Chamber and committees

I do not accept the member’s characterisation of the situation that we are in. I say to him that I listen to the legal profession regularly and often and that I take great care in listening to all the arguments that are put forward and in trying to address the profession’s issues.

The member raised the issue of capacity in the system. I remind him that the Government recently invested £1 million in the traineeship fund. There was also a 5 per cent rise in legal aid fees in 2021 and a further 5 per cent rise in place from this month, representing a rise of more than £10 million in legal aid fees in the past year alone. The Government is listening to the profession and is continuing to invest.

I am concerned about the current situation and recent developments, and I assure members that my officials and I continue to discuss further fee reforms with representatives of the profession. However, the situation in Scotland, in relation to eligibility levels and the wide scope that remains, is different from the situation in England, where the Conservatives are in charge of the legal aid system. That system has been cut, cut and cut again, so there is a stark difference between the situation in Scotland and the one that Conservatives are presiding over in the rest of the country.

We are working with stakeholders to improve water safety on several fronts, including awareness. Some measures, such as work to improve signage, should benefit all age groups, but other measures focus specifically on children and young people. For example, coinciding with the National Fire Chiefs Council’s be water aware campaign, next week will see the launch of age and stage-appropriate water safety education lessons, which have been developed by Education Scotland and Water Safety Scotland. The resource, which is to be hosted on the Education Scotland national improvement hub, aims to support those between the ages of three and 18 to develop valuable life-saving knowledge, skills and understanding.

The 2018 to 2026 drowning prevention strategy is a collaborative piece of work between Water Safety Scotland and its members, and the strategy is complemented by the stakeholder action plan that I launched last month. Both approaches are informed by an appreciation of the challenges of open-water swimming, which are very different from those of indoor pools because of the risks that are posed by currents, obstacles and, importantly, cold-water shock.

A key focus has to be on education and raising awareness, and both documents set out the work that is being done in that area. There is always value in practical experience, which is why one of the actions that the action plan identifies is for a sub-group of Water Safety Scotland to review the scope for developing expanded opportunities for young people to experience being safe in open water environments.

The Scottish Government has enhanced the funding that is available to RoSPA, which supports Water Safety Scotland, so that such work can be progressed as quickly as possible. In the meantime, relevant authorities are undertaking a range of site-specific work—for example, the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park Authority’s water safety campaign will highlight the importance of wearing buoyancy aids or life jackets when participating in all water sports and focus on being visible in the water for open water swimmers.

The member raises a pertinent question given the tragedies that have occurred in that national park in recent years. The national park authority has developed a water safety policy and an accompanying risk assessment procedure, which formalises its approach on its owned and managed land. It has now upgraded and installed public rescue equipment and signage sites around Loch Lomond. I saw some of that myself when I was at Balloch for the launch of the action plan this past month.

The follow-up phase involves assessing and addressing issues on sites outwith the immediate Loch Lomond area.

There were about five questions there, convener.

I am quite confident, because it works with other controlled goods. People do apply for licences. I will ask Elinor Findlay to give us more data about Northern Ireland in a moment.

The key thing is to make the scheme as simple as possible and not too expensive, so that people can apply for and get a licence quickly and easily. We need to ensure a level of awareness, so that people know that they must have a licence. We have to do really good work on our public campaigns so that we get that message out and people know what they have to do when the law changes.

There is often a question whether people will change their behaviour when we change the law. It can feel strange. I am old enough to remember when kids sat in the back of cars with no car seats and nobody wore seat belts. When I was small, it would not have occurred to someone to get into a car and put a seatbelt on. No one would have asked them to do that. It was not normal. The law changed and there were some really good public awareness-raising campaigns. I can think of some of the lines in the adverts. We do not think twice now. We get in the car and just put our seatbelt on. People get used to it. I am confident.

We all accept that legislation in itself will not fix all the problems. Through the work of the review group and the work that the Government has done, we have tried to find something that will go some way towards addressing all the concerns. That includes concerns about misuse and the concerns that a lot of people have told the committee about regarding the distress that is caused to animals or is felt by neurodivergent people. That distress is caused by legitimate firework use that happens sporadically in their neighbourhoods. The scheme also addresses safety concerns about people being injured. We have tried to do that in a balanced and proportionate way.

I have explained that some parts of the scheme are slightly more complicated than they might have been if we had a different set-up, but I am confident that we can make it as simple as possible for people to apply for a licence and I hope that they will do so. I do not want it to be a barrier for people who are using fireworks legitimately and safely. I want them still to be able to buy fireworks from a local shop and enjoy them with their families.

I think that we have that.

The financial memorandum, which has been provided to the committee, notes that we did a financial modelling exercise on that. We modelled fees of £20, £30 and £50 for a five-year licence. We looked at those amounts because we took into account similar licensing schemes that are already operating in Scotland, particularly the air weapons licensing scheme. We will undertake a further consultation on that, if Parliament agrees to the legislation, and go on to seek views on an appropriate level of fee.

The fees for licences in Northern Ireland are significantly higher. You make an important point—the cost must not act as a barrier to people. Nevertheless, if a community group wanted to put on a firework display, I would imagine that that would involve fairly significant costs, and in that context, potentially paying £30 for a five-year licence might not seem disproportionate.

I am sure that the committee will have heard this point being made really strongly in evidence, too, but in the consultations in 2019 and 2021, we heard repeated evidence about the disturbance caused to people by what we would characterise as more unpredictable use of fireworks, which led to the perception that periods of firework use had become a lot more prolonged than they used to be.

When I visited the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals a couple of weeks ago, it suggested that knowing when fireworks are going to be used allows pet owners in particular, but anyone who has issues in this area, including neurodivergent people, to undertake whatever mitigation might be needed. Those with neurodivergent conditions could plan to be somewhere else, for example, and people with pets that get seriously disturbed by fireworks could seek veterinary advice ahead of their use. I strongly feel that more predictability of use will benefit everybody.

The review group commissioned analytical work on the issue and looked at the international evidence that I have already mentioned. Something similar has been introduced in parts of Australia and New Zealand, but Elinor Findlay can say more about that and the effects that those measures have had.

I think I mentioned earlier that we consulted all the faith groups, and we feel that we captured all the dates that have religious significance and on which fireworks are traditionally used as part of the celebrations.

The days that we have set out broadly align with the existing dates. We are quite confident that that does not fall foul of any legislation.

Natalie Stewart might want to add to that.