Chamber and committees

Thanks to everyone for those answers, they were helpful. I feel that I should be really clear: I was not for a second suggesting removing funding where things work; I was suggesting that funding should remain where it has been shown to work. That was my point. I would also say that I totally agree with Mike Corbett about teachers and schools being given the space to try things and to fail, because we know there is learning in that, too, so it is important to have opportunity and space to do those things.

No, I am not suggesting that for a second; I am simply acknowledging that there is poverty everywhere and that there is a fixed budget. I am saying that, from my perspective, I see evidence that that targeted assistance to my area, which was in great need, has made improvements. If we found that, down the line, spreading the money across the whole country was having an impact on those improvements or had resulted in the money not having a great impact, would that change your thinking around whether the support should be targeted or universal? That was my question.

I have one reflection from having previously been on the education committee. There are often calls for very specific things to be taught. That is not how our system works, which I guess also applies to the topic of relationships and sexual health. That is not something only for teachers to tell children about; it is a job for the whole community, or perhaps for families.

I suggest that we write to Education Scotland to ask how it is monitoring implementation of the current teaching resources. We might also want to hear from the Scottish Government on how the views of children and young people are taken on board and used to influence policy in this area. We probably also want to know when the public consultation will open and how it will be promoted to children and young people, and when the Government anticipates that the revised guidance will be in place.

I seem to recall that the education committee did some work in this area quite recently, although it might not have been that recently. Perhaps the clerks could find out. I realise that colleagues might wish to reach out to stakeholders, but I am keen that we do not duplicate work, so we should check on what has been happening in other areas.

What you have informed the committee of helpfully covers the main points that I was going to make, convener. I think that, in summary, two aspects of the petition are important and there are two reasons why we should keep it open.

The first aspect is around data. Obviously, public bodies have a duty to collect and use data appropriately. The second aspect is highlighted in the submission from Lesley Warrender and the submission from our colleague Michelle Thomson MSP, and that is about the centring of victims. Sometimes when we talk about data in such matters, it can all be a bit cold. At the centre of this issue are women who have been raped, and the consequences of some of the practices that are being spoken about here are, frankly, devastating for victims of that particular crime.

I suggest that the committee ask the Scottish Government for its consideration of the recent rulings of the inner house of the Court of Session and what implications they have for the recording practice of Police Scotland, the Crown Office and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service in relation to people who are charged or convicted of rape and attempted rape. The petitioner considers that the recent rulings of the inner house of the Court of Session place a duty on Police Scotland to collect data on biological sex in relation to people who are charged with rape or attempted rape. Can we ask the Scottish Government for its position on that?

Can we also ask whether the draft guidance on collecting data on sex and gender has been updated or finalised since it was published in December 2020, and whether there are plans to consider the potential need for further revision of the guidance following those recent rulings?

I would like us also to contact Police Scotland, the Crown Office and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service. As you stated, convener, we need to be clear about whether they have a clear and transparent policy relating to the data that they collect and the use that they put it to. Importantly, has that policy been equality impact assessed and is the equality impact assessment a public document? Have they defined in a clear statement how data is collected in relation to the sex of people who are charged or convicted of rape or attempted rape and how it is used?

This is a really important matter, on which we need to take more evidence. The availability of healthcare practitioners is an important issue. We probably also want an update on the commitment to embed medication-assisted treatment standards. Colleagues might also want to hear from the chair of the Scottish Drug Deaths Taskforce and, perhaps, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans.

I agree with the petitioner that the rights of people who are detained by the state are important. Certainly when it comes to healthcare, there seems to be a bit of a gap, which we need to explore.

Good morning, minister. I welcome your comments about community ownership and development, which is important. It came across that the petitioners felt pretty disenfranchised by some of what had gone on, so it is really good to hear you champion community involvement.

We have heard from you and from stakeholders that the biggest threats are from deer and non-native species. Will you say a little more about what progress the Government is making on modernising deer management legislation? What is the Government doing, through work with landowners, to prevent the spread of non-native species into woodland?

I will ask you a little bit more about mandatory reporting. We explored it before. The Scottish Government—these are its words, not mine—says:

“there is not a compelling case for the introduction of mandatory reporting in Scotland and previous evidence has suggested that there could be some significant unintended consequences for wider child protection issues.”

You gave the example of why the position for a child within your previous religious organisation would be different. Will you expand a little bit more on that and on why mandatory reporting would be helpful for a child in that situation?

Legislation would have to be brought forward, and I suppose that a member could do that. Given that the proposal is not in any manifesto and that the current Government is not intending to change the system, I think that we should close the petition.

Convener, I note for the record that Angela Cousins is my constituent and that we met in 2018 to discuss the matter.

Angela, thank you for being with us this morning. I am sorry for what happened to you. Thank you for being so brave in speaking up for other people.

I will ask you about the suggestion that the Scottish Government has made that it will consider and address any future recommendations made by the current inquiry to improve legislation, policy and practice. Will recommendations from the current inquiry be able to address the concerns that you have about what happened to you in the religious organisation of which you were part?

You say that children within the organisation would not talk to anyone outside it. Is that why you feel that mandatory reporting should be introduced?