The next item of business is stage 3 proceedings on the Air Weapons and Licensing (Scotland) Bill.
In dealing with the amendments, members should have the bill as amended at stage 2, which is SP bill 49A, the marshalled list of amendments, which is SP bill 49A-ML, and the groupings of amendments, which is SP bill 49A-G.
The division bell will sound and proceedings will be suspended for five minutes for the first division of the afternoon. The voting period thereafter will be 30 seconds. Following that, I will allow a period of one minute for the first division after each debate. Members who wish to speak in the debate on any group of amendments should press their request-to-speak button as soon as possible after I call the group.
Members should now refer to the marshalled list of amendments, please.
Section 2—Requirement for air weapon certificate
Group 1 is on air weapons: requirements for grant or renewal of an air weapon certificate. Amendment 1, in the name of Alex Fergusson, is grouped with amendments 2 to 4. If amendment 2 is agreed to, I cannot call amendments 3 and 4, due to a pre-emption.
I thank the Presiding Officers for allowing these amendments, which were also lodged at stage 2, to be brought back at stage 3. We believe that they are worthy of further consideration, and I am grateful to the Presiding Officers for permitting that.
The purpose of amendments 1 and 2 is really quite simple: it is to save unnecessary bureaucracy, unnecessary expense and unnecessary use of police officers’ valuable time. Surely those are three worthy aims.
As we know, there are an estimated 500,000 air weapons in Scotland and presumably at least 300,000 people who own them. Each and every one of those people will have to undergo a process to be approved for and obtain an air weapon certificate. That is a pretty monumental task in anybody’s book, but when it is to be carried out by Police Scotland, which is in the process of reducing Scotland’s specialist resource of civilian firearms officers from an already miserly 34 to the almost unbelievably low number of 14, one has to query whether it is achievable. Even if it is, I have to question its necessity.
When the statistical data on recorded crimes and offences were eventually published not that long ago, they showed that airgun crime is at its second-lowest level in the past decade. There has been a 73 per cent reduction in airgun crime from its peak. It therefore seems to me that, if the purpose of the regime is to reduce airgun crime and we want to find the perfect example of taking a large sledgehammer to crack a fairly small nut, we need look no further than the proposal.
On top of that, I have not spoken to a single person who has been engaged in the debate or discussion who seriously believes that the licensing regime in itself will do anything to reduce airgun crime. Too many airguns will simply drop off the radar once the bill comes into force for that to be the case. Those that drop off the radar are unlikely to fall into the hands of people who will immediately rush to ensure that they have the necessary permit to hold an airgun.
It is clear that the bill will be passed today—I accept that entirely. Therefore, in order to reduce the bureaucracy, expense and time involved, I urge the Government to accept amendments 1 and 2, which would simply mean that existing and future holders of shotgun licences and firearms certificates would not be required to undergo a further process in order to possess an airgun.
If nothing else, that would reduce the number having to be processed by some 40,000. More important, if someone is already deemed to be a fit and proper person to own either a rifle or a shotgun—both of which are infinitely more dangerous weapons than any airgun—it is surely disproportionate beyond belief to require such a person to undergo yet another process and further expense in order to possess an air weapon as well.
My amendments would save time, money and precious police resources. If amendments 1 and 2 are unacceptable to the Government, I offer amendments 3 and 4 as a less satisfactory but nonetheless simpler compromise than the bill as it is published. What is not to like?
I move amendment 1.
Thank you very much. I received no prior notification that members wish to contribute to the debate on any of the groups of amendments this afternoon. I accept that members may press their request-to-speak buttons, in which case I will try to call them, but I must ask for brevity of contributions. I call Elaine Murray, to be followed by Liam McArthur.
My apologies, Presiding Officer. I did not realise that we had to notify you in advance if we wanted to speak on amendments.
You do not have to notify us in advance, but if we run out of time I cannot call members because the timings are based on what we know.
I will bear that in mind.
The Countryside Alliance has contacted us about this issue and I have had a couple of constituents contact me to say that people who already have a firearms licence should automatically be allowed to have an air weapons licence.
I resist the amendments in this group. Firearms regulations differ from the arrangements in the bill. If somebody has one firearm, they are not automatically allowed to have another firearm—another lethal weapon. Therefore, the fact that somebody has a licence for a firearm should not necessarily mean that they are automatically entitled to have an air weapon—another lethal weapon—without showing that there is a good reason for that.
I therefore resist the idea that somehow because someone has a licence for one firearm they should be allowed to have any number of air weapons without having to prove that they have a good reason for having them.
The bill does provide for some exemptions and quite rightly so, but I believe that the chief constable should be satisfied that someone has a good reason for holding a lethal weapon, because airguns of the size and power in question are lethal weapons and people should have to have a good reason for having one.
I understand that farmers in particular may feel that, because they tend to have a shotgun licence, they should be allowed to have an air weapons licence, but this is not just about the farming community; it is about the whole community in Scotland. It is important that the bill stays as it is and is not amended in this regard.
On the second set of amendments in this group—amendments 3 and 4—amendment 3 proposes substituting “must” for “may”. I think that “may” is the normal terminology in legislation, but in any case they are just another way of trying to do the same thing as amendments 1 and 2. I would resist all four amendments in Alex Fergusson’s name.
The minister will be aware of the concerns expressed by my colleague Tavish Scott at stage 1 about the proportionality and effectiveness of the bill as it stands. I very much welcome the fact that Alex Fergusson has succeeded in lodging his amendments.
From my experience, Police Scotland is indeed struggling to cope with the workload pressures already involved in administering shotgun licences. The amendments lodged by Alex Fergusson would at least offer some opportunity to make the bill a bit more proportionate and ease some of those workload pressures on Police Scotland.
I am therefore happy to lend the amendments my support.
Mr Fergusson has lodged a group of amendments that would fundamentally change the way in which we and the police intend to approach the licensing of air weapons under this bill.
The amendments reflect some of the objections that we have heard to the principles of air weapons licensing. Those objections were expressed by some of the shooting representatives on our expert consultative panel and by others who responded to our public consultation in early 2013. The Local Government and Regeneration Committee heard similar views during the first evidence session on the bill last November and again at stage 2, when Mr Buchanan lodged his amendments. However, as I said at stage 2, we believe that the measures and tests set out in part 1 of the bill achieve our aim of establishing a familiar, proportionate and practical licensing regime for air weapons.
Amendment 1 and the consequential amendment 2 seek to provide an automatic exemption from the need for an air weapons certificate for any person who already holds a firearms certificate or shotgun certificate issued by the police under the Firearms Act 1968. We considered that as a potential exemption from the licensing requirement when we first developed the bill, but we rejected the option for several reasons.
Under the Firearms Act 1968, for example, the tests for the grant of a firearms or shotgun certificate are different. The test for granting shotgun certificates is less stringent. There is no fit-and-proper-person test, and the onus is on the police to demonstrate the absence of a good reason to be granted a certificate, rather than the applicant having to show good reason. That is not the right approach to the licensing of firearms, including air weapons.
Also, firearms, shotguns and air weapons are used for different purposes and in different circumstances, as the police clearly explained when they gave evidence to the committee at stage 1. It does not necessarily follow that someone who has a legitimate reason for requiring a powerful rifle, for example, will also have a good reason for requiring an air weapon.
The bill gives us the chance to set out proper provisions for the regulation of air weapons in a modern Scotland. Applicants should be required to demonstrate that they have a reasonable and proper use for the guns and that they can be entrusted to use them responsibly and safely.
Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?
I will first finish my points.
Amendments 3 and 4 offer an alternative to the first two amendments in the group. They would require the chief constable to consider any applicant who holds a firearms or shotgun certificate automatically to meet the requirements to be granted an air weapon certificate without any further inquiry. Accepting those amendments would undermine the fundamental principle behind the licensing regime and the tests that are set out in it.
Having said all that, we have been clear that the new licensing regime should not place undue burdens on the police or applicant. We have made provision in section 5(2) to allow the chief constable to take as satisfied the tests that a person is fit to be entrusted with an air weapon, and that they are not prohibited from possessing firearms under the Firearms Act 1968, if they already hold a firearms or shotgun certificate.
We also make provision at section 9 to allow the alignment of air weapons certificates with those for firearms and shotguns. Coterminous certificates exist to align firearms and shotgun licences. The addition of air weapons will mean that all certificates fall to be renewed on the same date, reducing the burden on the applicant and the licensing authority. The fee for a coterminous air weapons certificate application will, as a result, be set at a lower level than that for a full application, as the police will be able to conduct all their inquiries at the same time.
Those measures go significantly towards the aims set out in Mr Fergusson’s amendments, but without compromising our overall objective of setting an adequate and fair test for the granting of certificates.
I have listened carefully to the cabinet secretary’s points. He has gone some way to addressing the concerns around burden, but Police Scotland is clearly struggling to deal with the workload pressures in operating gun licensing provisions. What he has set out will not satisfactorily address the concerns about the additional workload under the new regime. What reassurances will he give that Police Scotland is geared up to deal with the workload pressures that will come as a result of the bill?
