 ddiwedd i gweithio gymryd yn ymwiel yn ddim yn Open Cow. Mae gennym bod gweithio amser yn maith eich cymryd yn blaen, chi ddim yn ei gwaedd. Rwy'n meddwl i gyflym am y llwyddog a'i'r poln Cymru. Yn oedd Ysgrifennu Sgwrth Ffforddiol yn ddatblygu'r ysgolwyd ac yn defnyddio meddwl Gyda'r pryd yn gynghorffu am y Cymru, yw 2012. Rwy'n meddwl i gyflym am ein bod yn gweld i gweithio gyfnod o'r mynd yw sydd fydd yn cael eu gwithio i gwylliant o modd gynaennau. I will give the minister a few moments to get settled. Minister, Paul Wheelhouse, about 10 minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Last Friday, we published our report on the operation of the offensive behaviour at football and threatening communications Scotland Act 2012. In doing so, we have fulfilled our requirement in section 11 of the act to report on the operation of the offences covered by sections 1 and 6 of the act by 1 August this year. Since June 2013, researchers at University of Stirling and Scotland's social research have been carrying out extensive evaluation of the act, hearing evidence from a wide range of stakeholders, including fans, match commanders, police, prosecutors and football club representatives. The resulting independent evaluation covers section 1 of the act, offensive behaviour at regulated football matches, and is one of the pieces of supporting evidence that is central to our report. The second piece of evidence that our report is founded on is an evaluation of section 6 of the act, threatening communications, produced by the Scottish Government's Justice Analytical Services division. Presiding Officer, while the act is a high profile and important piece of legislation, it is by no means the only measure that this Government has deployed to tackle offensive behaviour and crimes associated with different forms of hatred. However, I hope to set it why I believe the act remains a tool that should remain available to the police and courts. I will also set out where I believe there is scope for improving implementation and operation of the act and I'm keen to work with all partners to do this. The basis for moving forward is the evaluation, recommendations and suggested improvements in relation to how the act is applied and used. I'm keen to supplement this by hearing from those who have an interest in the legislation, who want to respond to the recommendations and who have ideas for improving the operation of the act. Our on-going aim, though, is to learn from evidence and improve implementation of the act. The work undertaken by the independent research team indicates that the majority of the people of Scotland, including football fans, have had enough of football being used as an outlet for offensive, bigoted and abusive behaviour. Scotland is moving on from the prejudices of the past and I believe a clear majority supports the sentiment that Scottish football needs to move with the times. The evaluation shows that hateful and offensive activity has been a declining phenomenon at football in recent seasons since the act was introduced in terms of the number of charges reported to prosecutors by the police. Updated hate crime figures published last Friday indicate that it has now fallen even further than reported in the evaluation, with offences under the act falling 28 per cent since the first year of operation. I wholeheartedly welcome the decline in offences under the act. Those reflect an opinion that we observe through other work that we have been delivering, particularly in relation to tackling sectarianism, where the public tell us time and again that they are tired of the worn-out rhetoric of bigotry that has no place in modern Scotland. The act has some harsh critics and since taking on responsibility for this portfolio I have been keen to understand the basis for that opposition and look at how legitimate concerns can be addressed to improve the implementation and operation of the act. The act was not created in a vacuum. It resulted from circumstances that simply could not be tolerated and which needed a strong policy response. Members may recall that during the 2010-11 football season we saw an unacceptable level of sectarianism on Facebook and internet forums, blogs and social media, as well as a number of high-profile figures being targeted with parcel bombs and death threats alongside increased patterns of violence and disorder at some football matches. When Parliament legislates it is choosing to communicate important messages and in response to those events this act was stating that bigotry, prejudice and indeed the celebration of the loss of life and terrorist activity are unacceptable. There is no question about the fact that the vast majority of football supporters are well behaved and simply wish to support their team and enjoy the matchday experience. Today I acknowledge this good behaviour and self-policing where it occurs, as I have seen it at work. This positive behaviour is absolutely central to creating the atmosphere of friendly rivalry that allows everyone to enjoy our national sport without feeling abused, threatened or intimidated. It is therefore unsurprising that the evaluation highlights findings from surveys of supporters of Scottish football clubs conducted as part of the research which showed that a majority of football fans hold views which are broadly in line with the objectives of the act. Football is not responsible in itself for giving rise to sectarianism or other forms of hatred that exist within society. To suggest otherwise would be wrong, however regrettably it is a means by which such hatred, abusive behaviour or sectarianism can manifest itself. For example, recent research from the Scottish social attitude survey conducted by Scotsen found that 88 per cent of people identified football as a contributing factor to sectarianism in Scotland and 55 per cent highlighted it as the main contributing factor. In developing their evaluation, the University of Stirling and Scotsen social research consulted a wide range of stakeholders including conducting an online supportive survey at the end of 2012-13 season and a further survey at the end of 2013-14 season, attracting a total of 4,130 responses. The survey sought views about match day experiences since the legislation came into force and supported us from all 42 professional league clubs who were involved with the strongest representation coming from Celtic, Hearts and Rangers fans. The results validated through the focus group work demonstrate that 90 per cent of respondents to the fan survey found songs which glorify or celebrate the loss of life or serious injury offensive, 82 per cent found songs in supportive terrorist organisations offensive 75 per cent found songs, chants and shouting about people's religious background or beliefs that football matches offensive. We have never promoted the view that societal problems can be eradicated through legislation