���˿���

I know that only too well.

I agree. Sometimes, we are going to ask questions, and we will get answers that we probably do not expect, as you say. As I have already said, it will be extremely interesting to see what a citizens assembly on local government finance comes back with when its members are presented with all the facts in front of them. It might not necessarily be an answer that any of us in this room would think that it might be.

On how we deal with and manage these things, I always use this example. Again, when I was a councillor, I was on Renfrewshire access panels for those with disabilities—there were such panels all over Scotland. Initially, I went into the room and found angry people who were not being listened to by the local authority. I got to the stage of getting them involved, exactly as you say. I said, “The town hall’s being renovated and you’re part of the planning process—get in there and find out how we can make it accessible.” It is about ensuring that people can be involved and actually deliver something. That is always going to be the most important thing.

Is that easy to achieve? No. Is it challenging? Yes, but nothing good in life that is worth doing is easy. We are all used to the political process—as you quite rightly said, Mr Sweeney—and how we deal with such things, but this is a completely different animal. It is a situation in which the public may, on certain occasions, give us answers that we will be surprised by. Is that a bad thing? Not necessarily. Does Government need to take those answers seriously when they come in? Yes, it does. Will that be challenging as we go forward? Probably, but we need to roll up our sleeves and get on with it.

Thank you, convener. If you will indulge me, I will make a brief statement on the bill. As members will recall, it is a limited, single-purpose bill. It seeks to ensure compliance with treaties that the United Kingdom Government has agreed in relation to candidacy rights in local government elections.

I welcome the Scottish Parliament’s unanimous support of the bill at stage 1 and the committee’s continuing scrutiny of it. As no amendments have been lodged for consideration at stage 2, I have nothing further to add.

There is nothing to add to the letter, apart from to say that it was our intention to lodge an amendment but, in discussions with the UK Government, we found that it would create problems and difficulties on the UK side as opposed to ours and that the UK Government did not consider the matter to be a problem. Rather than have an argument with it about something that neither of us considered to be a serious problem, we decided that it would be best not to lodge an amendment. That is a simple summary of the position.

Again, it is a small number of people. Looking at it logically, we would probably say that most people, when they come into the country, would go into the main urban settlements in Scotland, and those authorities could probably cope with the demand. It is difficult for us to get that data because, when someone comes into the country, they can move as they like. They might arrive in Glasgow but end up living and working in Birmingham or London, and we do not tend to keep data on that. However, in order to give you total clarity, I will bring in Iain Hockenhull, who might be able to give you some detail on the data that we hold.

Yes.

Currently, that is how we all put our names forward, and I am comfortable with the process. With all the checks and balances that local authorities do when people put their names forward for election, we should be in a safe place with that. However, as I said when I answered your second question, if people have issues with it, that might be something that we can look at. We would need to investigate that to see whether it is a problem.

I will just double check with my officials. [Interruption.] Yes, it will be.

I am sorry if I sound as though I am repeating myself, but it comes down to the limited number of individuals involved. Consider the general population and how many people put their names forward to local authorities, and then apply that to a part of the community where a limited number of people would proceed. An even tinier number of people would be affected should there be any discrepancies and there is a by-election because someone has put their name forward when they should not have.

I am not saying that that is impossible but, if I were a betting man, I would not be betting on the chances of that happening. I am not saying that it could not happen; it could in extreme cases, but the numbers are such that there would be very few people to whom that would apply. On the whole, compared to by-elections that currently take place in local authorities, I do not think that the number will change to a great degree.

To give you more detail and make you feel even better, I will bring in Iain Hockenhull.

Indeed—if we ended up in a place where I do not think that we are going to end up.