���˿���

I will focus on the procurement process that the local authorities go through, because I have had experience of that myself. My one concern is to do with cross-border placements, because they do not align with the Promise, which ties in with all of this. Although I welcome what was said in the programme for government, I am keen to get more clarity on how many secure beds there are in Scotland. Are there enough?

The cross-border placement of young people is a challenge. Having worked in a children’s care home, I know that a substantial number of requests were made from down south to place young people up here. I feel that we are not looking after their wellbeing by doing that—that is the heart of the issue. I would therefore like to seek more clarity on that aspect.

Scotland Excel sets the procurement framework, and its approach is robust. It must meet certain requirements from the Care Inspectorate and the Scottish Social Services Council. A lot of times, local authorities are champing at the bit trying to get secure beds on a Friday. I also add that no local authority staff are available over the weekend, which can be a challenge. We need to ensure that the process around procurement is more seamless and that more secure beds are available so that young people are not getting put into the prison estate.

I agree with Jamie Greene. The letter mentions time in the open air and purposeful activity, but they are two completely different things. I would like to seek clarification of what the SPS says is purposeful activity. My understanding is that it includes physical training or down time, which is different from time in the open air. There is also the work element when people go to the work sheds and things like that. At that time, they are not out in the fresh air. I seek clarification of those two different elements.

There is still an issue when prisoners transfer from one health board to another if they transfer from a different prison and are progressing through. Despite Teresa Medhurst clarifying that their medical records go with them, I am not entirely convinced that the process is as seamless as the SPS says that it is. At the heart of the matter is the fact that many of them suffer from varying degrees of mental ill health and addictions. The approach should be seamless.

You have just touched on the issue that I want to raise. To put it in context, I have a Ring doorbell, which captures people passing by the door and whatnot. I have spoken to the police about that, as there was an incident in which people were loitering about outside at 2 or 3 in the morning, and the police said that they use the system a lot. Are you saying that that could be open to a complaint, because it involves facial digital technology? Could a complaint come back to me under data protection or GDPR legislation? In addition, the company, Ring, also holds that information. I suppose that I am going down a bit of a rabbit hole here, but where does it end?

Good morning, commissioner. You have touched on the significant legal and ethical issues in relation to the different uses of biometrics that have been highlighted in the code of practice. Will you talk about some of the work that will be undertaken on assessing legal and ethical issues in relation to emerging technologies?

No, not at all. It is all fascinating stuff.

You touched on your annual report, which ties in to our discussion. Who oversees the procuring of all those technologies? You mentioned local authorities, and we have also heard that only 26 per cent of biometric data in Scotland is held by Police Scotland. Do you have any input into the procurement process?

Thanks very much. That is really helpful.

Hi, Katy. The membership of the proposed group does not include a representative from the Conservative Party. Is there a particular reason for that?

I am pleased to propose amendments 56 and 57, having raised the issue of post-legislative scrutiny of the bill alongside my colleagues on the Criminal Justice Committee in our stage 1 report.

As a committee, we spent considerable time discussing the data available on the impact of fireworks and the importance of a post-legislative scrutiny review of the bill’s implementation. I therefore welcome the minister’s response to our recommendations on those issues, her willingness to give them further consideration and the opportunity to meet her to discuss them further.

Amendments 56 and 57 seek to place a duty on Scottish ministers to report to Parliament on the operation of the bill’s provisions within five years following royal assent. As we heard from the minister at stage 1 and as is outlined in the bill’s accompanying documents, it is expected that the provisions will come into force over the first two years following royal assent. In practice, that provides three years for gathering the required information and for monitoring and reporting on any change. That appears to me a proportionate timescale to allow for the implementation and initial operation of the proposed measures and, therefore, to ensure that the report that is submitted is sufficiently detailed and worthwhile. Amendment 56 also sets out that the report would be required to include appropriate information about criminal proceedings and convictions, the number of incidents in the reporting period and, importantly, the views and experiences of people in Scotland on how firework use has been impacted in their communities.

Amendment 129, in the name of Mr Greene, would, like my amendments, require Scottish ministers to

“review the operation and effectiveness of this Act.”

I believe that we are aligned in our desire to make certain that the legislation is working as intended, and to afford Parliament due levels of scrutiny, but I consider that commencing the reporting period on the day of royal assent, as set out in my amendments, will mean that there is no delay. The period is easily understandable and will not be tied to individual provisions coming into force. In my view, my amendments improve the transparency of the bill’s implementation, allowing members to develop a full understanding of how requirements are being met and to ensure that the legislation is working effectively.

I hope that members will support amendments 56 and 57.

Good morning, Franziska. It is so lovely to hear about Freiburg’s approach to being a sustainable city. I also understand that it is the sunniest place in Germany, so it sounds like a lovely place to live.

I want to ask about procurement. Freiburg’s website states that the sustainability of municipal properties and procurement has been a key consideration for many years. What changes did you make in your organisation and your working culture to establish a programme of energy efficiency improvements and changes to procurement practices?