The member should consider Police Scotland’s evidence to the Local Government and Regeneration Committee when it outlined how gun certificates are dealt with. There is a peak and trough in workload, and we are timing the introduction of air weapons licensing to fit into the period when a lower number of firearms and shotgun certificates require renewal.
Police Scotland is introducing a new database to deal with licences. It is confident that it can manage requirements smoothly, proportionately and reasonably. I am confident that, given the assurances that Police Scotland has given us, we can take forward the new regime. On that basis, I encourage Parliament to reject amendments 1 to 4.
I invite Alex Fergusson to wind up and to indicate whether he will press or withdraw his amendment.
I am grateful to members for their contributions. I say to Elaine Murray that the issue is not by any means just about the farming community, although we and other members will have received representations from that community. Indeed, many different people will consider that the extra burden that is to be placed on them is as unnecessary as it is disproportionate.
The cabinet secretary has pointed out, understandably, that the applicant has to show good reason for possessing a shotgun instead of the other way round, as happens in the current firearms licensing regime. At the end of the day, however, police officers or enforcement officers still have to decide whether that reason is good enough, so a burden is still being placed on the police.
I do not know whether the cabinet secretary is aware of this, but—and I will come back to this issue later this afternoon—I am reliably informed that Police Scotland is already failing to keep up with quite a heavy backlog of shotgun certificate and firearms licence applications. However much the Government might be trying to bring the processes together, I cannot see that this new process will be anything other than a very heavy burden on Police Scotland officers, when most of us think that they have better things to do.
We have made the arguments, and I accept that we are where we are. Nevertheless, I will press amendment 1.
The question is, that amendment 1 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division. As this is the first division of the afternoon, I suspend the meeting for five minutes, after which there will be a 30-second division.
14:46 Meeting suspended.
We move to the division on amendment 1.
For
Brown, Gavin (Lothian) (Con)
Buchanan, Cameron (Lothian) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (West Scotland) (Con)
Davidson, Ruth (Glasgow) (Con)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Goldie, Annabel (West Scotland) (Con)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Lamont, John (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McGrigor, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Milne, Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)
Rennie, Willie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con)
Scott, Tavish (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Allard, Christian (North East Scotland) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Beamish, Claudia (South Scotland) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Biagi, Marco (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brodie, Chic (South Scotland) (SNP)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Burgess, Margaret (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Campbell, Aileen (Clydesdale) (SNP)
Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Crawford, Bruce (Stirling) (SNP)
Cunningham, Roseanna (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dugdale, Kezia (Lothian) (Lab)
Eadie, Jim (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Fee, Mary (West Scotland) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Findlay, Neil (Lothian) (Lab)
Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Iain (East Lothian) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hilton, Cara (Dunfermline) (Lab)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Ingram, Adam (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alison (Lothian) (Green)
Keir, Colin (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
Kelly, James (Rutherglen) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacAskill, Kenny (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
Macdonald, Lewis (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Macintosh, Ken (Eastwood) (Lab)
Mackay, Derek (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
MacKenzie, Mike (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Malik, Hanzala (Glasgow) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Provan) (Lab)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Maxwell, Stewart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McAlpine, Joan (South Scotland) (SNP)
McCulloch, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McDonald, Mark (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
McDougall, Margaret (West Scotland) (Lab)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLeod, Aileen (South Scotland) (SNP)
McLeod, Fiona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
McMahon, Michael (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab)
McMahon, Siobhan (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McMillan, Stuart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McTaggart, Anne (Glasgow) (Lab)
Murray, Elaine (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Neil, Alex (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Paterson, Gil (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Pearson, Graeme (South Scotland) (Lab)
Pentland, John (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Robertson, Dennis (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Russell, Michael (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Simpson, Dr Richard (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Drew (Glasgow) (Lab)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Stewart, David (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thompson, Dave (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Urquhart, Jean (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Wheelhouse, Paul (South Scotland) (SNP)
White, Sandra (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Wilson, John (Central Scotland) (Ind)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow) (SNP)
The result of the division is: For 19, Against 96, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 1 disagreed to.
Section 5—Grant or renewal of air weapon certificate
Amendment 2 not moved.
Amendment 3 moved—[Alex Fergusson].
The question is, that amendment 3 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Brown, Gavin (Lothian) (Con)
Buchanan, Cameron (Lothian) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (West Scotland) (Con)
Davidson, Ruth (Glasgow) (Con)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Goldie, Annabel (West Scotland) (Con)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Lamont, John (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McGrigor, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Milne, Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)
Rennie, Willie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con)
Scott, Tavish (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Allard, Christian (North East Scotland) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Beamish, Claudia (South Scotland) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Biagi, Marco (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brodie, Chic (South Scotland) (SNP)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Burgess, Margaret (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Campbell, Aileen (Clydesdale) (SNP)
Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Crawford, Bruce (Stirling) (SNP)
Cunningham, Roseanna (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dugdale, Kezia (Lothian) (Lab)
Eadie, Jim (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Fee, Mary (West Scotland) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Findlay, Neil (Lothian) (Lab)
Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Iain (East Lothian) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hilton, Cara (Dunfermline) (Lab)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Ingram, Adam (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alison (Lothian) (Green)
Keir, Colin (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
Kelly, James (Rutherglen) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacAskill, Kenny (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
Macdonald, Lewis (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Macintosh, Ken (Eastwood) (Lab)
Mackay, Derek (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
MacKenzie, Mike (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Malik, Hanzala (Glasgow) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Provan) (Lab)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Maxwell, Stewart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McAlpine, Joan (South Scotland) (SNP)
McCulloch, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McDonald, Mark (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
McDougall, Margaret (West Scotland) (Lab)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLeod, Aileen (South Scotland) (SNP)
McLeod, Fiona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
McMahon, Michael (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab)
McMahon, Siobhan (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McMillan, Stuart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McNeil, Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
McTaggart, Anne (Glasgow) (Lab)
Murray, Elaine (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Neil, Alex (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Paterson, Gil (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Pearson, Graeme (South Scotland) (Lab)
Pentland, John (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Robertson, Dennis (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Russell, Michael (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Salmond, Alex (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Simpson, Dr Richard (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Drew (Glasgow) (Lab)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Stewart, David (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thompson, Dave (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Urquhart, Jean (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Wheelhouse, Paul (South Scotland) (SNP)
White, Sandra (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Wilson, John (Central Scotland) (Ind)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow) (SNP)
The result of the division is: For 19, Against 98, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 3 disagreed to.
Amendment 4 moved—[Alex Fergusson].
The question is, that amendment 4 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Brown, Gavin (Lothian) (Con)
Buchanan, Cameron (Lothian) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (West Scotland) (Con)
Davidson, Ruth (Glasgow) (Con)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Goldie, Annabel (West Scotland) (Con)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Lamont, John (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McGrigor, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Milne, Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)
Rennie, Willie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con)
Scott, Tavish (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Allard, Christian (North East Scotland) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Baxter, Jayne (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beamish, Claudia (South Scotland) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Biagi, Marco (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brodie, Chic (South Scotland) (SNP)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Burgess, Margaret (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Campbell, Aileen (Clydesdale) (SNP)
Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Crawford, Bruce (Stirling) (SNP)
Cunningham, Roseanna (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dugdale, Kezia (Lothian) (Lab)
Eadie, Jim (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Fee, Mary (West Scotland) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Findlay, Neil (Lothian) (Lab)
Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Iain (East Lothian) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hilton, Cara (Dunfermline) (Lab)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Ingram, Adam (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alison (Lothian) (Green)
Keir, Colin (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
Kelly, James (Rutherglen) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacAskill, Kenny (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
Macdonald, Lewis (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Macintosh, Ken (Eastwood) (Lab)
Mackay, Derek (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
MacKenzie, Mike (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Malik, Hanzala (Glasgow) (Lab)
Marra, Jenny (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Provan) (Lab)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Maxwell, Stewart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McAlpine, Joan (South Scotland) (SNP)
McCulloch, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McDonald, Mark (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
McDougall, Margaret (West Scotland) (Lab)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLeod, Aileen (South Scotland) (SNP)
McLeod, Fiona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
McMahon, Michael (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab)
McMahon, Siobhan (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McMillan, Stuart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McNeil, Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
McTaggart, Anne (Glasgow) (Lab)
Murray, Elaine (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Neil, Alex (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Paterson, Gil (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Pearson, Graeme (South Scotland) (Lab)
Pentland, John (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Robertson, Dennis (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Russell, Michael (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Salmond, Alex (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Simpson, Dr Richard (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Drew (Glasgow) (Lab)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Stewart, David (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thompson, Dave (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Urquhart, Jean (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Wheelhouse, Paul (South Scotland) (SNP)
White, Sandra (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Wilson, John (Central Scotland) (Ind)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow) (SNP)
The result of the division is: For 19, Against 100, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 4 disagreed to.
After section 41
Group 2 is on alcohol licensing: licensing objectives. Amendment 5, in the name of Patrick Harvie, is grouped with amendments 6 and 7.
I was prompted to lodge my amendments after the recent decision about the Arches venue in Glasgow. Members will be aware of the press coverage of Glasgow licensing board’s decision to revoke the Arches’ ability to operate past midnight, effectively closing it as a club venue, with the consequent job losses and the cultural loss of the venue to Glasgow and Scotland.
