Chamber and committees

Thanks—that is helpful.

Good morning. I am not a fish expert. I have just looked at the UK Government website, which shows that there are 43 fisheries management plans and five current consultations about cockles, North Sea and Channel sprat, queen scallops, the southern North Sea skates and rays, and other demersal non-quota species. There are a lot of separate species in each fisheries management plan.

Are the fisheries management plans grouped together under demersal and pelagic and, if so, is that to help manage the plans, because similar species are in the same waters? There is also the issue of managing the plans so that it is not just individual species that are looked at.

Will the cabinet secretary outline what the economic impact of Brexit has been on Scotland’s fishing sector, according to the available data?

Professor White mentioned conscientious objection. I have had a constituent who is a health professional contact me about that.

I am interested in how the law in Victoria provides for the option of conscientious objection. There are issues around providing information and support or assessing a person for voluntary assisted dying, or even supplying medication—that would involve pharmacists and nurses, which is who I am thinking about. Will you say a bit more about how the law works in Victoria and elsewhere in relation to supporting persons who conscientiously object?

Professor White mentioned conscientious objection. I have had a constituent who is a health professional contact me about that.

I am interested in how the law in Victoria provides for the option of conscientious objection. There are issues around providing information and support or assessing a person for voluntary assisted dying, or even supplying medication—that would involve pharmacists and nurses, which is who I am thinking about. Will you say a bit more about how the law works in Victoria and elsewhere in relation to supporting persons who conscientiously object?

I forgot to mention that I have an interest, in that I am still a registered nurse, with experience in the perioperative environment and clinical education.

I have a final question. Has there been any assessment of staff who have felt pressure to participate in voluntary assisted dying when they have actually been firmly conscientiously objecting?

Thank you.

I am okay, convener—I have had my questions answered.

Professor White mentioned conscientious objection. I have had a constituent who is a health professional contact me about that.

I am interested in how the law in Victoria provides for the option of conscientious objection. There are issues around providing information and support or assessing a person for voluntary assisted dying, or even supplying medication—that would involve pharmacists and nurses, which is who I am thinking about. Will you say a bit more about how the law works in Victoria and elsewhere in relation to supporting persons who conscientiously object?

It is reasonable to suggest that various commissioners have an advocacy role but that members of the public do not have a clear understanding of that. There should be a review so that there is more clarity on the role of each commissioner, including whether they have an advocacy role.

As I mentioned, the duplication of the functions and duties of commissioners in Scotland has been a concern. There is potential for the overlap and duplication of functions among different commissioners and across other organisations in Scotland, particularly as the number of commissioners is proposed to grow. Stakeholders have raised concerns about the complexity of the current landscape and the cost to the public purse of the commissioners’ appointments, along with their offices, their support staff and other associated administrative costs. With new bodies potentially adding to that complexity, some argue for a broader approach that prioritises human rights and equality for all, rather than creating multiple commissioners for specific groups.

One of the areas of concern that I have discussed with constituents and others is the potential democratic deficit that can be caused by the use of commissioners. Paragraph 142 of the Finance and Public Administration Committee’s report discusses democratic accountability concerns. Some argue that the commissioner system outsources Government decisions and policy direction away from ministers, who are democratically accountable through elections. The committee’s report broadly agreed with those points. It found that there is a need to is ensure that commissioners deliver value for money and effectively address the needs of the population, including by addressing the potential risks associated with duplication and working towards enhancing the efficiency of commissioners. It is welcome that the Scottish Government has accepted that point and will reflect on it as we move forward.

My final point relates to the financial aspect of commissioners. We are in challenging budgetary times, with the UK budget announced yesterday. As the committee’s report helpfully points out, the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body supports these independent office-holders and sets the terms and conditions of their appointment and annual budget. I will not repeat the figures, but I welcome the Scottish Government’s support for the intention of the committee’s report in driving to improve governance, accountability and efficiency across the parliamentary commissioner landscape. The Scottish Government has already adopted the position that any new public body should be created only as a last resort, and the Cabinet has approved the use of the ministerial control framework.