities
they
should
have.
Nobody
doubts
for
any
the
difficulty
for
people,
particularly
those
who
are
least
advantaged,
particularly
for
children
within
inner
cities.
B
Every
piece
of
work
that
can
be
done
should
be
done
and
I'm
very
happy
to
ensure
that
my
colleagues
come
to
you
with
indications
of
the
work
that
is
being
done.
But
there
is
no
organized
exemption
in
scotland
for
shooting.
There
is
the
ability
of
people
to
go
into
the
countryside
which,
if
we
were
to
try
and
ban
people
going
into
the
countryside
altogether,
I'm
pretty
certain
that
you
would
be
one
of
the
first
people
who
wish
to
criticize
that,
and
I
would
agree
with
you.
I
B
I
I'd
be
very
happy
to
to
welcome
any
constructive
as
to
how
we
squared
that
circle
that,
given
the
need
to
ensure
that
we
do
not
have
an
outbreak
of
the
virus,
an
uncontrolled
outbreak
of
the
virus,
where
you
to
make
those
suggestions,
you
can
absolutely
take
it.
I
would
ensure
those
are
looked
at
very
seriously
by
my
colleagues.
B
J
B
I'll
do
my
very
best.
I
put
it
in
a
sense,
a
matter
of
simple
arithmetic.
You
know
the
risk
increases
the
more
households
who
are
together
because
you
know
there
is
no
control
upon
those
households.
It
is,
I
suppose,
it's
a
long
time
since
I
did
any
mathematics
or
or
arithmetic
of
any
description,
but
I
suppose
it
is
a
geometric
progression.
B
You
know
with
one
in
one
household,
you
have
a
limited
number
of
connections,
all
of
which
may
give
you
an
unlimited
number
of
activities
which
will
give
you
the
possibility
of
contracting
the
virus
because
you're
outside,
because
you're
you're
you're
amongst
work,
mates
or
whatever.
That
would
perhaps
double.
If
there
are
two
households
together,
because
you're
you
you're
in
different
places
that
would
perhaps
triple
if
there
are
three
households
together.
B
So
the
reality
is,
it
is
not
the
individual
numbers,
although
clearly
that
is
a
factor
there's
also
the
factor
of
the
connections
of
more
than
one
household.
Nobody
is
is
happy
with
that.
You
know,
we've
reduced
that
number
and
that
number
has
been
reduced
because
of
the
evidence
that
we
have
seen-
and
this
has
been
northern
states
at
the
border-
that
the
the
biggest
danger
appears
to
be
at
the
present
moment
to
come
from
transmission
in
households,
and
that
is
where
it
is
taking
place.
B
Now
some
evidence
of
that
has
come
from
people
coming
in
from
abroad
and
they
have
contacted
one
household
that
has
been
picked
up
and
then
it's
transferred
to
another
household.
If
there
were
three
households
it
would
be
transferred
not
once
but
twice
so
I
think
that
is,
you
know
the
clear
argument.
I
can
understand
why
you
know
people
will
look
at
this
and
say,
but
you
know,
hang
on
a
minute:
I'm
not
infected.
Well.
Okay,
I
accept
that,
but
we
just
do
need
to
be
very
cautious.
We
have
seen
the
figures.
B
You
know,
we've
seen
the
fact
that
two
months
ago
we
were
reporting
on
five,
four
or
five
new
cases
a
day,
we're
talking.
You
know
now
in
a
couple
of
hundred
a
day
and
we're
not
unique
in
that
by
any
amount
of
means.
The
situation
is
worse
elsewhere
and
therefore
we
must
take
action.
You
know
if
we
think
back
it's
it's
quite
difficult
to
think
back
to
where
we
were
in
in
february
and
march.
B
This
just
came
up
on
us
pretty
quickly,
but
you
know
we
look
back
and
now
and
and
say
you
know:
we've
learned
an
awful
lot,
let's
apply
those
lessons
to
try
and
do
the
what
we
can
with
new
tools
in
our
hands
too,
because
test
and
protect,
for
example,
is
a
very,
very
powerful
tool
which
we
are
using
and
using
to
effect.
We've
seen
that
with
outbreaks
of
cluster
outbreaks
which
have
been
contained,
so
we've
got
to
take
action,
we
believe
we're
taking
the
right
action.
B
I
I
think
it
is
too
early
to
tell
I
know.
The
first
minister
yesterday
thought
that
there
was
there
were
indications
being
seen
in
glasgow
and
in
the
areas
where
first
on
it
restricted
that
it
was.
It
was
having
an
effect,
but
it
is
too
early
to
tell,
and
I'm
I'm
not
privy
to
that
information
today.
I
think
you
know
we,
the
actions
are
being
taken,
we
hope
will
be
the
actions
that
will
make
a
difference,
and
we
will
have
to
see
that
you
know
as
time
goes
on.
A
E
Thank
you,
convener.
I
have
no
relevant
interests.
Thank
you
good
morning,
cabinet
secretary.
I
just
want
a
wee
bit
of
clarification.
We're
talking
about
communication
earlier
is
important
now
from
reading
the
legislation-
and
this
is
my
first
time
on
this
committee
and
thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
be
a
substitute
mention
that
the
extension
of
the
legislation
is
up
to
march
2021.