Members will be aware of the 40,000 members of the public who signed a petition calling for that licensing board decision to be reversed. [Interruption.]
Order, please. Could we hear the member?
Will the member take an intervention?
Not at the moment, thank you.
Members will also be aware of the open letter that was signed by more than 400 leading names in Scotland—
Will the member give way?
Not at the moment, thank you.
The letter was signed by almost 400 members of the arts community in Glasgow. They said:
“our main concern is that we are not satisfied that full consideration has been given to the potentially catastrophic impact this decision will have on the cultural life of Scotland.”
The letter goes on to look at the social as well as cultural benefit of the venue:
“Thousands of people from all over the country come together at the Arches at weekends, and it is widely regarded by leading professionals as one of the best venues in the world.”
Later on, it says:
“As a key venue at the centre of Glasgow’s remarkable cultural renaissance of the past 25 years The Arches importance to the future of the cultural life of Scotland cannot be overstated”.
Having discussed the situation with colleagues who serve on licensing boards, I intend to address two issues through my amendments. First, the existing licensing objectives focus on the issues of potential harm, crime and disorder, the threat to public safety, nuisance, the impact on public health and the need to protect children from harm. Those are important factors and licensing boards should take them into account, but positive factors can come from licensed venues and their cultural and social benefit to a community. Those factors should also be taken into account.
Amendment 5 would introduce the additional licensing objective of
“promoting social and cultural life.”
Is the member arguing that a venue that is causing problems should be closed if it is a stand-alone venue but allowed to stay open if it is linked to an arts venue?
I am arguing that our approach to licensing should take a holistic look at all the impacts of a decision, not just some of them.
Amendments 6 and 7 address a second concern that colleagues on licensing boards threw up. They often feel drawn to making a decision purely about one venue rather than about the wider impact. In this case, we are looking at the harm that is caused by recreational drugs. Most of the people who went clubbing at the Arches used a recreational drug, but it was a licensed and legal recreational drug—alcohol—and most of us also use it. Recreational drugs pose a risk of harm that we should take seriously.
The Arches has a long-standing record as one of the most progressive, enlightened and responsible venues in relation to illegal drugs. It reported issues to the police, made sure that medical facilities were on site for when someone got into trouble and trained its staff well. The idea that closing such a venue means that people who use illegal recreational drugs when they go out clubbing will instead go to the library or to a poetry reading is nonsense. People will use the same drugs in less responsible and experienced venues. Let us not kid ourselves—many clubs in Glasgow, and elsewhere, will not report it to the police when they find drugs on the premises; they will flush them. Let us not pretend that there are not irresponsible venues out there.
By taking our current approach to licensing, we risk increasing the incentive for such irresponsible behaviour. Amendments 6 and 7 ask that we balance the decision about individual premises with the wider impact on the community.
15:00
I hear what Patrick Harvie is saying, but to be precise we are talking about one venue operating in two different ways. As John Mason suggested, people say that the Arches nightclub pays for the cultural part of it—and obviously we are sorry about anyone losing their job—but surely it would be better to give money to the cultural part of the Arches, rather than doing as Patrick Harvie suggests, which is to say that if a venue is safe to use drugs, it is all right as a cultural and social venue? What about all the other social venues that do not participate in that?
The argument for additional arts funding to try to salvage some of the Arches business model is still on the table.
The case that I am making for amendments 6 and 7 is not the same as for amendment 5. Amendment 5 is about cultural and social life as a licensing objective. For amendments 6 and 7, I would make the same case for a purely commercial club venue, which had no artistic element as part of its business model, as for the Arches. If we have a responsible venue, which behaves well, trains its staff and provides medical facilities, do we really think that we are improving public safety by closing it down and ensuring that its customers will go elsewhere, to a less experienced or less responsible venue? It is not appropriate to leave the alcohol licensing regime to mop up the harm that is done by irrational drug laws in this country.
I move amendment 5.
Despite the fact that the Parliament agreed a timetabling motion, it is clear from the number of members who have requested to speak that the agreed time will not be sufficient. Therefore, under rule 9.8.5A, I am minded to accept a motion without notice to propose that the time limit be extended by 15 minutes.
Motion moved,
That, under Rule 9.8.5A, the first time limit be moved by 15 minutes.—[Joe FitzPatrick.]
Motion agreed to.
That will extend the time limit for subsequent groups. I notify members that the clock in the chamber was reset in error. The time used in debate on amendments began at 2.32 pm and the timetable for consideration of amendments will be taken from that time.
I appreciate the concerns that Patrick Harvie raises and I recognise that it is about the regrettable closure of the Arches in Glasgow. There is a discussion to be had about how licensing boards operate, the proportionate policing of Glasgow’s club scene and the responsibility of licensed premises to meet public safety demands. We have not had much time to consider the amendments, but I am not convinced that the bill is the right way in which to deal with those issues.
We may need to have the debate at another time. It should not be rushed and would need to include full consultation with all interested parties.
As I explained earlier, I understand about the cultural part of the Arches, but I have real concerns about the definition of “social and cultural life” in amendment 5. I know exactly what Patrick Harvie is saying about the Arches, but there are other forms of cultural life. Would the definition bring in strip clubs or sexual entertainment premises? I am worried that the amendment would go against everything that is sought by some of the amendments to the bill that I have lodged.
As Claire Baker said, perhaps we should have a further debate on this and look at the definition. However, at this late stage, the bill is not the proper channel to go through.
On amendment 5, I can understand the desire to promote sensible social activities, but does Patrick Harvie not consider that the aim of
“promoting social and cultural life”
is already achieved by adherence to the current licensing objectives on the public’s behalf?
Licensing objectives are intended to protect the public and that should remain their core purpose. I appreciate the principles behind amendments 6 and 7, but I have concerns about their implementation. The objectives are meant to protect the public from particular problems and licensing decisions should respond to those when necessary. The key phrase is “where necessary”: local issues should be responded to locally.
Will Patrick Harvie confirm whether the intention of amendments 6 and 7 is to clarify the board’s responsibility for its whole area or to encourage restrictions to be applied across a whole board area, even when many parts of that area will not have pressing licensing issues?
As has been said, it is hard not to be sympathetic to the aims behind Mr Harvie’s amendments, but this is not the time or the place to debate them.
I sympathise with Patrick Harvie’s motivation in lodging these amendments. The future of the Arches is an issue that has been raised by colleagues—including Drew Smith and Claire Baker—on the Labour side of the chamber. However, I would put two arguments to Mr Harvie. First, changing the legislation governing licensing to introduce a whole new objective of
“promoting social and cultural life”
would be a fairly significant development, which at the least deserves fuller consideration.
A second, related point is that it is not generally good practice to introduce new proposals such as this one at stage 3. Civic licensing is already a complicated area, and the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 has been amended many times.
I urge Mr Harvie, having made his point, to withdraw amendment 5.
I am grateful to Patrick Harvie for taking us through his amendments. The licensing objectives represent the values on which the Scottish alcohol licensing system is based, and they are central to the way in which licensing boards carry out their functions under the 2005 act.
The current licensing objectives contained in the 2005 act are
“preventing crime and disorder ... securing public safety ... preventing public nuisance ... protecting and improving public health, and ... protecting children from harm.”
By virtue of section 41 of the bill, the last of those will soon include “young persons”, too.
Patrick Harvie’s proposed objective of
“promoting social and cultural life”
sits very uneasily within an act whose purpose is the regulation of the sale of alcohol. It is difficult to see how it could operate in practice for licensing boards, the trade and the public. I am concerned that, while the aim is laudable, we should not be charging licensing boards with the promotion of social and cultural life. The existing licensing objectives concern themselves with mitigating the effects of alcohol. However, the proposed new objective does not have that same concern as its primary aim.
I am sure that we all expect boards to take decisive action to address alcohol misuse. Amendment 5 has the potential to create difficulties for licensing boards in deciding which objective should be deemed more important than another when considering an individual case, and to deter boards from taking the sorts of decisions that we would expect them to take.
I do not believe that legislation concerning the regulation of the sale of alcohol is the appropriate means by which to consider the promotion of social and cultural life in Scotland. In addition, I am of the view that the promotion of social and cultural life in Scotland is not dependent on the sale and consumption of alcohol. As such, I do not believe that that should become one of the licensing objectives in the 2005 act. I therefore ask Mr Harvie to withdraw amendment 5 and not to move amendments 6 and 7. If those amendments were agreed to, they would undermine the entire alcohol licensing regime and all that it sets out to achieve.
Michael Matheson’s final comment that the objective would undermine everything that the licensing regime sets out to achieve is a wee bit of hyperbole. Amendment 5 is intended to broaden the aims that we seek to achieve through the licensing regime.
The cabinet secretary says that the regulation of the sale of alcohol is not the place for the promotion of cultural life in Scotland. If that is the case, it is certainly not the place either for the promotion of the objectives of our country’s drug laws.
Whether members support or oppose our current drug laws, the fact is that the impact of incidents of illegal drug use was a critical issue that led to the licensing board’s decision on the Arches. Once again, I cannot accept the argument that moving recreational drug use from one venue to another increases public safety—certainly not if we are moving it from a responsible, well-trained venue to other venues that are less so.
