Chamber and committees

I know that DBI has been an option for a number of years, and it is relatively straightforward. My understanding is that police officers can use DBI as a referral option for somebody they encounter who is experiencing poor mental health. Ultimately, that would normally be routed to the person’s GP, who would pick up the referral and engage with the person. There may be some other points of contact along that pathway. I know that it is considered to be a successful, user-friendly and well-established option. If it is helpful, and if members are happy to do so, we can ask for some more detail on DBI. I think it is quite an important tool in the toolbox overall.

Jamie, was your second point in relation to the enhanced mental health pathway?

On that note, we will move swiftly on.

Our next item of business is consideration of any final issues that we want to raise in our report on the supplementary LCM. Again, I will open up the meeting for members to raise any specific points.

One of the things that I would like to highlight in the report is the Scottish Government’s position that, where the UK Government intends to take powers to make secondary legislation in devolved areas, that must be accompanied by effective mechanisms to respect the devolution settlement and to recognise the responsibilities of Scottish ministers and the Scottish Parliament. Currently, the Scottish Parliament has no process for scrutinising that subordinate legislation. At this stage, it is not clear what information the Scottish Government will provide to the Parliament to facilitate such scrutiny.

I propose that we should make those points in our report. It is to be hoped that other members will agree.

Are members content for the committee to raise those points?

As there are no other questions, we will, as usual, move on to our next item of business, which is consideration of any specific issues that we would like to include in our final report on the supplementary LCM. For me, it would be a case of saying that the committee very much welcomes the Scottish Government’s position. It is an important step forward, and it provides clarity. Enforcement of the legislation will perhaps not be without its challenges, but there seems to be some agreement on the important role of data and evaluation.

Would any other member like to include any specific issues in our report? If there is nothing specific, we will move on.

Do members agree that the Scottish Parliament should give its consent to the relevant provisions in the Online Safety Bill, as set out in the Scottish Government’s draft motion?

Members indicated agreement.

Are members content to delegate to me the publication of a very short factual report on the outcome of our deliberations on the LCM?

Members indicated agreement.

Our next item of business is consideration of follow-up correspondence received from the Minister for Victims and Community Safety after we considered the issue of police searches for pyrotechnic devices outside football matches and other events. I refer members to paper 3. I again open up the discussion to members and ask if you have any issues or comments that you want to make on the letter that we received.

The result of the division is: For 6, Against 0, Abstentions 2. The committee therefore agrees with the Scottish Government that the Scottish Parliament should not give its consent to the relevant provisions in the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill, as set out in the Scottish Government’s draft motion.

Are members content to delegate to me the publication of a short factual report on the outcome of our deliberations on the LCM?

Members indicated agreement.

I will open up the meeting to allow members to come in with any questions.

It seems that no member wishes to ask a question. Okay. That was nice—short and sweet, and simple.

Okay; we can come back to that.

The importance of well-planned support for people on release from prison was a theme that the Criminal Justice Committee heard about at length during our scrutiny of the bill. In my constituency MSP role, I have engaged with a number of stakeholders on release planning and on how provision around the process of release could be improved. That is why I welcome sections 9 and 10, which seek to start that release planning at an early point and will drive consistency in the provision of throughcare support for people leaving prison. I am also clear that that will contribute to keeping victims and people leaving prison safe. In our stage 1 report, the committee broadly welcomed those sections, and we will be watching their implementation with great interest.

Another theme that was raised during the scrutiny, and which I feel very strongly about, is the importance of supporting people who are released direct from court, usually following a period of remand. I understand that, in those circumstances, release is difficult to anticipate and plan for, which makes accessing services extremely difficult for those individuals, rendering them on occasion extremely vulnerable.

I recognise that section 9, as drafted, would cover that scenario, as it covers release planning for remand and sentenced prisoners. However, I want to ensure that the Scottish ministers and, indeed, Parliament have additional levers if further action is considered necessary to make improvements in this area. I therefore consider that the Scottish ministers should have the power to make further provision in the area if they need to, particularly in relation to supporting people who are released directly from court following a period of remand, given all that we now know about how challenging that is.

My amendments 46 and 47 would hence provide ministers with regulation-making powers to make further provision in this area, should they need to. My amendments specifically reference the issue of release direct from court, following time on remand. I believe that Parliament must have a role in scrutinising any future use of the powers, so my amendments require that they be subject to the affirmative procedure.

I hope that those powers are not needed and that sections 9 and 10 work as intended. However, I feel that the additional powers would be helpful to ensure that the outcomes that we all seek—reductions in reoffending and better outcomes for people leaving prison—are achieved.

I move amendment 46.