Chamber and committees

Thank you for those opening remarks and for the statement of reasons. The committee’s role today is to decide whether we agree with your statement of reasons not to consult. I have taken some time to look at the responses to the previous consultation. As you mentioned, a lot of them involve people telling their personal experiences, which is hugely powerful. I guess that one argument why the committee should accept your statement of reasons is that those experiences stand and, as you said, if you were to consult again, you would hear the same stories again. That is almost certainly true.

However, one purpose of consultation is to guide the drafting of proposed legislation. What timescales are you working to in bringing a bill to the Parliament? As part of that process, even if you did not formally re-consult, how would you get views from people with lived experience on the specifics of delivery rather than hear their very important life experiences?

I invite the committee to agree to delegate to me and the clerks the publication of a short factual report on our deliberations on the affirmative Scottish statutory instrument that we have considered.

Members indicated agreement.

Item 4 is consideration of a negative instrument. I refer members to paper 2. Do members have any comments on the Scottish Tribunals (Eligibility for Appointment) Amendment Regulations 2021?

As no member has indicated that they have any comments to make, are members content not to make any formal comments to the Parliament on the instrument?

Members indicated agreement.

Item 5 is continued evidence on PE1817, to end conversion therapy.

We will hear from faith groups that support the petition. Although we are hearing from four representatives, we have received a range of evidence from other faith groups, including representations from Jewish and Muslim communities. That evidence will all appear in our final report.

I welcome Rici Marshall Cross, clerk of the south Edinburgh local meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Quakers in Scotland; Jayne Ozanne, director of the Ozanne Foundation and chair of the Ban Conversion Therapy coalition; the Rev Elder Maxwell Reay, member of the council of elders of Metropolitan Community Churches and national health service healthcare chaplain; and the Rev Fiona Bennett, minister of the Augustine United Church and moderator elect of the General Assembly of the United Reformed Church. You are all very welcome.

Members should refer to papers 3 and 4. I invite each of the witnesses to make a short opening statement, starting with Jayne Ozanne.

Would the Rev Fiona Bennett like to talk about that?

Given that it was suggested earlier on that there might not be enough evidence, and that we needed to go away and do more research, it would be useful if we could pull together those references so that people can see the wider picture.

Thank you.

I welcome back to the meeting Pam Duncan-Glancy MSP, who is supported by Kate Monahan, co-founder of Because We Matter; and Robert McGeachy, policy and engagement manager with Camphill Scotland. You are all very welcome. I refer members to papers 5 and 6. We also have correspondence from three organisations asking that the draft proposal be allowed to proceed to the next stage.

I invite Pam Duncan-Glancy to make a short opening statement.

That concludes our questions.

We are now required to make a decision on whether we are satisfied by the statement of reasons. I remind members that our decision should be based solely on whether we agree with the reasons that are set out in the statement as to why a further consultation on the proposal is not necessary. I am satisfied with the reasons that are set out, and I know that Fulton MacGregor is satisfied, too. Do members agree?

Members indicated agreement.

Following on from the point that Jayne Ozanne, in particular, has touched on, I would say that, although the committee has taken a lot of powerful evidence, we are still keen to ensure that we are not missing anything. If there is a piece of evidence that any of the witnesses think that we should be aware of, they should flag that up to us.

Jayne Ozanne touched on the Cooper report—we should provide a link to the report to ensure that it is easily accessible to anyone who is following the committee’s work. Is there any other work that the Ozanne Foundation has done that you would want to flag up to the committee?

Thanks. I do not think that there was a question there for Pam Duncan-Glancy, but I saw a smile come on her face as Fulton showed his cards.