One issue that the licensing board had to deal with in the case of the Arches was concern from the police. Would the amendments mean that the licensing board could disregard those police concerns, which were at the root of the decision that was taken on the Arches?
I would not want any licensing board in Scotland to disregard the concerns of the police, but I want what one member—I think that it was Claire Baker—called proportionate policing. Is it proportionate or intelligent to signal to other club venues in Glasgow, or elsewhere, that if they report incidents to the police instead of covering them up, they will be putting their licence at risk? At the moment we risk sending out a signal that irresponsible behaviour is less likely to lead to a licence being at risk.
Several members have pointed out that amendment 5 was lodged late, which I freely admit. Some may feel that the change it proposes is too big to introduce at stage 3. I felt that the amendment was a necessary response to recent events, and to challenge the idea that we focus only on harm. We would be wrong to ignore the harm that is caused by licensing the sale of alcohol, but we are also wrong if we fail to acknowledge the good that is done by licensing responsible, well-trained venues, and supporting them to operate even when there are problems. Those problems may be better dealt with on those premises than elsewhere.
I will press amendment 5 to a vote. Whether or not members support it, I think that this issue requires further debate and a recognition that we have been shying away from problems and pretending that our current approach to licensing solves them, when it manifestly does not.
The question is, that amendment 5 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Johnstone, Alison (Lothian) (Green)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
Rennie, Willie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Scott, Tavish (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Urquhart, Jean (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Wilson, John (Central Scotland) (Ind)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Allard, Christian (North East Scotland) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Baxter, Jayne (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beamish, Claudia (South Scotland) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Biagi, Marco (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brodie, Chic (South Scotland) (SNP)
Brown, Gavin (Lothian) (Con)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Buchanan, Cameron (Lothian) (Con)
Burgess, Margaret (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Campbell, Aileen (Clydesdale) (SNP)
Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP)
Carlaw, Jackson (West Scotland) (Con)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Crawford, Bruce (Stirling) (SNP)
Cunningham, Roseanna (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Davidson, Ruth (Glasgow) (Con)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dugdale, Kezia (Lothian) (Lab)
Eadie, Jim (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Fee, Mary (West Scotland) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Findlay, Neil (Lothian) (Lab)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Goldie, Annabel (West Scotland) (Con)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Iain (East Lothian) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hilton, Cara (Dunfermline) (Lab)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Ingram, Adam (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Keir, Colin (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
Kelly, James (Rutherglen) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lamont, John (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacAskill, Kenny (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
Macdonald, Lewis (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Macintosh, Ken (Eastwood) (Lab)
Mackay, Derek (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
MacKenzie, Mike (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Malik, Hanzala (Glasgow) (Lab)
Marra, Jenny (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Provan) (Lab)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Maxwell, Stewart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McAlpine, Joan (South Scotland) (SNP)
McCulloch, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McDonald, Mark (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
McDougall, Margaret (West Scotland) (Lab)
McGrigor, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLeod, Aileen (South Scotland) (SNP)
McLeod, Fiona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
McMahon, Michael (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab)
McMahon, Siobhan (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McMillan, Stuart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McNeil, Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
McTaggart, Anne (Glasgow) (Lab)
Milne, Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)
Murray, Elaine (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Neil, Alex (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Paterson, Gil (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Pearson, Graeme (South Scotland) (Lab)
Pentland, John (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Robertson, Dennis (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Russell, Michael (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Salmond, Alex (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con)
Simpson, Dr Richard (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Drew (Glasgow) (Lab)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Stewart, David (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thompson, Dave (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Wheelhouse, Paul (South Scotland) (SNP)
White, Sandra (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow) (SNP)
The result of the division is: For 9, Against 109, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 5 disagreed to.
Amendment 6 moved—[Patrick Harvie].
The question is, that amendment 6 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Johnstone, Alison (Lothian) (Green)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
Rennie, Willie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Scott, Tavish (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Urquhart, Jean (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Wilson, John (Central Scotland) (Ind)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Allard, Christian (North East Scotland) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Baxter, Jayne (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beamish, Claudia (South Scotland) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Biagi, Marco (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brodie, Chic (South Scotland) (SNP)
Brown, Gavin (Lothian) (Con)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Buchanan, Cameron (Lothian) (Con)
Burgess, Margaret (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Campbell, Aileen (Clydesdale) (SNP)
Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP)
Carlaw, Jackson (West Scotland) (Con)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Crawford, Bruce (Stirling) (SNP)
Cunningham, Roseanna (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Davidson, Ruth (Glasgow) (Con)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dugdale, Kezia (Lothian) (Lab)
Eadie, Jim (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Fee, Mary (West Scotland) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Findlay, Neil (Lothian) (Lab)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Goldie, Annabel (West Scotland) (Con)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Iain (East Lothian) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hilton, Cara (Dunfermline) (Lab)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Ingram, Adam (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Keir, Colin (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
Kelly, James (Rutherglen) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lamont, John (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacAskill, Kenny (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
Macdonald, Lewis (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Macintosh, Ken (Eastwood) (Lab)
Mackay, Derek (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
MacKenzie, Mike (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Malik, Hanzala (Glasgow) (Lab)
Marra, Jenny (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Provan) (Lab)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Maxwell, Stewart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McAlpine, Joan (South Scotland) (SNP)
McCulloch, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McDonald, Mark (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
McDougall, Margaret (West Scotland) (Lab)
McGrigor, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLeod, Aileen (South Scotland) (SNP)
McLeod, Fiona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
McMahon, Michael (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab)
McMahon, Siobhan (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McMillan, Stuart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McNeil, Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
McTaggart, Anne (Glasgow) (Lab)
Milne, Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)
Murray, Elaine (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Neil, Alex (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Paterson, Gil (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Pearson, Graeme (South Scotland) (Lab)
Pentland, John (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Robertson, Dennis (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Russell, Michael (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Salmond, Alex (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con)
Simpson, Dr Richard (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Drew (Glasgow) (Lab)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Stewart, David (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thompson, Dave (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Wheelhouse, Paul (South Scotland) (SNP)
White, Sandra (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow) (SNP)
The result of the division is: For 9, Against 109, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 6 disagreed to.
Section 45—Ground for review of premises licence
Amendment 7 moved—[Patrick Harvie].
The question is, that amendment 7 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Johnstone, Alison (Lothian) (Green)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
Rennie, Willie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Scott, Tavish (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Urquhart, Jean (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Wilson, John (Central Scotland) (Ind)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Allard, Christian (North East Scotland) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Baxter, Jayne (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beamish, Claudia (South Scotland) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Biagi, Marco (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brodie, Chic (South Scotland) (SNP)
Brown, Gavin (Lothian) (Con)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Buchanan, Cameron (Lothian) (Con)
Burgess, Margaret (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Campbell, Aileen (Clydesdale) (SNP)
Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP)
Carlaw, Jackson (West Scotland) (Con)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Crawford, Bruce (Stirling) (SNP)
Cunningham, Roseanna (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Davidson, Ruth (Glasgow) (Con)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dugdale, Kezia (Lothian) (Lab)
Eadie, Jim (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Fee, Mary (West Scotland) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Findlay, Neil (Lothian) (Lab)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Goldie, Annabel (West Scotland) (Con)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Iain (East Lothian) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hilton, Cara (Dunfermline) (Lab)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Ingram, Adam (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Keir, Colin (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
Kelly, James (Rutherglen) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lamont, John (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacAskill, Kenny (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
Macdonald, Lewis (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Macintosh, Ken (Eastwood) (Lab)
Mackay, Derek (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
MacKenzie, Mike (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Malik, Hanzala (Glasgow) (Lab)
Marra, Jenny (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Provan) (Lab)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Maxwell, Stewart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McAlpine, Joan (South Scotland) (SNP)
McCulloch, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McDonald, Mark (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
McDougall, Margaret (West Scotland) (Lab)
McGrigor, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLeod, Aileen (South Scotland) (SNP)
McLeod, Fiona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
McMahon, Michael (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab)
McMahon, Siobhan (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McMillan, Stuart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McNeil, Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
McTaggart, Anne (Glasgow) (Lab)
Milne, Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)
Murray, Elaine (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Neil, Alex (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Paterson, Gil (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Pearson, Graeme (South Scotland) (Lab)
Pentland, John (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Robertson, Dennis (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Russell, Michael (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Salmond, Alex (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con)
Simpson, Dr Richard (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Drew (Glasgow) (Lab)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Stewart, David (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thompson, Dave (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Wheelhouse, Paul (South Scotland) (SNP)
White, Sandra (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow) (SNP)
The result of the division is: For 9, Against 109, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 7 disagreed to.
Section 54—Overprovision
Group 3 is on alcohol licensing: overprovision. Amendment 8, in the name of the cabinet secretary, is grouped with amendments 9 to 11.
15:15
The amendments in the group are minor technical amendments concerning overprovision.