E
E
So
a
wee
bit
of
clarification
on
that
and
to
follow
up
on
that.
If
we
are
fortunate
enough
that
we
do
get
control
of
covert,
is
there
a
caveat
in
this
legislation
which
would
say
that
we
could
change
the
extension?
We
can
reduce
the
extension,
particularly
I'm
interested
in
the
adult
capacity
and
guardianship
as
well,
because
it's
people's
human
rights,
we're
talking
about.
B
B
After
three
weeks
when
the
two
emergency
bills
went
through,
we
a
slight
variation
from
the
uk
situation,
which
was
a
two-year
process.
We
said
that
we
would,
and
that
was
split
up
into
six-month
periods,
but
not
actually
for
renewal.
We
we
said
we
would
renew
ours
every
six
months.
We
thought
that
was
appropriate
and
conventional.
We
also
have
the
ability
both
to
end
provisions
and
to
suspend
provisions,
and
we
can
do
that
by
regulations.
B
So
we've
got
the
opportunity
to
to
look
at
what
we're
doing
yeah
and
to
say
do
we
still
need
this
and
that's
what
we
do.
We
have
suspended
the
number
of
privileges
and
we've
done
so
again
in
these
circumstances,
and
you
know
if
the
provision
is
for
six
months,
we
can
simply
not
renew
it
or
we
could
withdraw
the
whole
thing,
but
I
think
it's
sensible
to
have
a
a
period
of
time
in
which
we
understand
that
it's
in
effect-
and
these
are
things
are
available
to
us.
B
You
know
it
would
have
been
nice
not
to
have
to
renew
this,
but
I
think
the
circumstances
are
such.
I
don't
think
anybody.
I
hope
nobody
would
deny
that
we
have
to
continue
with
with
many
of
these
provisions
and
the
period
within
the
legislation
for
renewal
is
six
months.
So
we
that's
what
we
we
need
to
do,
but
we
have
done
as
you've
seen
and
there's
detail
in
the
regulations.
E
Thank
you
for
that
clarification.
I
think
it's
important
that
the
public
know
that
that
you
can
bring
to
committee
and
you
can
review
the
legislation.
I
would
follow
that
up
with
them
time
scale
I
mean
certainly
sitting
in
a
health
committee.
We
have
lots
of
the
legislation
come
forward
and
sometimes
it's
very
quick
to
go
forward
and
other
times
it's
not
so
quick.
So
I
would
have
concerns
how
long
it
would
take
for
it
to
be
reviewed
and
come
into
law.
E
You
know
if
it's
reducing
it,
but
the
one
area-
and
I
think
monica
lena
had
mentioned
as
well
as
as
well
as
a
convener
is
the
adult
within
capacity
and
the
children's
with
the
guardianship
orders.
I
take
on
board
exactly
what
you've
been
saying,
but
I
would
ask
adults
within
capacity
in
the
guardianship
for
children.
E
B
I
think
the
best
thing
I
could
do
in
those
circumstances
now
you
know
I
indicated
earlier.
There
are
departmental
ministers
portfolio
ministers
who
deal
with
the
the
detail
of
the
operation.
Is
I
I
need
to
make
sure
the
committee
you
and
the
committee
get
a
briefing
on
exactly
how
that
is
taking
place
so
that
you
are
confident
that
it's
taking
place
in
the
right
way
and
I'll
undertake
to
do
that.
E
It
can
be
there
just
one
one
last
question:
israel
80,
but
perhaps
in
the
future.
I
am
concerned
about
our
standing
in
scotland
with
echr
and
considering
the
brexit
situation.
That's
came
about
and
obviously
we'll
look
to
january
next
year.
How
is
that
going
to
affect
our
human
rights
or
the
human
rights
of
this
legislation?
That's
going
through?
Will
it
have
an
effect
on
it.
B
Well,
if
the
uk
government
were
to
pursue
the
suspension
or
or
alteration
of
uchr
would
have
a
profound
effect
on
all
our
lives.
I
I
you
know
the
uk
government
to
be
fair
to
them,
and
I
do
try
to
be
fair,
has
said
that
he
has
said
that
that
is
not
their
intention,
though
they
keep
briefing
that
it
is
their
intention.
I
mean
you
know
in
order
to
predict
what
was
going
to
happen
with
brexit
or
with
the
uk
government.
You
would
require
not
me
to
give
evidence
to
you
but
mystic
neck.
A
G
G
I
I
just
want
to
be
clear
in
my
mind
what
on
what
basis
they're
asking
for
that,
given
that
when
parliament
originally
granted
them
these
extraordinary
powers,
we
were
in
an
emergency
and
things
have
changed
since
then,
thankfully,
we
have
far
fewer
people
in
hospital.
That's
a
really
good
thing,
far
fewer
people
dying
of
covid.
G
B
Well,
I
I
think
you
know,
I
think
the
clarity
in
this
for
mr
simpson
comes
from
the
the
root
map
and
the
phasing
of
the
root
map
and
the
question
of
whether
or
not
we
would
reach
phase
four
phase.
