Chamber and committees

That is helpful. All areas are on the table. It is helpful for us to understand the different challenges and concerns that people have. One of the things that we are trying to do is to look at the system itself. What does the structure need to look like in order to support people in the most constructive way, rather than creating new kinds of litigation, for instance, if you are thinking about group action in that way.

The framework should provide for more flexibility, easier access and a more sustainable system, so that people will be able to operate within it now and in years to come. I suppose that that means that there would be the opportunity for further changes if they are needed, but this particular reform is aimed primarily at the system and the structures that are in place.

That question is really helpful in placing the focus on people, who are at the centre of all this. I will try to get to all the different bits of your question; please come back to me if I do not do that.

On the point that you made about legislation that might be unimplemented, I note that that is quite a complex subject. I say that on the basis of having had a significant number of conversations about it with officials and others—I hope that it is helpful to hear that. Those conversations are always in the space of how we can get from here to there, because everybody wants us to be able to put provisions in place in such a way that people can rely on a difference being made.

When looking at unimplemented legislation, quite a lot of the detail that I have been drilling down into has told me that something is happening but that it has not finished happening yet, if you see what I mean. There is a body of work under way, including on some really complex pieces that you would characterise as unimplemented, which I understand. That is a significant body of work that will be brought to fruition.

For example, some parts of the Children (Scotland) Act 2020 are complex, so there is lots to be done on that. A lot of work is under way to bring about the conclusions that we all want to see. I am happy to get into that sort of detail, either now or at another point, if that would be helpful.

Work is under way, but that does not mean that we should sit back and say, “It’s fine, because work is under way.” That is certainly not what I am suggesting. The knowledge about what has not yet happened is driving the planning process.

The reasons why things have not happened are often understandable if we pause and think about them. The legislation might not be as it was initially conceived—it might have been amended—which might have made things more difficult. That is not an argument against amending legislation, but the reality is that legislation sometimes changes between the point at which it is conceived and the point at which it comes out the other end, so additional work is needed to ensure that we can deliver it.

Alternatively, there might have been changes to other pieces of legislation that have resulted in their meshing with or cutting across existing legislation. Again, I can think of relevant examples relating to the 2020 act in that regard.

It is a complex issue, and it is interesting that it has come up a couple of times in different ways. That perhaps indicates that the committee will come back to me on it, which I welcome.

There is also significant interest in advocacy. It is important that there are different ways in which people can access support and the law. Some of our conversations about legal aid have been very much about ensuring that there are easier and more accessible ways for people to access the support that they need in that regard. There is the space for us to be more flexible and a bit more open to doing things in different ways, because we cannot just continue down the path that we have been on.

There are some fantastic specialist organisations and providers, and I am very supportive of the work that they do, which plays a significant part in making access to justice a reality for more people. That is particularly important for people in more difficult situations. I appreciate that everybody is in a difficult situation if they are trying to access justice, by the nature of the field, but some people are in particularly difficult situations. We are open to being a bit more flexible and imaginative in how services are provided. That is the direction of travel, and I am keen for that to continue.

That is a pertinent question. In essence, we are looking at a two-pronged approach. There is general acceptance of the need for reform, and I am positive about the engagement that I have had in that regard, including with the Scottish Legal Aid Board. However, the reality is that the system as it stands will continue to be in place for a period of time, until we have the revised system. Therefore, it will be important that we capture opportunities to be efficient.

The legal aid processes and systems have continued to evolve—I say that in the hope of being reassuring. It would be impossible for us to conceive of a system that had not evolved. That includes work on, for instance, making some of the interactions between solicitors and the legal aid system a little less burdensome and bureaucratic. However, bureaucracy is a real issue, and I most sincerely hope that it is dealt with by the reform.

There are two trains. There is the opportunity for reform with the bill, and there is, to an extent—although there will be limitations—an opportunity to do little bits to the system as it stands to try to deal with burdens, whether they are bureaucratic or something else. The reality is that most of our focus will be on making sure that we are in a positive place in terms of the reform, but the point is well made. The Legal Aid Board, which manages the technicalities and operation of the system, is also very receptive to that. That is an ongoing conversation. The technicalities are probably for the board rather than for me, but the point is well made and the issue is under constant discussion.

I will start at the end of that, if that is okay.