Section 7 of the 2005 act places a duty on licensing boards to make an assessment of overprovision of licensed premises in any locality within their areas and subsequently include a statement regarding it in their licensing policy statements. That allows boards to consider the unique circumstances of their areas, including distinct localities within them, and decide whether, based on local need, it is appropriate to restrict access to alcohol through limits on new licences, licences of a particular type or variations of existing licences within the entire area or identified parts of it.
It is important that the overprovision assessment is an effective and robust tool for licensing boards. In respect of the overprovision ground for refusal for a premises licence or for a major variation of a premises licence, our amendments to the bill at stage 2 made the wording of the 2005 act more concise. The technical amendments in this group have been lodged in response to concerns that were raised by stakeholders that our stage 2 amendments had, in reality, made the wording overly brief.
On further consideration, we agree that it will clarify interpretation if there is more detail at section 23(5)(e) of the 2005 act, which concerns the refusal of a premises licence on grounds of overprovision, and section 30(5)(d) of the 2005 act, which concerns the refusal to vary a premises licence on grounds of overprovision. We lodged these technical amendments to rectify that so that the updated sections 23(5)(e) and 30(5)(d) of the 2005 act would be clearer to the reader.
I ask the Parliament to support the amendments.
I move amendment 8.
Amendment 8 agreed to.
Amendments 9 to 11 moved—[Michael Matheson]—and agreed to.
Section 55—Duty of Licensing Boards to produce annual financial report
Group 4 is on alcohol licensing: annual functions report. Amendment 12, in the name of the cabinet secretary, is grouped with amendment 13.
I gave a commitment to the Local Government and Regeneration Committee at stage 2 to lodge an amendment that would impose a new duty on licensing boards to prepare and publish an annual report on the exercise of their functions. Amendment 12 addresses a concern first raised by Alcohol Focus Scotland and others, supported by the Local Government and Regeneration Committee, about the need for licensing boards to provide greater clarity about how they carry out their business.
John Wilson moved a non-Government amendment at stage 2 to oblige licensing boards to lodge annual reports on the exercise of their functions. The Government is sympathetic to the views that were expressed during the bill process, and I am grateful to Mr Wilson for agreeing to withdraw his amendment at stage 2 to allow my officials to carry out some informal stakeholder engagement before lodging the Government amendment.
Section 55 already imposes a duty on licensing boards to produce an annual financial report. Amendment 12 imposes a further duty on boards to prepare and publish an annual report on the exercise of their functions no later than three months after the end of each financial year. The amendment sets out what generally should be included in the report and what boards should have regard to in its compilation.
Amendment 12 also allows licensing boards to publish a combined financial and functions report, if they so wish. To ensure that the reports remain as effective and useful as possible, amendment 12 provides Scottish ministers with the power to make further provision about the annual reports using secondary legislation. We would expect to consult on the most effective and proportionate format and content before laying secondary legislation is required.
The annual reports will ensure increased accountability and transparency from licensing boards so that the public can see how they go about their business. I ask Parliament to support amendments 12 and 13.
I move amendment 12.
I thank the cabinet secretary for taking on board the aim of the amendments that I lodged at stage 2, which were based on discussions with Alcohol Focus Scotland. I welcome the cabinet secretary’s decision to lodge amendments 12 and 13 at stage 3, and I look forward to their being agreed to.
Amendment 12 agreed to.
Amendment 13 moved—[Michael Matheson]—and agreed to.
After section 59
Group 5 is on alcohol licensing: register of alcohol premises licences and personal licences. Amendment 14, in the name of Dr Richard Simpson, is the only amendment in the group.
I was not a member of the committee that considered the bill, but I observed the evidence that was given by a number of people at stage 1 about information that is available to the public. Amendment 14 would create a national alcohol licensing register to ensure that communities would have access to comprehensive information on licensed premises to help them to participate in the licensing process, particularly in relation to overprovision. Collating data at licensing board level in a uniform manner and publishing it centrally, preferably with information available at the ward or small data area level, could ensure a much more accessible form of information for communities.
Currently, licensing boards have to keep a public licensing register, but Alcohol Focus Scotland was recently able to locate only 16 publicly available registers, covering 19 of the 40 licensing board areas. The form and content of the information provided in the registers is highly variable, and not all the registers are available electronically. Alcohol licensing registers are potentially valuable tools for communities and other stakeholders to make use of in supporting their involvement in the licensing process, but there is a need to consider the form in which they are produced to ensure that they are as accessible and helpful as possible.
There is a national online register for tobacco outlets in Scotland, which can be searched by local authority area, postcode and type of premises. Examples of other possible approaches include mapping tools such as that produced by Lambeth Council, and the new website that shows alcohol and tobacco outlet density for small neighbourhood areas across Scotland. That website was created by a partnership involving the University of Edinburgh’s centre for research on environment, society and health—CRESH—the University of Glasgow, Alcohol Focus Scotland and ASH Scotland.
At stage 1, Dr Niamh Shortt from CRESH said:
“One of the most striking things in the documentation”
that the committee sent out
“was the very small number of applications that were refused. In 2011-12, only 21 licences were refused, whereas 347 were granted. In 2012-13, 12 were refused and 332 were granted. That shows the difficulties for local authorities in looking at”—
and fulfilling—
“licensing objectives.”—[Official Report, Local Government and Regeneration Committee, 19 November 2014; c 15.]
CRESH found that no data was available on licensed premises at the local area level, and that the data that was available was so variable that it took CRESH nine months to cleanse it before being able to put it into a research paper. Members might wish to look at the paper that has now been published, because it shows the relationship between the density—indeed, the overprovision—of licensed premises and alcohol problems in different areas.
It is a huge disappointment that communities have been unable to challenge overprovision largely because they have been unable to access the data. Access to total board area data and small area data is vital.
Amendment 14 would allow ministers to make provision for a national register to be completed by boards; it would not overburden licensees but would require boards to produce information in a specific format that would be publishable on the web.
Paragraph (3)(a) of the proposed new section that amendment 14 would insert would ensure that the information to be recorded not only would include the number of personal licences but could include data on the linear sales areas for off-licences and the number of drinking places available in on-licences.
I move amendment 14.
I will be brief. I welcome the cabinet secretary addressing the problem that is faced by individual licence holders who fail to renew their licences on time. I understand that that provision will be enacted swiftly, and I would be grateful if the cabinet secretary could publicise now—and widely thereafter—that welcome change.
I am grateful to Richard Simpson for lodging amendment 14, and I am sympathetic to the views that he expresses. However, I do not believe that it is appropriate to introduce the issue at this stage. The issue has not been brought before the Local Government and Regeneration Committee, nor has it been subjected to detailed financial consideration. I understand that a similar service in relation to e-planning has cost several million pounds to set up.
I am also concerned that the amendment, as drafted, is unworkable, because it incorrectly places a burden on licensing authorities to provide information when, in fact, the information that is required is held by licensing boards.
I assure the chamber that the Scottish Government is alert to the issue and that work is already in hand to go some way towards addressing it. Government amendment 12, which public health bodies such as Alcohol Focus Scotland pressed for, will impose a duty on licensing boards to report on the exercise of their functions and provide considerable information on the licences that are held, including occasional licences. We intend to consult widely to ensure that those reports are as useful as they can be without imposing an undue burden on licensing boards.
Furthermore, Police Scotland is already well advanced in rolling out its national Inn Keeper database. The police are a statutory consultee, which means that licensing boards will be provided with information from that national database.
The Scottish Government is working with a wide range of partner organisations to develop a business case for a national online licensing solution. Initial work has led to the development of a wider scope that is looking beyond just alcohol licensing to the civic regimes and central Government licensing regimes.
As all members will be aware, Scottish Government resources are limited. Therefore, rather than hastily commit to a specific project, we would do better to subject a major project such as that which is proposed to proper scoping and cost benefit analysis. That would allow us to assess the widest possible benefits to stakeholders while using effectively the resources that the Scottish Government, local authorities and others have in the area.
I ask Richard Simpson to withdraw amendment 14, on the basis that the Scottish Government already has work under way to develop an action plan for the delivery of a national licensing solution.
I am prepared to withdraw my amendment.
Under subsection (6) of the new section to be inserted by amendment 12—the annual functions report amendment, which we have just agreed to—it will be possible for ministers do much of what I am asking for, through
“the form and required content of reports”.
I understand from the cabinet secretary’s comments that that would be the case.
If communities are to participate fully in seeking to prevent overprovision, it is essential that they have that information. I therefore urge the cabinet secretary to pursue the development work that he has referred to as rapidly as possible and to ensure that we have an electronic system that allows proper access to the information.
On the basis of the cabinet secretary’s reassurances, I seek to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment 14, by agreement, withdrawn.
Section 60—Refusal to grant private hire car licences on grounds of overprovision
15:30
Group 6 concerns overprovision of private hire cars. Amendment 15, in the name of Cameron Buchanan, is grouped with amendment 16.
The amendments make it clear that if a licensing authority wishes to refuse a private car hire licence solely on the ground of overprovision, it must prove that there is, or would be, overprovision.
I consider strongly that refusing a private hire car licence solely on the ground of overprovision is anti-competitive and would hurt consumers, jobs and, indeed, the local economy. In the interests of compromise, I have worded the amendments to ensure that such refusals are kept to cases in which overprovision is certain.