Four
would
be
an
indication
I
think
to
all
of
us
that
we
had.
We
had
moved
on
essentially
into
the
situation
where
the
virus
was
was
was
not
in
actual
effect,
seemed
to
be.
You
know,
a
continuing
public
health
risk.
B
B
We're
still
absolutely
in
phase
three,
and
you
know
in
the
first
minister
has
indicated,
for
example,
as
as,
as
you
know
last
week,
that
some
of
the
indicative
gates
which
were
set
cannot
now
be
met,
that
there
has
been
a
move
backwards
in
terms
of
the
the
households
meeting
together.
So
I
think
that
indicates
to
us
that
there
is
still
a
requirement
we
are
still
within
the
pandemic.
B
B
Nobody
would
be
more
pleased
than
I
think
you
and
I,
if
you
know
it,
turned
out
that
this
was
a
mere
blip
and
that
you
know
things
subsided
and
everybody
felt
that
it
was
that
we
could
move
to
phase
four
when
nowhere
near
that-
and
quite
the
reverse
is
true.
You
know.
If
we
look
in
scotland,
we
see
the
mounting
number
of
individual
cases.
We
see
the
the
percentage
of
of
tests
rising
above
three
percent.
B
We
can
actually
look
at
that
also
in
european
terms,
as
a
threshold,
the
european
traveling
new
travel
recommendations,
which
the
irish
government
has
now
signed
on,
to
include
three
percent
of
testing
as
one
of
the
thresholds
to
move
from
one
category
to
another.
So
there
are
a
number
of
tests
you
would
apply,
but
I
think
the
generality
is
you
know.
Are
we
in
a
position
where
we
could
do
without
this
legislation
or
not?
B
And
I
think
the
answer
is
no,
but
we
should
be-
and
I
you
know
very
much
agree-
we
should
be
critical
of
each
item
in
it
and
we
should
examine
each
of
those
items
and
that's
why
the
six
months
is
not
absolute.
We
have
the
two
monthly
reviews,
you
know
and
we
have
suspended
things
after
two
monthly
reviews
and
we
can
continue
to
do
so.
So
the
individual
parts
of
this
can
be
examined
in
the
two
monthly
reviews
and
the
two
monthly
reviews
have
been
very,
very
comprehensive.
B
G
B
Well,
I
was
so
that
was
one
of
the
triggers
I
mean
you
know
I
am.
I
am
not
the
the
arbiter
of
that.
You
know
quite
clearly
the
the
chief
medical
officer
would
be
the
person
I
think
who
would
be
have
the
strongest
influence,
but
clearly
there
would
have
to
be
a
discussion
debate.
What
I'm
trying
to
indicate
to
you,
mr
simpson.
I
think
that
that
would
be
one
area
in
which
I
think
you
know.
B
If
we
were
in
phase
four
that
I
think
might
be
one
area
we
would
say
we
feel
that
we've
made
you
know
significant
progress
and
therefore
one
of
the
issues
would
be
the
legislation
and
the
regulations.
You
know,
I
can't
give
you
an
absolute
to
that,
but
you
know
I
nobody
wants
these
to
continue.
I
don't
want
these
to
continue
for
a
moment
longer
than
necessary
and
in
those
circumstances,
that
would
be
a
consideration.
I
think,
if
we
look
at,
I
just
I
haven't
found
it
here.
G
That
is
essentially
the
government
bringing
in
regulations
without
scrutiny
of
parliament.
The
scrutiny
comes
later,
so
you
ask
you,
ask
parliament
what
it
thinks
once
the
law
is
in
place
now,
we've
had
we've
already
had
a
number
of
questions
this
morning
from
other
msps,
which
suggests
to
me,
and
I've
felt
this
for
a
while
that
it
would
be
better
if
you
were
to
present
what
you
want
to
do
to
parliament
and
parliament
can
then
scrutinize
what
it
is.
B
You
are,
of
course,
a
former
convener
of
the
of
the
relevant
committee
on
this,
and
your
knowledge
of
your
negative
affirmative,
super
affirmative
and
native
affirmative
is
is
without
question.
I
have
to
say
so,
I'm
slightly
nervous
about
jousting
with
you
on
these
issues,
but
in
terms
of
made
affirmative
affirmative
procedure.
It
applies
here
because
there
is
an
urgency
in
putting
places
specifically
regulations,
there's
an
urgency
in
putting
in
place
regulations.
I
mean,
let's
take
as
an
example.
You
know
you
took
part
in
the
phone
call
on
friday
afternoon.
B
B
We've
had
examples
of
this
side
of
the
board
of
regulations
being
made,
but
not
operable
for
a
week
or
10
days
or
something,
and
my
view
is
that
if
these
are
absolutely
essential
there
and
then
they
should
be
made
there
and
then
now
I
think,
there's
another
way
of.
Of
course
I
wouldn't
accuse
you
of
of
misrepresenting
things,
but
I
think
it's
another
way
of
looking
at
made
affirmative,
which
is
there
is
still
the
opportunity
for
members
to
question,
because
you
know
I
have
been,
as
I
indicated
10
times
to
this
committee.