It is profoundly important that we capture as much of the thinking that the people who have knowledge of the system can bring to the table. That may include law centres. A significant amount of outreach work has gone on and is continuing. The final piece of outreach work that I am involved in will be on 12 October. The consultation ends on 13 October. However, it has been a job of work over the entire consultation period. The outreach is vital. Officials are doing a significant amount. We absolutely want and value the input of people with the expertise that law centres bring.

However, I am also super enthusiastic about the potential for input from people who have lived experience of the system. You mentioned people with some very specific areas of need, such as people who are experiencing—did you say, street homelessness?

Can you tell me a little bit more about what you mean by logistical implications?

Yes, it felt as though you asked a lot of questions, but I will do my best to answer them. Please keep me right if I do not answer the points that you were looking for me to answer.

I think that your first point was about implementation of the Children (Scotland) Act 2020, which is an important and wide-ranging piece of legislation. I am probably unable to go through every element of it and give you a detailed timetable as I sit here, but if there are particular points that you have in mind, I will certainly try to address them. I assure you that, over the next 12 months, our priority is to make significant progress with implementing a couple of parts of the act.

First, there is the register of child welfare reporters, which the convener touched on earlier. That is an important point. Secondly, there is child advocacy. A number of provisions in the act have already been commenced, and we are looking at what comes next. As I said earlier, significant work is ongoing in those areas to ensure that we can deliver on the different aspects that require a little bit more work.

With regard to child welfare reporters, a working group is under way, and an implementation plan is in place to establish the new register of child welfare reporters. We are also in the initial phase of working on child advocacy. I hope that those are useful examples of where we will go next.

You also asked about domestic abuse as it relates to the Children (Scotland) Act 2020. Is that correct?

I am happy to follow up on that. My brief thought is that balance is important. A significant body of work is under way to make things more efficient through the use of technology, including AI. Of course, there must be proper safeguards—that goes without saying and is really important. The other side of the coin is that digital services might not be for everybody, and we need to be mindful of the fact that people have different needs. Overall, technologies exist that have lots of positives. We can embrace them, and the system is absolutely embracing them. Right across the justice system, technology is being used to positive effect.

My final example of that is the phenomenal work that I have seen with people being able to virtually tour courts. People who are potentially victims of domestic abuse can virtually tour the whole court building so that they know exactly what it looks like. They can do a walk-round without ever having been there, so that they have confidence to go into the building, knowing where they will go, who they will meet and exactly what it will be like. That is the best example that I can give of where technology can play an absolutely excellent part in making access to justice work for the people who are central to what we are trying to do.

When I started looking at legal aid, one of my first reflections was that, although there have been various adjustments along the way, the current system has been in place for a very long time. Although I am sure that the system was absolutely fit for purpose when it was first conceived, the world that we inhabit today is very different and the challenges that people across the country are trying to navigate are very different from those that existed at that time.

We must seize this opportunity to put in place a structure that is not only fit for now but flexible enough to allow its useful purpose to be sustained in years to come, because we are all well aware of the speed of change in society and the impacts on people’s need for legal aid.

The reason why all that matters is that legal aid performs a specific purpose: it allows people to pursue or defend their rights and to fund their legal defence when they would otherwise be unable to do so. In relation to access to justice, legal aid is vital in ensuring that people are able to secure fairness in the justice system. We need a system that is fit for purpose and that has taken account of the views and perspectives that have been fed in by individuals who have experience of the system, whether it be users or people who work in legal aid. I am keen that we capture as much of that information as possible before the consultation ends on 13 October.

That is crucial. When we are considering the bigger picture of legal aid and access to justice, we should ensure that we capture views and perspectives on reform and, more broadly, that we have in place systems that have at their heart those who are less able to advocate for themselves. We should have in place good, strong systems that capture feedback and deal with the needs of those who might not be in a position to advocate for themselves.

You referred to the need for us to have children at the centre of what we do and to be mindful of their rights as we go about our work. That is central to the justice portfolio, as it is to many others.

11:00

I do not want to be unhelpful in any way, and I am happy to have conversations on what are serious issues, but I think that those are criminal justice questions, so I would need to switch hats—and maybe rooms, too. I am not saying that to avoid your questions—I do not want to do that—but I am slightly unsure as to whether I can answer them at this committee.