alone as there are complex problems which can only be addressed through a range of activities. That is why the act is part of our broader work to tackle abusive behaviour and has never been intended as a single fix. I recognise, though, that there are areas where improvements could be made. After all, this is still new legislation and it is important that we consider where it is not working as effectively and take the appropriate steps to address that. For example, while policing at football matches is an operational matter for Police Scotland, there is an acknowledgement of the evaluation findings that the relationship between the police, football clubs and fans could be improved. I am keen to see this move forward and to work with all parties on positive engagement and improving levels of trust and I know Police Scotland shared its ambition from my discussions with them. In addition, I was delighted to be able to announce last Friday that I have extended the diversion from prosecution programme run by SACRO, Scotland's leading organisation for reducing offending in communities, as an alternative to prosecution. I know that there are concerns raised by football clubs and others such as fans against criminalisation. SACRO's programme, which will now cover all of Scotland, will ensure that, when appropriate, we will be kept away from the criminal justice system and given appropriate alternative education programmes to make them understand the real impact of their actions, steer them away from getting caught in a downward spiral within the criminal justice system and give them opportunities to make positive life changes. Clearly, where behaviours can be changed without giving first-time and low-tariff offenders a criminal record, this would, in our view, be desirable. Another area that I will be looking into is the application of football banning orders, the effectiveness of those as an intervention and what improvements can be made to procedures to ensure that they remain an effective tool for dealing with a wide range of negative behaviours associated with football. That will be taken forward in conjunction with the Scottish Court Service and the Crown Office. Again, a short term, the banning order may be an appropriate alternative in some cases and prosecutors may wish to use these as an alternative disposal. The Lord Advocate will be updating his guidelines on the act to ensure that prosecutors are aware of the diversionary programme and are able to use it in all suitable cases. He will also be highlighting precedents established through case law to help to clarify interpretation of the act and achieve a more consistent approach to its application. As well as taking the actions that I have already mentioned, I am keen to hear further from those who have been critical of the act so that I can identify and understand legitimate concerns that they may have and how best to address those. Clearly, actions need to be evidence-based and that is why I am also committed to continuing to monitor the operation of the act and the effectiveness of the sacred diversion from prosecution programme. However, there are other issues highlighted in the evaluations, such as the fact that 60 per cent of fans perceive that they have not yet seen an improvement in behaviour, the comparatively low usage of the act and the time duration of court cases, a particular concern of fans representatives. The implication of all of those findings needs to be fully considered and were appropriate acted on. Presiding Officer, I am satisfied that this evaluation meets our commitment to report to Parliament on the effectiveness of the act and that it presents a strong, diverse and representative set of views, reflected through our robust and independent evaluation process. We have a thorough and robust understanding of the impact of the act in the first two seasons of operation and I thank the University of Stirling and colleagues in Justice Analytical Services for providing a good basis for further progress. Tackling all forms of abusive behaviour, including abusive behaviour in and associated with football, is a priority for this Government and it is central to building an inclusive Scotland where all can live and raise their families in peace without the fear of threats, abuse or prejudice. The act remains an important tool for helping us to achieve that goal. Thank you. The minister will now take questions on issues raised in his statement. I intend to lie around 20 minutes for questions after which we move on to the next item of business. It would be helpful if members wished to ask a question or to press a request to speak, but now, Annacole Hugh-Henry. I am sorry, Minister. Sectarianism and offensive behaviour is unacceptable no matter where or when it occurs. Indeed, I am surprised and disappointed that 100 per cent of those surveyed did not find this behaviour unacceptable. The question is what to do about it. This act is controversial. Not just with football fans, it has been criticised by sheriffs and other legal experts. Many have questioned whether most of the convictions under the act could have been obtained using existing legislation. The act has created a culture of mistrust between football fans and the authorities. Not help, by the way, some fans have been arrested at home in controversial circumstances. The research will highlight that football-related offences are down, concludes that this can possibly be attributed to other factors and therefore it is impossible to determine whether some or indeed any of the reductions are in fact attributable directly to the act. This research does not make clear whether or not the act is effective. The minister has been disingenuous. A promise was in fact made to review the legislation. This work should be the start of that review. We all know that bigotry and intolerance is not confined to football matches. Will the minister commit to enhancing the investment in education? Will he commit to having a thorough review of what I believe is flawed legislation? We can do better than this. Scotland deserves effective action to tackle this age-old scourge. Mr Henry makes a couple of points that I am in agreement with him. I am disappointed that 100 per cent of fans and 100 per cent of the population is offensive and should no longer continue. We have to recognise a strong support that we should all welcome among fans and the general public about tackling all forms of offensive behaviour. The focus will inevitably be on sectarianism, but we have homophobia, racism and other forms of offences. That is very welcome. We have never said that offensive behaviour at Football and Threatening Communication Act was the only tool in the box. That is why we continue to invest £2.3 million in the current financial year in community-based activities, 38 projects across Scotland, which I believe will help to tackle this from another