B
You
know
to
answer
questions
on
this
and
to
debate
and
discuss
it,
there's
still
an
opportunity
to
vote,
because
the
committee
gets
to
vote
and
the
chamber
can
get
to
them,
so
it
is,
it
is
not
wholly
without
scrutiny.
The
question
is:
does
the
scrutiny
take
place
before
the
regulation
is
effective
or
does
it
take
place
after
the
regulation
is
effective
and
in
these
exceptional
circumstances
made
affirmative
is
rare,
you
know
and
and
that
he's
in
exceptional
circumstances
in
public
health
circumstances.
B
G
G
If,
if
that's
possible
now
I
accept
that,
if,
if
there
are,
if
there's
a
genuine
need
to
act
quickly
and
I've
always
held
this
view
as
well,
then
you
act
quickly.
A
government
should
do
that,
but
I,
I
think,
there's
been
a
number
of
examples
where
you
could
have
asked
parliament
first
and
that
would
have
also
helped
to
explain
things
to
the
public
in
a
way
that
perhaps
has
not
happened.
G
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much
and
we
now
move
to
the
second
agenda
item,
which
is
consideration
of
the
motion
on
the
draft
affirmative
instrument
that
we
have
just
taken.
Evidence
on
this
ssi
relates
to
extending
the
expiria
provisions
within
the
coronavirus
scotland
acts
to
the
31st
of
march
2021..
A
A
A
This
is
a
negative
instrument,
which
means
the
parliament
has
40
days
to
consider
a
motion
to
annul
the
instrument
we
have
taken
evidence
on
the
instrument
from
the
cabinet
secretary
this
morning
and
a
motion
to
annul
this
instrument
has
not
been
lodged.
Does
any
member
wish
to
make
any
further
question
comments
on
this
negative
instruments
before
our
consideration
is
concluded?
And
if
so,
could
members
indicate
this
by
typing
r
in
the
chat
bar.
A
A
A
This
is
our
second
evidence
session
for
this
meeting
and
we
will
take
evidence
again
from
the
cabinet
secretary
for
constitution,
europe
and
external
affairs
on
the
following
made
affirmative
instruments,
that
is,
the
health
protection,
coronavirus
restrictions,
aberdeen
city,
amendment
regulations,
2020,
ssi
2020-253
and
the
health
protection
coronavirus
restrictions
directions
by
local
authorities,
scotland
regulations,
2020,
ssi,
2020
262..
I
think
the
cabinet
secretary
is
accompanied
by
two
different
officials
for
this
evidence
session.
Can
I
welcome
amanda,
gordon
deputy
director,
local
interventions,
outbreak
management
and
luke
mcbratney
bill
team
leader
coronavirus,
scotland
bills.
B
If
I
might
continue
to
just
very
briefly
outline
what
these
are
about,
which
may
save
us
some
time,
if
you
would
allow
me
to
do
so-
yes,
indeed,
thank
you.
Convener
the
the
aberdeen
regulations,
the
health
protection,
corona
virus
restrictions,
habiting
city,
amendment
regulation,
2020.,
the
original
regulations
with
respect
to
aberdeen
took
effect
on
the
fifth
of
august
and
the
required
businesses
in
the
city.
To
close.
B
This
was,
in
our
view,
a
necessary
and
proportionate
measure
to
control
an
outbreak
of
covet
19
in
aberdeen
city,
which
was
associated
with
a
number
of
bars.
These
regulations
were
amended
on
the
24th
of
august
to
reflect
opening
of
additional
businesses
in
line
with
the
route
map,
thanks
to
an
extraordinarily
hard
work
of
everyone
involved
in
getting
the
abilities
to
the
outbreak
under
control,
particularly
the
people
and
businesses
of
aberdeen.
B
These
restrictions
were
allowed
to
expire
after
21
days
and
aberdeen
city
council
now
fully
in
line
with
the
latest
restrictions
which
the
scottish
government
has
published.
The
health
protection
coronavirus
restrictions
directions
by
local
authorities.
Scotland
regulations
2020
make
provision
for
a
local
authority
to
give
directions
relating
to
specified
premises,
events
and
public
outdoor
places
in
its
area.
The
scottish
government
made
regulations
by
way
of
the
made
affirmative
procedure
on
the
27th
of
august.
The
regulations
entered
into
force
on
the
28th
of
august,
and
the
plenary
vote
will
of
course,
take
place
in
due
course.
B
They've
brought
forward
these
regulations
to
ensure
that
local
authorities
have
the
power
to
take
targeted
local
action
to
limit
or
stop
the
spread
of
corona
virus.
A
direction
may
only
be
given
if
the
local
authority
considers
that
the
necessity
and
proportionality
conditions
set
out
in
the
regulations
have
been
met.
The
local
authority
must
review
the
direction
at
least
once
every
seven
days,
and
it
must
be
revoked
or
revoked
and
replaced
when
it
is
determined
on
review
that
the
requirements
of
necessity
and
proportionality
are
no
longer
met.
A
Thank
you,
yes,
that
that
is
very
helpful,
not
just
as
a
reminder,
but
also
as
a
brief
brief
summary.
