���˿���

I am keen to follow up on the issue of bus passes and other universal access, as it came up quite a lot during our engagement sessions. Justine, you have seen the question and I know that you are happy with it, because you worked in partnership with the team here to draft it, but is there anything else that you want to say before the minister comes in?

Thanks very much for that thorough response. I think that you predicted the supplementary question that I was going to ask, which was about your role with other departments and ministers. I am conscious that a lot of the questions that we have asked today have been about other ministers, and you have answered them really well, but I want to ask about the specific work that you are doing with ministers and how you are doing it.

I think that you have already answered this, but I will just give you a chance to reiterate your answer. Is the policy of universal free school meals—of which I am a big supporter, as is Justine and the other members of the panel—something that comes up regularly at the meetings that you have described?

I know that you are personally committed to that.

Good morning to the minister and her team.

My question is from Justine, who is here today. He writes:

“The panel think that the universal bus pass policy has been a great way to tackle inequality and poverty, and that a similar approach should be used for free school meals, including removing stigma and barriers by taking away token schemes and raising the age of free meals to 18. What has the Minister done to work with the Minister for Children, Young People and Keeping the Promise to understand the equalities impacts of the current approach to free school meals, and will she commit to carrying out work on understanding how cross-cutting successes like the universal bus pass can be replicated in other policy areas to alleviate inequality?”

Thank you.

I have a follow-up question to the discussions that we have been having. The response to the equality and human rights budget advisory group makes it clear that the Scottish Government does not intend to greatly increase direct engagement with the public on the budget process yet, through our engagement sessions and through doing things a wee bit differently, we have heard the citizens panel and the wider public ask for such engagement. The importance of understanding lived experience in the context of spending outcomes has been emphasised to us.

Do you acknowledge the calls for more opportunities for the public to engage more directly with the Scottish Government on the budget process? If so, will you outline why citizen-led approaches that reflect lived experience have not been incorporated into budget setting?

So, where is the stumbling block in the system? You are absolutely right to say that there is complete cross-party support for children not being in court as an ordinary occurrence. I sat on the previous session’s Justice Committee—as did Rona Mackay—when it dealt with the vulnerable witnesses legislation that you mentioned, as well as a number of other such bills. Where is the stumbling block in the justice system that means that kids are still getting taken to court, and how can the bill help to address the situation?

It feels as though almost all the witnesses are roughly in the same place. Some people, such as Marsha Scott, are opposed to the proposal for a commissioner but can see some good points to it, while others, such as Sandy Brindley, are for it but have given huge caveats.

I apologise to the convener, but I want to ask a general question. If the Parliament or the Government decided to withdraw part 1 of the bill, how could the main aims behind the proposal for a commissioner be achieved through existing statutory or voluntary mechanisms? Marsha Scott is nodding, so I will come to her first.

Following on from that conversation, I want to ask whether you think that the bill is about trying to make a culture shift in the justice agencies. After all, trauma-informed practice has been around for a long time; I think that most folk involved in the sector in one form or another are pretty clear about what it is, and the agencies sitting here today have been practising it with victims of crimes for many years now, and to a high standard.

Outside your agencies, though, the rest of the justice sector is predominantly concerned with the accused—or, ultimately, the offender, if the person is convicted. Indeed, I know that from my time as a justice social worker. Trauma-informed practice with offenders is a pretty important thing, as you can imagine, but even in justice social work, there has been only limited and minimal scope to carry out that kind of work with victims. How much is the bill trying to look at agencies across the board, not just justice social work, which I have already mentioned, but also the courts, to ensure that victims are taken more into account in a trauma-informed way?

Bill, it sounds as though you are saying that we need part 1 of the bill, which contains the provisions on a victims commissioner, to enforce part 2 of the bill on trauma-informed practice.