Chamber and committees

Good morning. According to the policy memorandum, the aim of the bill is to reduce the number of people in prostitution and reduce the impact on those who are, or have been, in prostitution. The committee has heard differing views and has been presented with differing evidence, as to whether the provisions in the bill as it is currently drafted will or will not achieve a reduction in prostitution. Do you maintain that the bill’s provisions will achieve the ends as set out in the policy memorandum? If so, can you help the committee understand why we should prefer that line of evidence, and reject the alternative?

I understand the point that the cabinet secretary is making, but the process feels uncomfortable, particularly in the context of this week, when we are addressing legislation that was fundamentally flawed when it was passed by the Parliament, even after full scrutiny. That is something that concerns me more widely, so I make that point.

On the SSI that is before us, we have received submissions—from the likes of Victim Support Scotland—which, as ever, have been very helpful. Based on that, I will put a couple of questions to you. Will prisoners in the cases concerned be included in the victim notification scheme? If so, what information will be available to the eligible victims?

I understand. Thank you.

Good morning. The police told us that they need £33.7 million on top of the £104.9 million uplift. Part of the £33.7 million would go towards funding an additional 600 community officers. The committee heard about the role that those officers would play in prevention and proactive policing. There was also a suggestion that that would help to keep the prison population down. Given the need to reduce the prison population, which the cabinet secretary and I have discussed many times, as well as the significant challenges with things such as antisocial behaviour and retail crime, does the cabinet secretary acknowledge that, if the budget provides a lesser award than £33.7 million for community officers and others, the police’s ability to do community policing will be compromised and the outcomes will be worse?

I would like a brief clarification. Cabinet secretary, you talked about the fact that, under the notification requirements, a registered sex offender is already required to notify the police of a certain range of details—and you set out what they were. This SSI will add information on any application for a gender recognition certificate or on the issuing of a full GRC. This might be to do with the definition of the relevant start date—you talked about that being the date of conviction—but can you clarify: is the offender required to notify the police if they already have a GRC prior to the date of conviction?

Exactly.

I have a small follow-up question, because you brought in enforcement at the end. The convener asked an important question, and you brought up Northern Ireland and Ireland earlier. The committee heard in evidence from the Crown Office that it

“is mindful of the challenges experienced by police and prosecutors”

in those two jurisdictions. Do you accept that enforcement could be problematic? Earlier, in response to the convener, you said that this bill has been drafted differently. Can you help me understand precisely in what way it has been drafted differently if enforcement in Scotland is going to be different from enforcement in those jurisdictions?

The next question is similar. The committee has heard differing evidence as to whether criminalising purchasers might result in a higher risk for those who are selling sex. We have heard from both sides: on one side, we have heard, “No, it will not increase the risk,” and on the other side, we have heard, “Yes, it will increase the risk.” Do you think that there will be an increased risk to those selling sex? If not, why should the committee prefer that line of evidence as opposed to the alternative?

Staying on policing, I have a specific question about retail crime. Shoplifting is up 15 per cent in the past year, and it is 129 per cent higher than in 2021. The Scottish Government has provided funding for the retail crime task force, which many have welcomed and have said is an important intervention. Is the cabinet secretary making the case for continuing funding for the retail crime task force beyond March 2026? Can she give us any indication of the prospects of success?

First, cabinet secretary, on the point that Katy Clark has just raised—and noting that we are all getting this information in real time—I want to be clear that the SSI before us creates a new power for ministers to change the minimum period of sentence served, but to do so using subordinate legislation, such that neither the power’s creation nor its ultimate use would go through full parliamentary scrutiny. That is what is happening here—is that correct?