Refusals due to overprovision would be against the best interests of the public for four reasons. First, restricting the supply of private hire vehicles would limit the ability of consumers to choose between different services and select their preferred option. That choice is crucial to increasing and maintaining standards of service in the industry. Secondly, preventing new entrants would prevent prices from going as low as they could do in a less restricted market, as an expanded supply of private hire vehicles would bring down prices and make such transport an even more affordable option for all consumers. Thirdly, experience elsewhere has shown that those lower prices would allow more people than before to make frequent use of private transport. That can be a great convenience and it would be a loss to the Scottish public if they were denied the same opening up of travel options that is available in other places. Finally, it is apparent that determining that there is overprovision in a locality would prevent economic growth and job creation.
If someone wishes to start work as a private hire vehicle driver, the licensing authority should not stand in their way just because other drivers have already entered the market and do not want competition for fares. For that reason, the amendments aim to provide some measure of protection against unfair licence refusals by ensuring that authorities can refuse licences on the ground of overprovision only where that is certain.
I move amendment 15.
It is clear from Mr Buchanan’s comments that he believes that a competitive free market trumps every other consideration for this Parliament. I urge colleagues to resist the amendments.
Mr Buchanan suggests that we replace a local authority’s judgment that it is satisfied that there is overprovision with a requirement for there to be proof of overprovision. The matter was debated by the committee at stage 2, when I believe that Mr Buchanan asked the Government to remove section 60 altogether. The Scottish Government agreed to provide further guidance. That was accepted by the committee, and I ask Mr Buchanan to accept the committee’s judgment on the matter.
I am grateful to Cameron Buchanan for explaining his amendments.
Section 60 will allow a licensing authority to refuse a private hire car licence where it is satisfied that granting it would result in an overprovision of private hire cars. I remain of the view that an optional overprovision test in relation to private hire cars is a useful addition to the taxi and private hire car licensing regime.
There are already appropriate checks and balances in place in relation to those who are unhappy with a decision that a licensing authority has made. Paragraph 18 of schedule 1 to the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 provides that, where a private hire car driver licence is refused, the applicant can require the licensing authority to provide reasons for that refusal and can appeal the decision to the sheriff court. If, during any appeal hearing, the licensing authority is unable to demonstrate that it has reasonably reached its decision, the sheriff can uphold the appeal and remit the case back to the authority to be reconsidered or reversed.
I am concerned that the amendments would create uncertainty in the minds of licensing authorities and might deter them from considering an overprovision test in relation to private hire cars.
It would be wrong to take that tool away from licensing authorities or to discourage its use. An overprovision test would allow licensing authorities to ensure that those entering the private hire car trade can have an expectation of making a reasonable income while reducing the temptation for private hire car drivers to attempt to operate in illegal competition with taxis. I therefore ask Cameron Buchanan to withdraw amendment 15 and not to move 16.
Having listened to the arguments on both sides, I would like to press amendment 15.
The question is, that amendment 15 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division. This will be a one-minute division.
For
Brown, Gavin (Lothian) (Con)
Buchanan, Cameron (Lothian) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (West Scotland) (Con)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Goldie, Annabel (West Scotland) (Con)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Lamont, John (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
McGrigor, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Milne, Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Allard, Christian (North East Scotland) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Baxter, Jayne (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beamish, Claudia (South Scotland) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Biagi, Marco (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brodie, Chic (South Scotland) (SNP)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Burgess, Margaret (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Campbell, Aileen (Clydesdale) (SNP)
Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Crawford, Bruce (Stirling) (SNP)
Cunningham, Roseanna (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dugdale, Kezia (Lothian) (Lab)
Eadie, Jim (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Fee, Mary (West Scotland) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Findlay, Neil (Lothian) (Lab)
Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Iain (East Lothian) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hilton, Cara (Dunfermline) (Lab)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Ingram, Adam (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alison (Lothian) (Green)
Keir, Colin (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
Kelly, James (Rutherglen) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacAskill, Kenny (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
Macdonald, Lewis (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Macintosh, Ken (Eastwood) (Lab)
Mackay, Derek (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
MacKenzie, Mike (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Malik, Hanzala (Glasgow) (Lab)
Marra, Jenny (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Provan) (Lab)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Maxwell, Stewart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McAlpine, Joan (South Scotland) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McCulloch, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McDonald, Mark (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
McDougall, Margaret (West Scotland) (Lab)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLeod, Aileen (South Scotland) (SNP)
McLeod, Fiona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
McMahon, Michael (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab)
McMahon, Siobhan (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McMillan, Stuart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McNeil, Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
McTaggart, Anne (Glasgow) (Lab)
Murray, Elaine (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Neil, Alex (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Paterson, Gil (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Pearson, Graeme (South Scotland) (Lab)
Pentland, John (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Rennie, Willie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Dennis (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Russell, Michael (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Salmond, Alex (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Scott, Tavish (Shetland Islands) (LD)
Simpson, Dr Richard (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Drew (Glasgow) (Lab)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thompson, Dave (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Urquhart, Jean (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Wheelhouse, Paul (South Scotland) (SNP)
White, Sandra (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Wilson, John (Central Scotland) (Ind)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow) (SNP)
The result of the division is: For 14, Against 102, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 15 disagreed to.
Amendment 16 not moved.
Section 61—Testing of private hire car drivers
Group 7 is on testing of private hire car drivers. Amendment 17, in the name of Cameron Buchanan, is the only amendment in the group.
Amendment 17 would prevent licensing authorities from requiring testing of the navigational knowledge of applicants for a private hire car driver licence, although it would allow other forms of background checks or testing.
Satellite navigation now allows drivers to navigate efficiently without extensive knowledge of roads, which makes requiring a knowledge test an unnecessary barrier to employment and growth in the industry. [Interruption.]
Order, please. I need to hear the member.
Furthermore, restricting competition would act against the interests of consumers by keeping prices higher than they should be.
Some people may prefer the possibility that they will pay a little extra to be driven by someone with extensive local knowledge who does not need to use a satellite navigation system. Those people are free to choose a taxi instead of a private hire vehicle.
The point is that people should be free to choose for themselves which type of private transport to opt for. The Government should not allow that choice to be taken away from them. We should allow the market to reflect customers’ preferences by letting them make their own decisions, rather than allowing licensing authorities to dictate what sort of taxi industry there should be.
I recall that the minister argued at stage 2 that the testing provisions should provide licensing authorities with discretion, and that tests could cover issues such as customer care and disability awareness so that private services can meet customers’ needs. I acknowledge those points. Amendment 17 retains that discretion and would allow such tests to take place, including checks to allay any fears about an applicant’s criminal background. That is very important.
The point is that allowing knowledge testing of all drivers is a distinct issue. It would probably become a method to shield incumbents from the competitive effects of a technological change. Customer preference for either local knowledge or technology should be left to the customer, and testing should be introduced only where it is in consumers’ best interests.
I believe that amendment 17 strikes the appropriate balance and therefore urge members to act on behalf of consumers by supporting it.
I move amendment 17.
I am grateful to Cameron Buchanan for explaining amendment 17.
I am mindful of Cameron Buchanan’s concerns that it is not desirable to create a barrier to entry to the private hire car trade that is too high. That is why the provisions on the ability to test private hire car drivers have deliberately been drafted to be flexible. Whether and what to test is at the discretion of the local licensing authority.
We are also happy to make the point that any test should be proportionate and necessary within the guidance that will accompany the legislation. Accordingly, where the local authority does not see a requirement to take forward a knowledge test of any kind for private hire car drivers, they are not required to do so.
However, I suspect that many passengers would quite rightly expect that a private hire car driver has a reasonable knowledge of the area and how to get about it. It is right to give local licensing authorities the ability to test that.
I remain of the view that the licensing authority is best placed to decide whether any testing of private hire car drivers should occur and what the test should involve. I therefore ask Cameron Buchanan to withdraw amendment 17.
I invite Cameron Buchanan to wind up and indicate whether he intends to press or withdraw amendment 17.
I sense some sympathy for my point of view. In view of that, I would like to press my amendment.
