Chamber and committees

The bill will take some time, whereas we could produce policy in a matter of months.

Does anyone else want to contribute?

I will elaborate on that a bit. You might have seen the evidence that has been submitted by the hope instead of handcuffs campaign, which raises specific concerns about private transport providers. In essence, the concerns relate to the lack of regulation and reporting on transportation.

In relation to secure accommodation, the broad direction of travel has been towards raising standards, with more reporting and less use of inappropriate restraint, for example. However, the campaign has evidence of what it believes to be inappropriate use of handcuffs, specifically, and restraint in general by private transportation providers when young people are being moved between secure accommodation locations or between somewhere else and secure accommodation. The campaign has proposed to the committee and Parliament that there should be greater regulation and greater reporting specifically in relation to transport.

If private transportation providers were required to report every instance in which restraint was used, whether that was handcuffs or something else, which would be the appropriate body to which such reports should be submitted? Would it be the SCRA, the Care Inspectorate or local authorities? Would it depend on the individual circumstance, such as where the young person was being transported to and from?

The bill is relevant only to part of what is in the Promise, which goes far wider. In so far as it is relevant, does the bill go far enough to fulfil what is in the Promise?

I would like to follow up on what Fiona Dyer said about the evidence around the impact on young people under the age of 18 who have gone through the criminal justice system. Would Fiona or anybody else on the panel be able to expand a little on what the effect often is on the young person and on the rest of their life when they go through a criminal justice approach while they are still a child?

Do I have time to ask Megan Farr a brief follow-up question, convener?

I am keen to pick up on the Promise, which you mentioned. Before I do so, would Megan Farr or Katy Nisbet like to add anything?

My understanding is that there is new guidance or rules. Something new is being produced, primarily by COSLA. I presume that that is coming from the group that you referred to.

The question for the committee and for the Parliament is whether we can deal with that issue specifically through a non-legislative approach or whether it should be covered in the bill. I am interested in hearing your thoughts on whether what is coming will do the job that I think we all want it to do. Alternatively, should we consider a legislative approach, whether in the bill or elsewhere?

That would be useful, thanks. It is primarily of interest in relation to private providers but, as you said, sometimes they are not available. I would be interested in understanding what your process would be in those circumstances.