Chamber and committees

That is absolutely fine.

I take your point on widening our inclusion of voices that we hear. For your interest, we are trialling a model citizens participation panel. We have started that process and it is going well at the moment. We are getting good feedback from citizens directly from their communities, so that is in the offing. However, we will take note of your suggestions, which are helpful.

Allan, will you try again now, please?

I have a quick supplementary for our COSLA representatives. I am glad that you mentioned the good practice that is going on, especially around participatory budgeting, which I know has benefited many constituencies, including my own. Can you give the committee some examples of how you capture how effective that has been and how meaningful it is for the local people who are part of that process? How do you gather feedback?

That would be brilliant—thank you.

Good morning. Agenda item 1 is a decision on whether to take in private item 4, which is consideration of evidence heard, and item 5, which is an informal briefing from the Scottish Government’s bill team for the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill, in private. Do we agree to take those items in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Agenda item 2 is consideration of a negative Scottish statutory instrument. I refer members to paper 1 and note that there is no accompanying policy note or impact assessment for the instrument. As no member has indicated that they have any comments to make, are members content not to make any formal comment to the Parliament on the instrument?

Members indicated agreement.

That is fantastic. Thank you.

Thank you, Allan, and thank you for your patience, as well. I would like to move on to Heather Williams.

You are suggesting a continuous scrutiny cycle.