Chamber and committees

I accept what it says; witnesses are more than welcome to give their opinion. I have already said that the numbers fluctuate, so I do not think that there are inaccuracies, but the costs need to be updated.

That is fine. Thank you, convener. I am happy to get to your question.

I know that that issue was raised during the evidence sessions and in written evidence. As I said, following careful consideration of the responses to the consultation, the Scottish Government is content that additional legislative provision in relation to restraint is not necessary to ensure the safety of the child and others. That is because an overly prescriptive approach to minimising restraint practices could have adverse consequences in relation to escalation and criminalisation. Instead, ministers consider that a blended framework of regulation, guidance, practice support and precise reporting is likely to serve Scotland’s children best.

Work is on-going with partners to reduce and, where possible, eliminate the use of restraint with children in care. That includes working with the Scottish physical restraint action group to explore definitions of restraint along with the availability of data, training and support.

There are no inaccuracies. It needs to be—

Yes—it needs to be updated.

Sorry?

I think that that would make sense, if it is decided that it would be better to have a regulated service. At the moment, as you have mentioned, information on the use of handcuffs on secure transport is organised by local authorities and is not held centrally, so there are issues around that. The short answer to your question is yes—that could be considered.

No—I do not accept that. You asked me whether I accepted what COSLA said, and I said that I do. Witnesses are free to say what—

It is factual in its context, yes, but as I said—

We are listening to views and—as I have made clear throughout the entire committee meeting—we are happy to look at the matter as we go forward. There are no plans for what you describe at the moment, but that can be addressed if the requirement is there.

Yes—if they require extra funding, that is simply the case. As I have said, that will have to be looked at once the bill has progressed.