Can
we
move
straight
to
questions
and
again,
if
I
may
begin
by
asking
the
first
questions
and
obviously
today,
as
you
said,
we're
looking
at
the
ssr
relating
to
local
lockdown
measures
in
aberdeen,
which
was
the
first
example,
I
think,
of
local
restrictions
being
imposed
by
regulation.
A
The
policy
note
for
the
other
ssi
directions
by
local
authorities,
which
we're
also
considering
notes
as
as
follows,
and
I
quote
we
have
learned
from
the
experience
of
dealing
with
the
first
set
of
local
outbreaks.
These
regulations
provide
the
tools
that
those
on
the
ground
dealing
with
local
outbreaks,
consider
that
they
would
have
needed
in
order
to
have
a
chance
of
earlier
controlling
or
preventing
these.
B
B
B
It
was
the
high
risk
of
transmission
and
the
high
risk
of
transmission
was
the
the
fact
that
physical
distancing
was
an
issue
and
where
it
was
less
than
two
meters
means
that
the
risk
of
transmission
and
distance
of
spreading
by
face-to-face
contact
is
increased.
High
occupancy,
where
there's
higher
occupancy
of
a
space,
then
there's
a
reduction
in
physical
distancing
and
an
increased
risk,
for
example,
of
touch
surface
contamination
high
noise
levels.
It
is
an
increased
risk
of
respiratory
secretion
dispersal.
B
In
other
words
you
have
to
shout
and
and
therefore,
by
doing
so
doing,
there's
an
increased
risk
of
transmission,
poor
ventilation
and,
quite
clearly
in
many
licensed
premises.
Not
that
I
spend
an
awful
lot
of
time
in
them,
but
in
many
licensed
premises
there
is
poor
ventilation
and
that's
reduced
dilution
and
removal
of
viral
load
and
there's
an
increased
risk
in
licensed
premises
in
any
case
of
customer
non-adherence.
B
The
recommended
prevention.
So
in
all
those
in
all
those
circumstances,
this
was
a
necessary
step
and
we've
learned
from
that
and
we've
learned
that
those
are
the
things
you
need
to
do
because
the
virus
there
was
contained
within
in
aberdeen,
but
we
also
know
that
there
are
different
circles
in
different
places.
You
know
the
the
the
west
of
scotland
break
is
a
different
outbreak
that
is
being
transmitted
in
different
ways.
So
we've
learnt
those
things,
but
we've
learned
those
things
from
the
aberdeen
situation
and
then
they
can
be
applied.
B
Where
you
have
to
close
premises,
you
need
regulations
to
close
premises,
but
actually
maybe
in
very
small
outbreaks.
You
know
a
sledgehammer
is
not
required.
You
in
natural
fatigue,
local
authority
can
do
that
because
in
the
tracing
process
you
may
identify
as
single
premises.
That
is
the
issue
and
it'll
be
best
to
be
able
to
deal
with
that.
Some
single
premises,
first
of
all
by
persuasion,
but
if
not
by
persuasion,
then
by
regulation-
and
that
is
what
the
second
set
of
regulations
does,
that
it
allows
you
to
take
that
targeted
action.
B
You
don't
use
the
sledgehammer.
You
can
act
quickly.
Local
authorities
have
the
power
to
do
so,
but
it
must
be
necessary
and
it
must
be
proportional,
and
it
must
not.
Last
you
a
significant
length
of
time,
so
adding
to
the
armory
of
local
authorities
is
an
important
thing
to
do
and
that's
what
we
try
to
do
by
learning.
A
Thank
you
for
that
answer,
and
you
covered
in
your
answer
my
some
of
the
issues
I
was
going
to
raise
in
my
my
last
question,
which
is:
is
this
distinction?
I
raised
this
with
you
before
this
distinction
between
using
regulation
and
using
guidance,
and
I
suppose
now
having
the
experience
of
both
aberdeen
and
the
west
of
scotland
to
look
upon.
B
Well
there
is
there
is
that
distinction
that
you
know
if
you're
you
want
to
persuade
people
new
things,
so
the
40s,
you
know
clearly
how
we've
worked
for,
how
the
piece
of
workforce-
and
I
suppose
forward-
and
you
want
to
persuade
people
to
do
things
to
encourage
people
to
enable
people
to,
but
in
the
end
you
may
have
to.
You,
may
have
to
tell
people
to
do
things
and
you
need
regulation
to
do
that.
B
So,
if
you're
telling
people
to
close
premises,
then
you
you
need
regulation
to
do
that
unless
they're
willing
to
do
so
voluntarily
and
regulations
also
might
in
the
end,
be
the
necessary
backstop,
I
mean
you
know.
The
first
minister
has
made
it
clear
that
we
have
guidance
in
place
in
the
west
of
scotland,
but
if,
if
it
was
not
observed,
if
there
was
a
major
problem
with
it,
then
you
know
you
might
have
to
move
to
regulation.
B
They're.
Also
not
separate,
I
mean
you
will
you
will
note
from
the
local
authority
regulation
that
guidance
is
being
issued,
and
you
know
guidance
really
is
in
in
two
shapes
here.
