Chamber and committees

I am very pleased to speak in the stage 3 debate on the Fireworks and Pyrotechnic Articles (Scotland) Bill. In the short time available, I want to make a few points about public expectation, scrutiny and the harm that is caused by fireworks.

I again thank the Criminal Justice Committee clerking team, Scottish Parliament information centre colleagues and our community participation and communications team colleagues, who supported members throughout what was a challenging journey, given the tight timescales and the breadth of the provisions that were being considered.

I also acknowledge the collegiate and good-humoured way in which members of the Criminal Justice Committee worked together, discussing and probing issues, challenging and disagreeing with one another, but always respectfully and always in the spirit of making the best law that we could with the provisions that were set out.

The bill does not ban fireworks—such a provision would be counterproductive and an unwelcome overreach in legislation. Rather, it seeks to bring about a culture shift that will enable us all to enjoy fireworks, while recognising that the public mood has shifted and that greater controls are sought to address the antisocial use of fireworks, the causing of distress to people, pets and livestock, and, of course, the targeting of emergency services workers who are simply trying to do their job.

There was strong support for increased control over supply and use in the majority of the 16,500 responses that the Scottish Government received to its consultation back in 2019. Subsequently, the firework review group made 11 recommendations, all of which sought to tighten legislative provision around fireworks.

Similarly, a desire for tighter controls was reflected in more than 1,600 comments in the Criminal Justice Committee’s digital engagement process. The emergency services, animal welfare organisations, the National Autistic Society, local authorities and the Blackburn bonfire night action group were all consistent in their desire for change.

That all helped to inform the committee’s strong desire to shape the bill. As was evidenced by the volume of amendments that were lodged at stages 2 and 3, members across the chamber were invested in the issue and truly represented their constituents and communities.

The fireworks industry was less supportive. Understandably, it voiced concern for the future of its businesses, in the event that the bill is passed. The bill makes provision for compensation to be paid to affected businesses. If the bill is passed, I am pleased that the Scottish Government intends to work with the industry to “lay the groundwork” for how support can be delivered to help businesses to adapt.

I turn to the issue of burn and blast injuries, which the minister highlighted in opening the debate. I feel that the issue received limited scrutiny during stages 1 and 2 but is a crucial driver for change.

The British Society for Surgery of the Hand highlighted the devastating life-changing burn and blast injuries to the face, hands and limbs that fireworks can cause—preventable injuries that are commonly sustained by children and young men and in communities where there is increased deprivation, adding to the long-term burden of disease and disability in our communities.

Care of Burns in Scotland stated that

“Despite public information and injury prevention campaigns, these fireworks injuries continue to occur at a steady rate. What could be considered as minor injuries cause suffering and devastate families’ lives.”

The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow considered that

“multiple elements”

in the bill

“would make a substantial difference in reducing harm”

including

“fireworks licensing which changes purchase from impulse to one of planned decision.”

The bill’s journey has not been straightforward, and there were many diverging views on the provisions. Should the bill be passed today, it is now for the Scottish Government to ensure that the legislation delivers on its intention of facilitating a culture change that supports tighter control of fireworks, but still allows the safe and enjoyable use of fireworks in all our communities.

How does investment in fee uplifts in Scotland compare with that in England and Wales? For those who are seeking access to legal representation, how does Scotland’s legal aid system compare with that of England and Wales in terms of scope and eligibility?

I agree that there was significant discussion on this issue in the committee, but I think that the member may also be aware of correspondence that has come in from the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow that sets out that firework licensing will change

“the purchase from impulse to one of planned decision, with the burden of responsibility on the purchaser to provide proof of age/suitability to purchase fireworks.”

Would the member agree that that makes a strong case for having a licensing scheme in place?

The creation of a national care service might provide opportunities to give greater statutory oversight of ADPs in the delivery of MAT standards. Now that the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill has been introduced, will the minister outline what steps will be taken to determine whether greater statutory powers are needed in this area?

I will bring in Russell Findlay, then I will pull everything together.

That concludes the public part of our meeting, and we will now move into private session.

Our next item of business is consideration of correspondence from Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Federation on the potential impact of new pension arrangements on police numbers. The correspondence was received following a request from the committee to the chief constable for an update on the matter after consideration of a Scottish statutory instrument.

I refer members to paper 1 and invite them to make any comments that they have.

Good morning, and welcome to the 21st meeting in 2022 of the Criminal Justice Committee. We have received apologies from Collette Stevenson. I welcome Jackie Dunbar to the meeting as a committee substitute.

I invite members to decide whether to take in private item 3 and any future consideration of progress made on implementing the committee’s recommendations in its report on the priorities for the criminal justice sector in Scotland. Are we agreed to take those items in private?

Members indicated agreement.

I am keen for us to have a discussion about members’ views on the content of the two letters that we have received.

Does anyone else want to come in on Jamie’s suggestion? I have mixed feelings about it. On one hand, I understand where you are coming from. On the other hand, I am quite keen that we do not conflate matters. The federation has written to us in very clear terms. I do not think that members have any doubt as to what its concerns are. If members are happy to write to the federation for some clarity, I am agreeable to that, but I am keen that we keep our consideration quite focused in the meantime. The other relevant option would be to write to the Scottish Police Authority to ask what it is doing about monitoring what is happening in the immediate term.