The question is, that amendment 17 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Brown, Gavin (Lothian) (Con)
Buchanan, Cameron (Lothian) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (West Scotland) (Con)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Goldie, Annabel (West Scotland) (Con)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Lamont, John (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
McGrigor, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Milne, Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Allard, Christian (North East Scotland) (SNP)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Baxter, Jayne (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beamish, Claudia (South Scotland) (Lab)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Biagi, Marco (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Brodie, Chic (South Scotland) (SNP)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Burgess, Margaret (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Campbell, Aileen (Clydesdale) (SNP)
Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Crawford, Bruce (Stirling) (SNP)
Cunningham, Roseanna (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Dugdale, Kezia (Lothian) (Lab)
Eadie, Jim (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Fee, Mary (West Scotland) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Findlay, Neil (Lothian) (Lab)
Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Iain (East Lothian) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hilton, Cara (Dunfermline) (Lab)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Ingram, Adam (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alison (Lothian) (Green)
Keir, Colin (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
Kelly, James (Rutherglen) (Lab)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacAskill, Kenny (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
Macdonald, Lewis (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Macintosh, Ken (Eastwood) (Lab)
Mackay, Derek (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
MacKenzie, Mike (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Marra, Jenny (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Provan) (Lab)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Maxwell, Stewart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McAlpine, Joan (South Scotland) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McCulloch, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McDonald, Mark (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
McDougall, Margaret (West Scotland) (Lab)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLeod, Aileen (South Scotland) (SNP)
McLeod, Fiona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
McMahon, Michael (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab)
McMahon, Siobhan (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McMillan, Stuart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McNeil, Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
McTaggart, Anne (Glasgow) (Lab)
Murray, Elaine (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Neil, Alex (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
Paterson, Gil (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Pearson, Graeme (South Scotland) (Lab)
Pentland, John (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Rennie, Willie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Dennis (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Russell, Michael (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Salmond, Alex (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Simpson, Dr Richard (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Drew (Glasgow) (Lab)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thompson, Dave (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Urquhart, Jean (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Wheelhouse, Paul (South Scotland) (SNP)
White, Sandra (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Wilson, John (Central Scotland) (Ind)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow) (SNP)
The result of the division is: For 14, Against 100, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 17 disagreed to.
Section 68—Licensing of sexual entertainment venues
Group 8 is on notice of sexual entertainment venue licence application. Amendment 18, in the name of the cabinet secretary, is the only amendment in the group.
Amendment 18 is an important measure in supporting community engagement in the licensing of sexual entertainment. The issue was raised by Cara Hilton at stage 2, and I undertook at that time to lodge an amendment at stage 3.
Although the current process already allows for robust notification procedures, with requirements for both newspaper advertising and notices to be publicly displayed, there are advantages in requiring specific notification to particular bodies that will have an interest in the licensing of sexual entertainment venues. There is a practical advantage in ensuring that important stakeholders, including violence against women partnerships and community councils, are notified of applications early, so that they have sufficient time to consider applications and to make such representations to the authority as they consider appropriate. [Interruption.]
Order, please. Can we hear the cabinet secretary?
There is also an advantage in that it will send a very clear message that groups that are identified as being appropriate to receive copies of the application, including violence against women partnerships and community groups, are at the heart of the licensing process.
Rather than identify particular bodies in primary legislation, my preference is for each local authority to identify which organisations in its area should be notified of applications, because local authorities are best placed to make that judgement. However, the statutory guidance that will follow the bill will indicate the types of bodies and organisations that should be considered, and my intention is that they will certainly include bodies such as violence against women partnerships. Local authorities will have to take that guidance into consideration when compiling their list of recipients. Local authorities will also have to have regard to their sexual entertainment venue licensing policy statement and the full range of objectives that are set out in that document.
I move amendment 18.
Amendment 18 agreed to.
Group 9 is on sexual entertainment venues: access of persons under 18. Amendment 22, in the name of Cara Hilton, is grouped with amendment 19. If amendment 22 is agreed to, I cannot call amendment 19, because it will have been pre-empted.
15:45
I thank the Zero Tolerance Trust for working with me on amendment 22, and I thank Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People, who has given the amendment his support.
The purpose of amendment 22 is to prevent under-18s from working in sexual entertainment venues. It would remove the option of young people being employed in those venues at any time and ensure that sexual entertainment venues cannot be accessed by children and young people at any time.
I recognise that Michael Matheson’s amendment 19 seeks to clarify the circumstances in which young people may enter sexual entertainment venues, and that it would oblige operators to provide a reasonable excuse, but I do not accept that that provides sufficient safeguards. When I lodged the same amendment at stage 2, there was some debate about the employment rights of, for example, an apprentice plumber who attended a job at a sexual entertainment venue. The reality is that that affects very few young people, but there will be significant risks to a large number of young people if the bill proceeds as it is.
The Zero Tolerance Trust has argued that allowing under-18s to be employed in sexual entertainment venues will in essence create a groomers’ charter by allowing venues to employ teenage girls to work as cleaners or in office roles and then to persuade or subtly coerce them to become performers when they reach 18. That is a real concern for vulnerable young women including care leavers, and for women who live with poverty or disadvantage. Even if sexual entertainment is not taking place, a young person who works in one of those venues will be exposed to sexually explicit materials and could be at risk of sexual exploitation, of being propositioned for sex or of being exposed to an industry that damages women and to an environment in which sexual entertainment is normalised. That could lead a vulnerable young person to come to the view that sexual entertainment is an acceptable form of employment for them.
Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People, Tam Baillie, has said that
“the approach being taken in this Bill towards young people being employed in sexual entertainment venues appears in direct contradiction to a range of key Scottish Government policies and legislation, including Getting It Right For Every Child”
and the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014. If we are serious about having an equal Scotland and about tackling domestic abuse and violence, and if we really want to make Scotland the best place for girls to grow up in, the Scottish Government must be consistent. Michael Matheson’s amendment 19 is well intentioned, but as Tam Baillie said, it has the
“potential to create more difficulties than it solves”.
The use of the word “reasonable” leaves the way open to wider interpretation. I think that that could be to the detriment of young people and that it will put more young people at risk. It is already the case that no one under the age of 18 can work in a sex shop under any circumstances. That provision should also apply to sexual entertainment venues. My amendment 22 would allow that to happen.
My amendment 22 is in the best interests of children and young people right across Scotland. I urge the Scottish Government and members to listen to the views of Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People and of groups including Barnardo’s Scotland, the Zero Tolerance Trust, Rape Crisis Scotland and Scottish Women’s Aid. Members should support my amendment.
I move amendment 22.
Amendments 19 and 22 follow issues that were highlighted by Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People ahead of the stage 1 debate and which were subsequently pursued by Zero Tolerance Scotland. Each concerns the position of young people in relation to sexual entertainment venues and the particular concern that a young person could be employed in such a venue—as a cleaner, for example—and then find themselves being drawn into becoming a dancer. At stage 2, I agreed to consider the matter further and to lodge an appropriate Government amendment at stage 3.
We have always made it clear that the bill’s intention is to tighten up the licensing of sexual entertainment venues, which have been treated hitherto in more or less the same way as any other licensed premises. That has meant that under-18s could perhaps collect glasses or undertake similar activities while the premises are open and the sexual entertainment is taking place. We do not believe that that is acceptable. That is why the bill, as introduced, made it clear that under-18s should never be on the premises while sexual entertainment is taking place.
I have fully considered the concerns that have been raised about the employment of under-18s in such venues, and in response, we have lodged amendment 19, which would remove the provision in the bill that would have permitted a young person to be employed by a sexual entertainment venue. Amendment 22 would do likewise, as Cara Hilton has outlined. Therefore, both amendments mean that under-18s should not generally be able to access such venues.
However, the Government amendment goes further in providing protection. There is a misunderstanding about how the law works in this area, which has led to some stakeholders confusing the impacts of amendments 19 and 22. I hope to make that clear this afternoon.
The Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 includes a provision for a reasonable excuse that will permit a young person to be in a sexual entertainment venue. Cara Hilton’s amendment would simply remove the provision in the bill relating to the employment without addressing the reasonable excuse in the 1982 act and would therefore permit a young person to be in such a venue at any time, including when sexual entertainment is being provided if that young person has a reasonable excuse. It will be a matter for the courts to determine what might constitute a reasonable excuse.
However, the Government’s amendment would restrict availability of that defence of a reasonable excuse only to when the sexual entertainment was not taking place. That is, under amendment 19, no person under 18, whether an employee or otherwise, will be permitted on the premises while sexual entertainment is taking place and only where there is a reasonable excuse for that young person will they be permitted within the premises when no entertainment is taking place. Cara Hilton’s amendment does not go that far.
Therefore, both the Government amendment 19 and Cara Hilton’s amendment 22 would remove the provision in the bill that permits an under-18 to be employed in a sexual entertainment venue. However, Cara Hilton’s amendment is less restrictive than the Government’s amendment in that it would allow the reasonable excuse defence to be applied at all times, whereas amendment 19 will restrict that defence to times when sexual entertainment is not taking place.
I am very grateful to the cabinet secretary for giving way. He will be aware of the children’s commissioner’s concerns, specifically in relation to that point. In his briefing the commissioner states:
“Amendment 19 also shifts the focus from young people in an employment capacity to young people more generally. There is therefore a possibility that venue owners could find ways for younger children and young people to be ‘legitimately’ allowed to enter sexual entertainment venues.”
How would the cabinet secretary respond to that specific concern?
Unfortunately, the children’s commissioner has got the law wrong in this area, because of the reasonable excuse provision, which is provided for in the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982, which has not been addressed. That is why the Government’s amendment 19 addresses that point.
Government amendment 19 makes it clear that no person under 18 can ever be employed in a sexual entertainment venue. It also makes it clear that no under-18 can be on the premises when sexual entertainment is taking place. Finally, it makes it clear that even when sexual entertainment is not taking place, an under-18 can be on the premises only if it is shown that there is good reason for them to be there.
For those reasons, I ask Parliament to reject amendment 22 and to support amendment 19, which imposes further restrictions to protect young people.
