Chamber and committees

The British Veterinary Association is a member of the dog control coalition, which I have met regularly since last October. When we meet, we listen to its concerns. Concerns about capacity or a breaking point have not been raised specifically, but several other issues have been raised with us, and as we move forward, we will work with the coalition and through the implementation group, too.

Yes, of course.

Yes. We have found ourselves in a position that we never wanted to be in, and that has been highlighted in what we have gone through over the past couple of months. The issue is very emotive, and I know that there are very polarised opinions on it. I have already reiterated that we do not want to be in this position. Moving forward, we really need to look at the legislation and at reform.

Mr Doris and I have discussed that at length. One of the unintended consequences was to do with what happened if somebody died. That was not covered in the legislation that came into force on 31 January in England and Wales; it came up later and we have been able to pick up on it and include it in our legislation.

As we go through the process, a few things have been highlighted, one of which is the issue that Mr Doris raises. My understanding is that, to legislate for that through the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, we would need primary legislation, not secondary legislation. Perhaps Jim Wilson could comment on that.

I think that there is a need for a reform of dog legislation so, yes, everything would be considered.

We can definitely look into it.

Ms Dowey raises a valid point. She will know that we have replicated what the UK Government implemented at the end of January. I do not think that there was any provision for, as such, vetting dog owners who apply for exemption certificates. I go back to the point that I keep reiterating: that demonstrates the need for a review of legislation relating to dogs, because there are some irresponsible dog owners who should not be dog owners.

It should be automatic. Any child who is going through the process will be entitled to legal aid.

Good morning. I congratulate you on your new role, convener.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to the committee about the draft Legal Aid (Miscellaneous Amendment) (Scotland) Regulations 2024, which have been lodged to deliver changes to existing legal aid regulations, primarily to ensure continued access to justice in Scotland.

First, the regulations provide for children’s legal aid to be automatically available to the child in a children’s hearing system case in which a pre-hearing panel or the children’s hearing is considering the imposition of a compulsory supervision order that includes a movement restriction condition. The Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Bill seeks to ensure that 16 and 17-year-olds will not be sent to young offenders institutions from 2024 onwards. In order to achieve that, it is likely that there will be an increased use of movement restriction conditions. Legal aid is currently automatically available for children if a pre-hearing panel or children’s hearing considers that it might be necessary to impose a compulsory supervision order that will include a secure accommodation authorisation. However, it is not available in cases in which the panel or hearing is considering a compulsory supervision order that includes a movement restriction condition.

Secondly, the regulations make provision to uplift the current counsel accommodation allowance. Existing regulations provide that counsel who must travel to appear in cases, such as when the High Court goes on circuit and sits outside the central belt, may claim accommodation and subsistence allowance. It has become apparent that, in a number of instances, the current allowance is insufficient to cover the costs of accommodation. The regulations raise the accommodation allowance and introduce a new provision to allow for it to be exceeded if certain conditions are met, including the condition that counsel has received the prior approval of the Scottish Legal Aid Board. That will allow the board the flexibility to approve hotel costs above the standard limit, albeit that it is predicted that that will be a very rare occurrence.

Finally, regulations introduce specific counsel fees for written submissions when they are required by the court. In particularly complex or technical cases, albeit rarely, the court has requested written submissions in preparation for a trial. Due to the nature of the submissions, the preparation that is involved can take several hours or, in some cases, days. Currently, there is no separate fee for that work; it is simply subsumed into the preliminary hearing preparation fee. The regulations will amend the fee table to provide fees for junior and senior counsel to be payable for criminal cases in which a written submission has been requested by the court.

That gives you a brief overview of the regulations and their context, and I am happy to answer any questions.

My understanding is that it will be automatic, but I will bring one of my officials in on that.