³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

I am sorry, convener—I thought that I was here to answer questions on the issues with the bill as it progresses, and those relate to the longer term. As I said, I completely appreciate the recruitment and retention issues with social work, and my colleagues are working through those. I have laid out steps that should help in both the short term and the long term, and I have been clear that we are listening to the voices of social workers and other key stakeholders in order to try to improve matters.

I cannot give an answer today on what I think the impact would be, because the hearings system redesign report and its recommendations are being considered at the moment. I have said that I will respond to the recommendations by the end of the year.

I appreciate that there are conflicting views on what having salaried chairs and paid volunteers would lead to, so that needs to be considered very carefully. However, I want to be clear that I hold those issues quite independently from the bill. The bill has been in the works for a long time now, and the hearings system redesign and the recommendations—there are nearly 100 of them—also require time and attention. We have to consider both things, as well as how they will impact on each other and on other aspects of policy. I understand the thinking that the recommendations could help the bill, but I am very careful about conflating the two. I consider them to be two very separate issues.

The hearings system has worked very well for a number of years. It has always risen to challenges in the past and I believe that it can rise to the challenges during the progression of the bill.

I am currently exploring how the courts will be able to protect a victim of domestic abuse by way of a non-harassment order and referral to a children’s hearing, which would be the disposal if an accused child would benefit from the compulsory measures in the hearings system. That is under live consideration.

It is not necessarily about telling you more. I would like Shona to elaborate on some of the points that I have made.

I completely appreciate what you are saying about sharing information with victims, but we need to make sure that it is right for the victim. Every situation is different, and I want the issues to be considered on a case-by-case basis. As I said, when it would be helpful to share information with a victim or when the information related to safety, I would like that to happen. However, it is about how we build the system and ensure that we get it right.

I will bring in Shona Spence to follow up on that.

I might bring officials in on that, because a lot of that work probably predates my time in post. I look very favourably on the idea of considering international examples. We do that across a range of policy areas, as there are things that other countries get very right. If there are aspects of what they do that we could follow, I would certainly be open to considering that.

I will pass over to Brendan Rooney to talk about the work that has been done in that regard.

I am sorry, but I am not quite clear on the question. You asked whether there is on-going consideration of—

Thank you for repeating the question. I cannot say what would happen, because such decisions would be purely for the Lord Advocate. Obviously, there will be increased numbers as a result of the Government’s bill, but I am not able to foresee or comment on how such decisions would be taken. Such matters would be purely for the Lord Advocate to consider.

Absolutely. As Mr Kidd has advised, provision of continuing care is a local authority duty, but I understand that there are concerns about this being absorbed into existing costs. We are all in extremely difficult financial circumstances just now but, as I think that I said in answer to your second question, this will absolutely be something that I am happy to monitor.

Yes, of course.

This is an extremely sensitive matter. It is also difficult because, when it comes to protecting the identity of deceased victims, there are, I think, competing wishes. There are times when people would want that anonymity, but I also think that there are times when people might want to raise the profile or awareness of certain things. As a result—and I know that I keep coming back to this—I guess that it is about striking a balance.

Considerations of the issue are absolutely live ahead of stage 2, although I would also note that the matter was not consulted on when the bill was introduced. Given the strength of feeling about the issue and given what I have said about the competing thoughts in that respect, this is a little difficult for me but, as I have said, these considerations are live ahead of stage 2 and I will be examining how best to proceed with the matter.

Absolutely. As I said, it is done on a case-by-case basis. When I say that I want to get it right for all children and young people, that includes those who have committed an offence and those children and young people who are present in the centre. It is about how that is managed in the centre. I am confident that secure care centres have a lot of experience in that regard. I appreciate what you are saying about increased numbers. We are not dealing with a huge number of children, but I appreciate that it is at a higher age. Secure care centres are absolutely equipped to deal with such situations at the moment, so I have confidence in them.

Equally, as I have said numerous times today, I am always happy to listen to concerns and hear about areas where people think we are not getting it right and to look at how we can get it right.