Chamber and committees

That is a really interesting example.

Neil Stevenson, you can come in—very briefly.

Thanks for that. You said that you do not have carte blanche. In your written evidence, you state that you have some concerns about the bill and the fact that responsibility for dealing with complaints remains split between bodies will prevent the complaints process being “seamless”. It would be helpful if you could give a wee example of that.

We would welcome being kept informed about that. When you are in a position to issue timescales, please write to the committee and let us know.

That was helpful. The bill has been around for a long time and, as far as young people are concerned, I think that the good-will winds are, in a sense, behind it. Obviously, though, the committee has a duty to look underneath and work together on the detail.

On that note, I thank the cabinet secretary for her extensive contributions and her officials for appearing before the committee. That concludes this morning’s formal business, and I thank everyone again.

No problem. The main thrust of it is whether, through the bill, a citizen will be able to make a complaint in the least traumatising way possible. Will they manage to navigate the system, and what is the likelihood of their getting a clear outcome?

It is not just a rebranding, is it? The bill has in it a proposal to extend the powers of the SLCC.

Please indicate if you wish to do so.

I will continue on the theme of whether the bill is achieving its objectives. I am interested in the complaints system. There are huge issues with the current system, and I want to know whether the bill addresses those. From the point of view of the average person on the street, the system is quite impenetrable already. I have heard from many people who have made representations about their complaints that not only is the system difficult to navigate but getting satisfaction from it is extremely difficult at the moment. Will the bill seek to address that? I am particularly interested in underrepresented and marginalised groups—people who are the poorest in society or who are from ethnic minorities, for instance. I direct the questions to Naeema Yaqoob Sajid and Brian Inkster.

Agenda item 2 is consideration of a negative Scottish statutory instrument. I refer members to paper 1. Do members have any comments on the regulations?

As no member has indicated that they have any comments, is the committee content not to make any formal comments to the Parliament on the regulations?

Members indicated agreement.

Good morning, and welcome to the 22nd meeting in 2023 of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. We have received no apologies for this morning’s meeting.

Under agenda item 1, do we agree to take item 5, which is consideration of today’s evidence, in private?

Members indicated agreement.

No—that was very helpful.