Chamber and committees

On the point about an independent review, you mentioned earlier that the proposals before us are based on OSCR’s perceptions. Are the proposals skewed in that direction?

Sarah Latto, I think that you said that there are aspects missing from the bill.

Good morning, and thanks for the evidence that you submitted in advance and for answering our questions today. My question is similar to what witnesses who were in the room earlier would have heard me ask. I am keen to understand a bit about the consultation process that led to the bill that is in front of us and how you would characterise your involvement in that. I will start with Rami Okasha, if that is okay.

Thank you.

Good morning, panel. Thank you for the evidence that you have given us in advance and for coming here this morning.

I want to explore a little bit the question of how we have got to this point and the review that, as has been indicated, has been part of the bill’s development. The Scottish Government has said that, although it is bringing forward this piece of legislation now, it will carry out a broader review in the future. Have you been involved in the development of the proposals in the current legislation? How would you characterise that involvement?

That question is for Jason Henderson, first of all.

I appreciate that. Thank you. Is there anyone online who wants to come in?

Do any of the other witnesses want to come in on that?

I appreciate that; that makes sense.

I will now go to Shona NicIllinein.

On the previous point, is there a mechanism somewhere in the middle that could be used so that, when people were disqualified, the world and their granny could not find the record of it but the burden on charities when they had to find such information would be reduced? Could there be a register that charities could contact OSCR about that, ultimately, could tell them whether a person appeared on it?

My second point relates to disqualification. I, too, was concerned about that, particularly given the impact that some charities can have on people who want to rebuild their life, part of which can be becoming a trustee. What would a compromise, waivered position look like? We probably accept that there need to be checks and balances in those areas. What would an easy waiver look like?

What would an independent review look like? What key elements would ensure that it was independent?