���˿���

Those are the questions that we are trying to grapple with. Learning what not to do is as important as learning what to do.

I will ask another question so that we can learn from your experiences on the criminal offence and its relationship to revoking a GRC. Are you aware of any instance of someone who has revoked their GRC having had any hint of criminality in their initial self-declaration, or has that not occurred in the Irish experience?

Thank you for your time, Regina—I really appreciate it.

I will be quick. One of the proposed reforms that we are looking at is including the option for a “person of interest”—a person who is associated with the person who is applying for a gender recognition certificate—to have a say in the matter, whether that is a spouse or another close family member. I wondered whether you considered at the time of legislating, in 2015, whether the Irish legislation would include some kind of relationship other than parents for 16 and 17-year-olds. Was there consideration of enabling anybody else, in any other capacity, to have a say in whether somebody should or should not be granted a gender recognition certificate?

Thank you, Regina; that is really helpful. Thank you, convener. I will leave it there.

I realise that, as you have identified, there are challenges around what is reserved and what we have powers over.

To follow on from that, you have talked about building in connections and networks to secure resilience at local level. Are there alternative models of ownership or control that we should be looking at as well? Obviously, there is an important role for the big broadband corporations and for mobile connectivity to support what we are doing, but community ownership offers something adaptable, flexible and localised that can secure the resilience that smaller towns and villages and rural areas need. What are your thoughts on that?

That is fair enough—and that will be important as hybrid working continues after the pandemic.

I have a question about the use of the application of connectivity, whether it is broadband or mobile connectivity, which might link back to something that Fiona Hyslop was talking about. There are real economic opportunities emerging in relation to issues such as how we use 5G data to manage traffic flows, deal with accidents and better predict supply chain issues, and there are also links into health and food supplies. Where in the policy and strategy landscape is thinking happening around such issues?

Absolutely. One of my final points was going to be about data trusts and the ownership of data. Those are interesting questions that I do not know whether anyone has got to grips with, although I know that interesting thinking is going on around that. However, that is probably not a topic for today.

We are moving towards a digital economy in which everything relies on some kind of digital connectivity, whether it involves food production, livestock monitoring, traffic management or whatever.

There are interesting opportunities to think differently about broadband, mobile connectivity provision and charging. For example, there is a very clear desire for universal provision. How do you see a future Scotland doing universal provision?

Thank you, cabinet secretary; I will leave it there.

Good morning, cabinet secretary, and thank you for what you have said so far. I have a couple of questions that follow on from Fiona Hyslop’s questions. In our town centre and retail sector inquiry, which we are coming to the end of, and in thinking back over the winter, it has become clear that resilience is an issue. It is important to have infrastructure in place, but there is an issue about how we build into that infrastructure the resilience to cope with bad weather events such as storm Arwen and ensure that businesses and residents can move to omnichannel or multimodal interactions, whether that is home working or bricks and clicks in retail.

How does the Scottish Government ensure that we have not only the infrastructure but the support that backs up that infrastructure to ensure access to reliable and resilient connections, and fast access to the maintenance that is required if there are connectivity issues?

Good morning, and thank you both for being with us this morning and for the evidence that you have provided in your opening statements and in writing.

I have a couple of questions to ask, and I will start with Alice Sullivan. I know that other members are going to come on to talk more about data, so I am going to ask questions about the need or the case for change. Alice, in your view, is there a requirement for this reform in the first place? You talked a lot about the implications for data, so do you see there being a need for change if we can get some of the data stuff right? I appreciate that other members will ask about the data in a moment.

I want to come back to a couple of things that have been said. I will come to Robin White first.

You have spoken about age and about self-identification and self-declaration. Should there be any gatekeeping, whether that is medical, such as through the gender recognition panel and the assessment of information about dysphoria and other evidence, or should we completely disentangle the process from gatekeeping? How do you see that element of the bill working?