In speaking in support of the powerful words of my colleague Cara Hilton on her amendment 22, I simply draw members’ attention to the excellent briefing from Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People. [Interruption.] The minister made an argument based on legal advice that was remarkably unconvincing for me. He made an argument that there should be reasonable excuse—[Interruption.]
Order.
I have to say that the children’s commissioner has laid out a very clear argument.
He says that he is concerned that:
“A young person working in an SEV”—
a sexual entertainment venue—
“is likely to be at increased risk of grooming/exploitation by their employer or those associating with them.
Even if sexual entertainment is not taking place at the time the young person is present, it is likely that environment itself is unsuitable. For example, sexually explicit materials may be on display.
A young person will be working in an environment where sexual entertainment is ‘normalised’ and therefore may form a view that sexual entertainment is an acceptable form of employment for them.”
His conclusion is clear:
“A sexual entertainment venue is no place for a child or a young person.”
It is difficult to disagree with either of the children’s commissioner’s observations or conclusions. I urge members to follow the commissioner’s recommendations, to support Cara Hilton’s amendment 22 and to reject the minister’s amendment 19.
I call Cara Hilton to wind up, and to seek to withdraw or to press her amendment 22.
There is a danger that the bill could put children and young people at risk of harm. My amendment would remove the option of any under 18-year-olds being employed by a sexual entertainment venue. [Interruption.]
Order. Order! Allow Cara Hilton to be heard.
Amendment 22 will ensure that such venues cannot be accessed by children and under 18-year-olds in any circumstances or at any time.
I am not at all convinced by the cabinet secretary’s arguments.
Will Cara Hilton take an intervention?
No—I have no time. I am sorry.
We have plenty of time.
Amendment 19, by allowing venues a reasonable excuse to allow young people on premises, will open up many loopholes, which will put young people, especially young women, at risk of sexual exploitation. The venues are completely unsuitable for young people at any time.
Today, we have an opportunity to send out a strong message about the Scotland that we want. I want a Scotland that protects our children and young people from harm and exploitation and which challenges the objectification of women and girls. I urge the chamber to vote for amendment 22 and to reject amendment 19.
The question is, that amendment 22 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Baxter, Jayne (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beamish, Claudia (South Scotland) (Lab)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Dugdale, Kezia (Lothian) (Lab)
Fee, Mary (West Scotland) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Iain (East Lothian) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Hilton, Cara (Dunfermline) (Lab)
Kelly, James (Rutherglen) (Lab)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Macdonald, Lewis (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Macintosh, Ken (Eastwood) (Lab)
Malik, Hanzala (Glasgow) (Lab)
Marra, Jenny (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Provan) (Lab)
McCulloch, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McDougall, Margaret (West Scotland) (Lab)
McMahon, Michael (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab)
McMahon, Siobhan (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McNeil, Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
McTaggart, Anne (Glasgow) (Lab)
Murray, Elaine (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Pearson, Graeme (South Scotland) (Lab)
Pentland, John (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Simpson, Dr Richard (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Drew (Glasgow) (Lab)
Smith, Elaine (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab)
Against
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Allard, Christian (North East Scotland) (SNP)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Biagi, Marco (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Brodie, Chic (South Scotland) (SNP)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Burgess, Margaret (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Campbell, Aileen (Clydesdale) (SNP)
Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Crawford, Bruce (Stirling) (SNP)
Cunningham, Roseanna (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Eadie, Jim (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Ingram, Adam (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alison (Lothian) (Green)
Keir, Colin (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacAskill, Kenny (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
Mackay, Derek (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
MacKenzie, Mike (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Maxwell, Stewart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McAlpine, Joan (South Scotland) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McDonald, Mark (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLeod, Aileen (South Scotland) (SNP)
McLeod, Fiona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (West Scotland) (SNP)
Paterson, Gil (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Dennis (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Russell, Michael (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Salmond, Alex (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thompson, Dave (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Urquhart, Jean (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Wheelhouse, Paul (South Scotland) (SNP)
White, Sandra (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Wilson, John (Central Scotland) (Ind)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow) (SNP)
Abstentions
Brown, Gavin (Lothian) (Con)
Buchanan, Cameron (Lothian) (Con)
Carlaw, Jackson (West Scotland) (Con)
Davidson, Ruth (Glasgow) (Con)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Goldie, Annabel (West Scotland) (Con)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Lamont, John (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
McGrigor, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Milne, Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
The result of the division is: For 33, Against 67, Abstentions 14.
Amendment 22 disagreed to.
Amendment 19 moved—[Michael Matheson].
The question is, that amendment 19 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
There will be a division.
For
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Allard, Christian (North East Scotland) (SNP)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Biagi, Marco (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Brodie, Chic (South Scotland) (SNP)
Brown, Gavin (Lothian) (Con)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Burgess, Margaret (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Campbell, Aileen (Clydesdale) (SNP)
Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP)
Carlaw, Jackson (West Scotland) (Con)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Crawford, Bruce (Stirling) (SNP)
Cunningham, Roseanna (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Davidson, Ruth (Glasgow) (Con)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Eadie, Jim (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Fergusson, Alex (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con)
Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Goldie, Annabel (West Scotland) (Con)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Ingram, Adam (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Johnstone, Alison (Lothian) (Green)
Keir, Colin (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lamont, John (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacAskill, Kenny (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
Mackay, Derek (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
MacKenzie, Mike (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Marra, Jenny (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Maxwell, Stewart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McAlpine, Joan (South Scotland) (SNP)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McDonald, Mark (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
McGrigor, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLeod, Aileen (South Scotland) (SNP)
McLeod, Fiona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
McMillan, Stuart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McTaggart, Anne (Glasgow) (Lab)
Milne, Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)
Paterson, Gil (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Rennie, Willie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Robertson, Dennis (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Russell, Michael (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Salmond, Alex (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Simpson, Dr Richard (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thompson, Dave (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Urquhart, Jean (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Wheelhouse, Paul (South Scotland) (SNP)
White, Sandra (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Wilson, John (Central Scotland) (Ind)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow) (SNP)
Against
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Baxter, Jayne (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Beamish, Claudia (South Scotland) (Lab)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab)
Dugdale, Kezia (Lothian) (Lab)
Fee, Mary (West Scotland) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Gray, Iain (East Lothian) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Hilton, Cara (Dunfermline) (Lab)
Kelly, James (Rutherglen) (Lab)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Macdonald, Lewis (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Macintosh, Ken (Eastwood) (Lab)
Malik, Hanzala (Glasgow) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Provan) (Lab)
McCulloch, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McDougall, Margaret (West Scotland) (Lab)
McMahon, Michael (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab)
McMahon, Siobhan (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McNeil, Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
Murray, Elaine (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Pearson, Graeme (South Scotland) (Lab)
Pentland, John (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Smith, Drew (Glasgow) (Lab)
Smith, Elaine (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab)
The result of the division is: For 84, Against 28, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 19 agreed to.
16:00
Group 10 is on sexual entertainment venue licensing policy statement. Amendment 20, in the name of the cabinet secretary, is the only amendment in the group.
The Scottish Government strongly believes that the proposed licensing scheme for sexual entertainment venues takes a step forward from current arrangements by allowing the local authority to exert greater control over what goes on and what is permitted in its area. It has always been envisaged that a local authority that seeks to license sexual entertainment in its area will have to undertake a full and proper exercise to reach a determination of how to approach the licensing function. In other words, it will have to adopt a policy in respect of the exercise of its functions that relate to licensing sexual entertainment venues.
Amendment 20 seeks to formalise that by requiring the preparation and publication of a policy statement, and it also requires that, in preparing its policy, the authority should focus on listed objectives. Some of those objectives are traditional licensing issues—for example, prevention of nuisance and crime, and protecting children and young people from harm. We have also included the objective of reducing violence against women in order to make it clear to local authorities that that important issue is at the heart of the licensing regime, and that part of the licensing authority’s role will be to ensure improved working conditions and a safer environment for the women who work in those venues.
The Scottish Government will produce statutory guidance to assist local authorities in developing their policies. Once those policies are prepared, the local authorities must have regard to their own policy statements when exercising their functions in relation to the licensing of sexual entertainment venues. As a result, the policy statement will need to be considered when a list of persons or bodies who are to receive copies of licence applications is prepared, or when it is decided that such an application should be granted. That will ensure that the policy statement is fully embedded in the licensing process. Finally, the amendment also lays out the mechanics of how and when the policy statement should be published and reviewed.
I move amendment 20.
I thank the cabinet secretary for engaging with me and the Zero Tolerance Trust on this amendment and amendment 18. I am pleased that both amendments reflect many of the issues that I raised during stage 2 in respect of consulting violence against women partnerships and obliging local authorities to produce a licensing policy statement.
Amendment 20 is important, because it will ensure that local authorities, in offering a licence for a sexual entertainment venue, fully consider the wider public policy priorities including tackling violence against women and protecting young people from harm. There is absolutely no doubt that there needs to be a lot more public scrutiny before such venues are granted licences. I hope that the amendment will ensure that there is more joined-up thinking on the policy at local and national levels, and I am very happy to support it.
Amendment 20 agreed to.
That brings us to the end of stage 3 consideration of amendments.
Previous
Business Motion