One
shape
of
guidance
is
for
the
particular
sector,
for
example,
guidance
for
the
licensed
trade
which
does
exist,
but
there's
also
guidance
on
the
application
of
the
regulations
and
that,
in
the
case
of
the
local
authority,
ones
will
be
issued
this
week.
You
don't
need
that
guidance,
but
it
does
help
you
in
terms
of
interpretation,
so
those
two
things
can
go
together.
A
J
Thanks
very
much
convener
and
hello,
again,
cabinet
secretary,
the
aberdeen
experience
could
probably
have
happened
anywhere
in
scotland,
resulting
in
measures
that
had
to
be
taken.
Do
you
think
that
if
we
continue
to
get
clusters
occurring
in
different
towns
and
villages
in
scotland,
for
whatever
reason,
then
that
will
really
prevent
us
from
moving
to
phase
four?
Is
that
the
key
driver
for
this?
We
have
to
stop
the
clusters
occurring
wherever
to
enable
us
to
move
to
the
phase.
B
The
first
minister
has
been,
you
know,
very
clear
that
you
know
the
first
us.
That
is
how
we
behave.
You
know
the
observing
facts,
making
sure
we
are
wearing
our
face,
masks,
making
sure
we're
not
in
crowded
places
you're
doing
doing
the
things
we
need
to
do.
The
next
line
of
defense
is
test
and
protect
you
know
and
test
and
protect,
is
really
important.
It's
not
so
much
as
being
able
to
move
on
it's
being
able
to
to
to
make
sure
that
the
virus
is
controlled
and
it
does
not
become
out
of
control.
B
It
does
not
essentially
become
is
not
transmitted
again
in
the
community
in
an
exponential
fashion.
That
would
take
us
back
to
where
we
were,
and
we
don't
want
to
go
back
to
where
we
were.
So
it's
not
so
much
as
preventing
us
from
moving
on.
It
is
the
necessary
step
that
we
have
to
take,
and
you
know
we
can
see
that
if
it
is
done
properly,
then
it
has
worked.
You
know
worked
in
aberdeen,
you
know
it
it.
It's
worked
in
other
places.
We
saw
the
small
initial
clustering
in
gretna.
B
You
know
and
anand
we've
seen
aberdeen
we've
seen
a
the
the
meat
plant.
One
we've
seen
one
recently
the
borders,
you
know
now
there
are
still
others
and
but
the
work
that's
being
done
to
test
and
protect
is
absolutely
vital.
First
of
all,
let's
observe
the
regulations.
That's
the
best
thing:
let's,
let's
keep
washing
our
hands.
Let's
keep
winning
your
face
coverings.
B
J
B
See
what
happens
very
clear
definition
of
this?
I'm
sorry,
I
was
not
able
to
quote
it
to
you
earlier
on.
I
really
need
to
find
the
the
definition
within
all
the
documentation,
that's
sitting
in
front
of
me,
but
there
is
a
very
clear
definition.
I
want
the
committee
to
have
that
definition
of
phase
four.
It
had
to
be
useful
to
remind
us
of
the
of
the
definitions
again,
but
it's
a
very
clear
definition
of
phase
four
and
the
role
of
this
yeah
and
the
role
of
moving
to
phase
four
and
look
for
now.
B
B
Then
of
course,
then
they
have
the
a
sexual
guidance
in
terms
of
the
particular
sectors
and
industries
they're
dealing
with,
and
then
they
have
the
detailed
guidance.
Now
local
authorities
have
been
involved
in
the
discussion
of
the
detailed
guidance
very
clearly.
They
can
operate
the
regulations
without
the
detailed
guidance,
but
it's
helpful
to
them.
The
and
the
powers
can
be
used.
So
the
guidance
is
now
will
be.
The
draft
guidance
of
final
draft
guidance
will
be
issued
this
week
and
that
will
help
them
to
understand
the
issue.
You're,
raising
and
other
issues.
B
Now
the
powers
you
know
are
in
existence
and
and
and
have
been
used
in
the
sense
that
there
are
instances
in
the
last
fortnight
where
local
authorities
have
been
have
had
to
say
to
individual
premises.
Providers.
Look,
you
know,
you
know
we
can
do
this
easy
way,
the
hard
way
you
know
the
easy
way
is.
You
must
understand
that
these
premises
are
a
risk
and
we
want
you
to
close
for
these
reasons
or
we
can
pursue
that
under
the
powers
that
we
have
and-
and
that
I
think,
is
an
important
thing.
I
hope.
E
Gina
and
good
morning,
again,
cabinet
secretary,
I'm
very
much
in
favor
of
local
authorities
having
this
legislation
and
guidance,
I'm
a
great
believer
in
the
fact
that
they're
on
the
ground,
they
know
exactly
what's
happening
in
that
respect.
In
your
opening
remarks,
when
you
mentioned
aberdeen,
you
mentioned
patel
restaurants,
et
cetera,
et
cetera
and
the
transmission
situation.
B
I
think
I
would
probably
like
amanda
to
answer
that
if
she
possibly
could,
but
before
she
does,
I
wonder
if
I
could
just
go
back
to
phase
four.
