Chamber and committees

Thanks very much for that update. The access to pensions by Police Scotland officers is an issue that the committee has looked at in the past. On the basis of your update, I am more than happy for the committee to write to Ivan McKee, as Minister for Public Finance, on the issues that you have raised.

Before we move on, I want to confirm that members are happy that the SSI comes into force. In particular, I want to confirm that with Liam Kerr, because he is joining us online.

Good morning, and welcome to the 13th meeting in 2025 of the Criminal Justice Committee. We have received apologies from Pauline McNeill, and Liam Kerr joins us remotely.

Our first item of business is a decision on whether to take in private item 4, which is consideration of our work programme. Do we agree to take that item in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you for the question. The cross-committee group on drug deaths and drug harm, which you are obviously aware of, has had oversight of the journey of the people’s panel, to a certain extent, and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, who currently covers the drug policy brief, has already attended meetings of the cross-committee group and we have taken evidence from him. Likewise, we have invited a group of panel members to contribute their reflections on the panel process to the cross-committee group.

It is certainly the intention of the cross-committee group to continue tracking progress on the recommendations. As you will know from paper 2, the Government has accepted—either in principle or fully—more or less all the recommendations, with the exception of the recommendation that was made about the point that we are discussing today. Rest assured that there will be continued monitoring on the back of the published report.

Our next item of business is the consideration of a Scottish statutory instrument that is subject to the negative procedure. I refer members to paper 1, which sets out the purpose of the regulations. I declare an interest, which is that I am a former police officer.

Do members wish to make any recommendations in relation to the negative instrument, or are we content that it comes into force?

Will the cabinet secretary provide an update on the assessment that has been made thus far of the impact of the 2025 act in relieving some of the acute pressures that are currently being experienced in our prison estate?

I am very pleased that we are having this debate on the international situation. I have never understood why we have not spent a bit more time debating issues that impact Scotland in the international space and that have the potential to threaten our democracy, our security and our future. That said, I commend the scrutiny that has been undertaken by the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee on a range of issues, such as Brexit, the implications of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 and the review of the EU-UK trade and co-operation agreement.

However, across the world, democratic systems are under pressure, with fundamental principles being challenged and, in some cases, actively undermined. Where does Scotland see itself in all that? How do we remain safe and prosperous? I propose that we give it less passing attention and instead recognise how our domestic policy can and should intersect more closely with international policy across a range of areas, including defence and the security of our energy infrastructure.

Scotland is a peaceful and prosperous country, but we are not immune to the impact of the global events and conflict that have been raised by colleagues this afternoon, such as those playing out in Gaza, Ukraine and Sudan, or to the implications of globalisation withering on the vine, courtesy of US tariffs. Some might welcome that, of course.

On energy infrastructure security, the UK strategic defence review is considering the reforms that are needed to meet the challenges of the 21st century and is expected to advise on an expansion of our military footprint in the Arctic and high north, as the region becomes increasingly contested owing to melting sea ice opening up access. On a recent parliamentary visit to the Faroe Islands, we discussed high north security in the context of undersea infrastructure, which, in the main, means gas pipelines and data cables.

Just last week, we saw two incidents in which Royal Air Force Typhoons were scrambled to intercept Russian intelligence aircraft in NATO airspace. Indeed, in 2023, 50 Russian aircraft were intercepted by RAF jets scrambled from RAF Lossiemouth. That is not an unusual scenario, but it demonstrates the fragility of Scotland’s undersea infrastructure. The issue cuts across domestic and international policy but has significant implications for our energy industry and communications capability. I, for one, will be interested to see what comes forward in the defence review.

That leads me on to Ukraine. In recent months, the situation in Ukraine has been peppered with increasing uncertainty, largely courtesy of the United States pulling back from its previous commitment to support Ukraine and, in particular, the withdrawal of aid and intelligence support. In response, the UK Government has committed to a coalition of the willing, which involves bringing together European countries, NATO and others to drive progress towards lasting peace.

The UK and Europe have committed to rearmament, so what can Scotland do to support that endeavour? I and others contend that, although defence is reserved, Scotland cannot stand still as the world changes around us. We have an opportunity to support our defence industry across skills development, recruitment and research and development—all competencies that lie here in Scotland, not London. In 2022, Scotland’s defence sector added £3.2 billion to the Scottish economy and employed more than 33,000 Scots, including 1,500 apprentices.

I am just finishing.

However, the value of the industry is not just economic; it is also crucial to the wider defence picture in the UK, Europe and Ukraine. I look forward to seeing our new Scottish defence industry strategy soon.

As was touched on in previous questions and responses, one of the key pathways that the report highlighted was the transformation of Grangemouth into a producer of sustainable aviation fuel, which is an option that the Scottish Government has long called on the UK Government to appropriately regulate for. Does the cabinet secretary share my concern that the UK Labour Government has so far concentrated on aviation fuel developments south of the border, when Grangemouth is poised to lead that industry? Bearing in mind the cabinet secretary’s important point about the need for a radical shift in policy and the regulatory landscape, what engagement has the Scottish Government had with the UK Government on the urgent need for regulatory changes to enable that?

I remind members that, if amendment 200 is agreed to, I will not be able to call amendments 70 and 71.

Amendment 200 agreed to.

Amendments 201 and 202 moved—[Angela Constance]—and agreed to.

Amendment 37 not moved.

Section 47, as amended, agreed to.

Section 48—Rights of audience: advocates

Amendment 38 not moved.

Section 48 agreed to.

Section 49—Statement of training requirement for prosecutors

Amendment 39 not moved.

Section 49 agreed to.

After section 49

Amendment 203 moved—[Angela Constance]—and agreed to.

Section 50—Clerk of the Sexual Offences Court

Amendment 40 not moved.

Section 50 agreed to.

Section 51—Deputy Clerks of the Sexual Offences Court

Amendment 41 not moved.

Section 51 agreed to.

Section 52—Clerk and Deputy Clerks: further provisions

Amendment 42 not moved.

Section 52 agreed to.

Section 53—Sexual Offences Court records

Amendment 43 not moved.

Section 53 agreed to.

Section 54—Sexual Offences Court records: authentication and electronic form

The next group is entitled, “Sexual Offences Court: procedure and records”. Amendment 204, in the name of the cabinet secretary, is grouped with amendments 205 and 206.