Good morning, and welcome to the 33rd meeting in 2025 of the Criminal Justice Committee. We have received no apologies this morning. Fulton MacGregor joins us online, and we are also joined by Pam Gosal.

Our first item of business is a decision on whether to consider in private at this meeting and at future meetings all the evidence heard on, and any follow-up correspondence or action from, our consideration of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service delivery review. Do we agree to do so?

Members indicated agreement.

We are about five minutes out from our scheduled finishing time, but—with the agreement of the next panel of witnesses, who are in the public gallery—I will extend the session for another five minutes to allow for some supplementary questions.

I have a quick question that goes back to the notification requirements in part 1 of the bill. Marsha Scott touched on the fact that MAPPA was not really designed for domestic abuse; I am interested in that. Sticking with you, Dr Scott, do you have any additional views on the provision to make all domestic abuse offenders—as they are defined in the bill—subject to MAPPA? As you touched on that earlier, perhaps you can give a fairly brief response.

I apologise for the session overrunning slightly, and I thank all our witnesses for an insightful opening session.

We will have a short suspension to allow for a changeover of witnesses.

I plead for a single response, because we are short on time and a couple of members still want to come in.

Fulton, do you want to come back in, or are you happy with that response? [Interruption.] I do not know whether you were able to hear me. I was just asking whether you wanted to come back in, or whether you were happy with that response.

Thank you very much, Agnes.

When you say “HBA”, I take it that you are referring to honour-based abuse.

I want to highlight the points that I made earlier with regard to the scrutiny that already exists above Police Scotland from the Scottish Police Authority. Police Scotland is accountable to the SPA and a range of other organisations. I am not sure that there is a lack of scrutiny, although I accept the point that the member is making about independent oversight.

I begin by acknowledging the cabinet secretary’s update on the appointment of Professor Alexis Jay as independent chair of the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group, which will work on a national review on group-based child sexual exploitation.

I very much support the Government’s motion this afternoon. However, it is important to reflect on the range of work that has already been undertaken to start informing how we shift the dial in this very complex space. In her national audit report on group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse, Baroness Casey said:

“The ... public are rightly appalled when they hear of group-based child sexual exploitation and expect it to be investigated thoroughly, offenders brought to justice and punished severely.

They, undoubtedly, also expect ... the right systems in place to understand child sexual exploitation ... and who is perpetrating it ... so that we can prevent it from happening in the first place.”

That audit made 12 recommendations in relation to tightening the law, bringing perpetrators to justice, data collection and use, and applying best practice across safeguarding agencies.

We have also heard today about the Jay review of criminally exploited children, which looked at the scale and nature of the criminal exploitation of children. It was an excellent review, with recommendations spanning across policy and practice at the local and national level, investment and whole-system learning. It said:

“What is required is a new system designed with the explicit purpose of tackling the criminal exploitation of children.”

I note that, during a members’ business debate earlier this year, which was secured by Michael Matheson MSP, on the review, no calls were made to hold an inquiry. It is important to highlight operation Beaconport, which is overseen by the National Crime Agency. That operation is bringing policing partners together south of the border in order to develop a more effective response to group-based child sexual exploitation. I hope that that will provide a platform for Police Scotland to do further work to examine relevant cases, past and present.

That is a crucial piece of work, and I especially welcome the update on self-assessment across key areas of practice within Police Scotland, including data analysis, investigation, disruption and resources. I anticipate that that work will inform the inquiry that has been announced today. At this point I commend officers and specialists in Police Scotland for their work in this specialist area of investigation. I know from personal experience that the work is harrowing, sensitive and very complex.

On the Police Scotland response and what Pauline McNeill’s motion relates to, I note the cabinet secretary’s response to Ms McNeill’s question about independent oversight. I point out that Police Scotland is one of the public bodies in Scotland that attracts the most scrutiny, not least from the Scottish Police Authority, His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland, various commissioners and, indeed, the public. I absolutely agree that a significant piece of work is required to further enhance our response to group-based sexual exploitation of children, so I am pleased to hear the update from the cabinet secretary regarding the appointment of Alexis Jay. I very much look forward to supporting that work.

I am pleased that there is now an opportunity to move forward collectively on the issue, thereby demonstrating our commitment to the public across Scotland that we are united in addressing it together, once and for all.

Will the member give way?