I
I
I'm
now
able
to
to
tell
you
exactly
what
it's
phase
four
is,
and
it
might
be
useful
phase.
Four
in
the
final
is
is
in
this,
and
this
is
the
description
of
it.
B
In
the
final
phase
of
the
transition
to
the
crisis,
the
virus
remains
suppressed
to
very
low
levels,
considered
a
significant
threat
to
public
health,
but
society
remains
safety,
conscious
all
who
criteria
continue
to
be
met.
A
vaccine
and
our
effective
treatment
may
have
been
developed
test
and
protect
continues
to
be
fully
operational
in
all
14
health
board
areas.
Scotland
is
open
with
precautions
and
the
importance
of
hygiene
and
public
health
are
emphasized.
B
It
could
be
many
months
or
longer
until
we
reach
this
phase.
So
I
think
that
makes
it
absolutely
clear
that,
when
we're
at
phase
four,
we
are
still,
you
know
active
we're,
still
vigilant,
we're
still
taking
all
the
measures
we
need
to
take,
but
we
have
moved
into
the
stage
where
the
viruses-
and
these
are
important-
words-
is
suppressed
to
very
low
levels
and
no
longer
considered
significant
threat
to
public
health.
B
I
think
that
probably
is
helpful,
could
be
that
that
we
know
can
actually
can
actually
have
that
on
the
record,
and
my
apologies
for
taking
a
little
bit
of
time
to
to
to
get
it
to
you
and
my
gratitude
to
those
who've
just
made
sure
I
have
it
in
front
of
me.
Perhaps
amanda
could
say
something
about
the
university
and
the
interaction
with
local
authorities.
It
may
well
be
that
we
would
want
to
look
at
that
more
closely,
but
if
amanda
has
anything
to
contribute
to
be
helpful,.
K
It
won't
surprise
you
to
hear
that
we
are
it's
something
we
are
very
conscious
of,
and
thinking
a
lot
about
and
we're
working
very
closely
with
the
universities
themselves
and
also
some
of
the
some
of
the
stakeholders
in
that
area.
To
do
some
scenario
planning
to
work
through
what
exactly
might
be
needed
now,
as
as
the
the
cabinet
secretary
has
already
alluded
to,
it
is
very
important
that
when
we
intervene,
it
is
in
a
targeted
way,
and
our
experience
in
our
learning
so
far
has
taught
us
about
looking
at
what
is
happening
in
a
night.
K
K
E
I
Thank
you,
convener.
I
would
just
like
to
ask
the
cabinet
secretary.
Obviously,
communication
is
absolutely
key.
It's
it's
one
of
the
major
ways
that
we
can
ensure
public
health
is
optimized
during
the
pandemic,
and
what
lessons
does
the
cabinet
secretary
feel
have
been
learned
today
when
it
comes
to
communicating
clearly
with
the
public
and
what
liaison
is
going
on
with
local
government
and
national
government
to
ensure
that
this
all
remains
the
case.
B
Well,
there's
very
strong
discussions
with
local
governments
have
indicated
they're
being
involved
in
guidance.
Local
government
is
a
key
partner
in
all
of
this,
and
you
know.
For
example,
there's
a
role
for
environmental
health
officers
have
been
involved,
treating
standards
officers
have
been
involved
and
there
is,
you
know,
there's
a
lot
of
pressure
on
local
authorities.
This
is
pressure
on
government
too,
but
I
think
it's
been
a
a
positive
discussion
and
and
debate
in
terms
of
communication.
B
B
A
I
B
It
is
it's
a
good
point.
I
I
think
we
are.
You
know
as
democrats,
keen
on
guidance
and
regulation
yeah.
We
would
like
to
persuade
people
to
do
the
right
things.
I
hope
today's
explanation
of
what
I
think
the
difference
is
between
the
two
has
been
helpful,
and
maybe
we
should
talk
about
that
a
bit
more,
but
I
think
for
for
our
general
message.
You
know
what
is
after
a
lot
of
thought
and
not
likely
or
ill-advisedly.
B
F
Thank
you,
computer.
If
I
could
ask
the
cabinet
secretary
in
terms
of
the
regulations
dealing
with
directions
to
local
authorities,
would
that
include
circumstances
where,
for
example,
I
have
been
contacted
or
infrequently
by
constituents
who
say
they
were
in
a
shop
or
why
shop
they've
never
seen
anybody
wearing
a
face
covering
is
all
very
lacks.
They
try
to
take
the
issue
up
with
relevant
officials
at
the
local
authority.
They
don't
feel
that
they
get
much
of
a
hearing,
they
don't
think
anything
really
changes
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
B
B
Undoubtedly,
if
people
are
worried
about
the
non-wearing
of
of
face
coverings
and
shops,
then
they
should
be
engaging
with
the
shop
and
with
the
local
authority
about
that,
so
that
there
is
engagement
there
and
the
local
authority
has
an
ability
to
to
deal
with
that
to
advice.
There
are
public
health
issues
and
their
explanation.
Encouragement
should
take
place,
but
if,
in
the
end
you
know
a
shock
is
a
you
know,
proven
vector
of
the
of
the
of
the
of
the
virus
and
will
not
act.
B
Then,
of
course
you
know
these
regulations
are
available
to
close
down
a
shop
as
they
would
close.
Anything
down.
You'll
buy
a
local
authority
if
they
were
not
operating
properly
and
remember,
however,
that
it
has
to
be
proportional
in
what
is
is
taking
place
and
it's
reviewed
every
seven
days.
So
this
is
where
things
are
particularly
bad.
There
is
proven
transmission,
you
know,
and
they
and
the
those
responsible
are
refusing
to
take
action
or,
worse,
are
saying
to
their
stuff,
and
they
know
this
does
happen.
Regrettably,
it's
rare,
but
it
does
happen
saying
this
stuff.
B
F
Yeah,
I
think
the
cabinet's
actually
for
the
answer,
looking
at
it
on
the
other
side
of
the
coin
in
it's
not,
I
suppose,
inconceivable,
perhaps
less
likely
that
there
could
be
erroneous
information
and
that
could
lead
to
action
being
taken
now.
I
know
that
there's
provision
for
there
to
be
an
appeal
in
their
circumstances,
to
the
sheriff
the
local
sheriff
court,
but
as
a
matter
of
practicality,
as
we
know,
there
is
quite
a
backlog
in
the
courts,
and
I
just
wonder
what
consideration
has
been
given
to
the
that
remedy
notwithstanding.
B
B
You
have
to
do
it
within
the
judicial
process.
I
mean
it
would
be
difficult
to
have
appeals
to
others
here.
In
these
circumstances,
particularly
as
it
will
hinge
on
matters
of
law,
you
know
it
were,
for
example,
the
actions
taken
by
the
local
authority,
both
necessary
and
proportionate.
I
mean
I
think
that
would
be
the
key
issue.
You
know
here
so,
and
these
are
not
perfect,
but
I
think
they
are
necessary
and
they
are
proportionate
and
we
should
that's
why
they
need
to
be
supported.
H
H
H
B
B
It
takes
a
amount
of
the
concerns
that
they've
got
and
I
think
that
would
be
more
eloquent
in
terms
of
of
what
requires
to
be
done
than
anything
I
can
say
here
so
with
your
permission,
convener
will
will
undertake
to
furnish
the
committee
with
the
guidance
and,
of
course,
if
there's
anything
the
guidance
that
there's
further
questions
about.
I
I
think
it
is
a
reasonable
assumption
to
make
that
I
should
be
back
at
the
committee
before
too
long.
H
H
A
I'm
I'm
I'm
very
grateful
for
that.
In
the
circumstances
there
are
no
further
questions,
so
we
now
move
to
agenda
item
five,
which
is
the
motions
on
the
made
affirmative
instruments.
Sorry,
yes,
the
motions
on
the
maid
affirmative
instruments
that
we
have
just
taken
evidence
on.
We
will
consider
each
motion
in
turn.
I
therefore
invite
the
camera
section
secretary
to
move
motion
s5m225
that
the
kerbin
19
committee
recommends
that
the
health
protection
coronavirus
restrictions,
aberdeen
city,
amendment
regulations,
2020
ssi
2020-253,
be
approved.
A
A
A
I
turn
now
to
the
second
instrument
in
this
gender
item
and
I
invite
the
cabinet
secretary
to
move
motion
s5m22574
that
the
covert
19
committee
recommends
that
the
health
protection
coronal
virus
restrictions
directions
by
local
authorities.
Scotland
regulations,
2020,
ssi,
2020
262,
be
approved,
moved.
A
A
A
A
Thank
you.
I
now
bring
the
meeting
of
the
coven
19
committee
back
to
order.
We
are
under
agenda.
Item
sticks,
which
is
consideration
of
the
following
negative
instruments,
which
are
as
follows:
the
coronavirus
scotland
act,
2020,
suspension,
muir,
burn
regulations,
2020
ssi
2020-260,
the
coronavirus,
scotland
act,
2020,
suspension,
adults
within
capacity
regulations,
2020,
ssi
2020-267,
and
the
coronavirus.
Scotland
act,
2020
eviction
from
dwelling
houses,
notice
periods,
modification
regulations,
2020,
ssi,
2020,
slash,
270..
A
The
procedure
for
negative
instruments
allows
40
days
for
the
parliament
to
consider
a
motion
to
a
null
an
instrument.
A
motion
to
a
null
has
not
been
laid
for
any
of
these
instruments,
but
this
is
members
opportunity
to
raise
any
specific
points
they
may
have.
As
part
of
our
formal
consideration
of
these
instruments,
does
any
member
have
any
comments
or
queries
they
wish
to
make?
If
so,
could
you
please
indicate
this
by
typing
r
into
the
chat
bar
now.
A
A
A
But
that
concludes
our
business
for
this
meeting
and
just
to
advise
everyone
that
there
is
no
committee
scheduled,
but
next
week
that
is
the
week
commencing
the
21st
of
september,
but
a
meeting
will
be
scheduled
for
wednesday,
the
30th
of
september
and
the
clerks
will
provide
members
with
further
information
about
this
meeting
here
in
due
course-
and
I
now
close
the
meeting.
Thank
you.