angle, and I hope that all members will support in doing so. I recognise the point that we are never claiming that the offensive behaviour act would be the only thing that would solve this. I take on board the messages that the researchers say in the difficulty in isolating the impact of a specific measure such as the act in tackling sectarianism, that we should welcome the fact that there is strong support for tackling the issue among fans and the wider public. In terms of the commitment to review, as I said in my opening statement, I intend to continue to engage with those who have criticisms of the act by how better we can implement the act and also to listen to specific concerns from clubs and fans and supporters about how we can police such issues as well. Police Scotland obviously has operational responsibility for dealing with such matters in the grounds and to inform the grounds, and I know that it has a willingness to engage with fans on this and are looking to try and improve relations. I think that there is a good basis for going forward, and I certainly give my own commitment to keep an eye on what is happening in terms of the implementation of the act and therefore to continue to review its effectiveness. Margaret Mitchell. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I thank the minister for foresight of the statement, the gesture of which appears to be a reaffirmation of what we already knew in relation to offensive behaviour at football matches and a broadly upbeat assessment of how the legislation is working in practice in terms of the decline in football-related charges. However, I cannot point out that the report itself states that it is impossible to determine whether some or any of those reductions are attributable directly to the act. What is evident from the minister's statement is an emphasis not on continuing to make use of the act but rather to improving relationships using diversion from prosecution, consideration of banning orders and, crucially, looking at guidelines to help to clarify the interpretation of the act. Is not it simply time to repeal this ill-conceived legislation? In terms of the concerns raised by the police, does the minister consider the intense police resources that it has taken up at the expense of placing more violent risk groups can be justified at the very least, can the minister cite any examples of the review that he looked at specifically in terms of the prosecution process which shows how inadequate the act has been so far leading to the necessity to clarify its interpretation? Minister. I am certainly addressing the final point first of all, Presiding Officer. I have to disagree with Margaret Mitchell. I think the kind of offences that have been committed under the act have contributed to a wider situation where we have people fearing for their safety, but more specifically the general effect, the debilitating effect of having sectarianism and other forms of hatred-based offences happening in our society which make people's lives on a day-to-day basis very difficult to live. Anything we can do is sending a strong signal through the act to the wider population that this Scottish society in the 21st century does not support any form of discrimination or hatred which causes offence to people and that in the past and parts of Scotland has led through to acts of physical violence and abuse. I think we have to make a clear statement there. I appreciate the points that Margaret Mitchell is making but I do believe it was important that Parliament set a strong signal to the Scottish population that this needed to be tackled. I would also say that 80 per cent of the public in the U-Gov service published indicate support for the act specifically so not just support for legislation to tackle offensive behaviour but specifically support for the act. There is some support out there for this strong support and I do appreciate the issue about Police Scotland resources focus unit was set up specifically to try and improve the policing arrangements in and around football matches that have been successful, that has been welcomed by clubs and by some supporters groups. The focus unit is working very effectively to try and finesse and find units policing approach but we stopped funding focus specifically as a standalone project if you like in 2012-13 at the end of 2012-13 so thereafter the costs are being borne by Police Scotland but they believe, Police Scotland I know believe that this is an important area to tackle. I just advise members that we are very tight for time all afternoon I have 12 members who wish to ask a question of the minister and I intend to finish no later than 250 so can I urge members to keep the question brief and can I urge the minister to keep the answer brief too. Rodri Cambol followed by Meka McMahon What further information can the minister provide regarding the expansion of the diversion from prosecution programme? Minister As I've already mentioned SACRA programme which will cover all of Scotland will ensure that when appropriate people will be kept away from the criminal justice system and given appropriate alternative education programmes which is something that changes the point that Mr Henry made make them understand the real impact of their actions steer them away from getting caught in a downward spiral within the criminal justice system and give them opportunities to make life changes I believe that as I've mentioned in my statement and recognised by Margaret Mitchell Lord Advocate will importantly update his guidelines so that it's clear when that particular programme is most appropriate to be applied Mike McMahon followed by Els McKinnis Thank you Can I ask the minister to firstly withdraw his claim that his views on the extension of diversion from prosecution time with that of fans against criminalisation nothing could be further from the truth that he should not have made that claim Fans against criminalisation see no sucker to those who should not be facing prosecution in the first place and being diverted away from any prosecution Can I also ask what efforts the Scottish Government has made to follow their commitments on further equality, impact assessment to assess the impact of the legislation is having on people of different races and ethnicities and can he advise the chamber how they have engaged with Scotland's multigenerational Irish community in particular In regards to the first point that Mr McMahon asked about the discussions that I have had and I have had a very full and frank discussion with fans against criminalisation about their views and it was very helpful I know that Mr McMahon is pointing, I am aware that the members are in the chamber Mr McMahon wasn't at the meeting but we discussed with fans against criminalisation I know Mr McMahon that without gesticulation from Mr McMahon fans against criminalisation had a full and frank discussion where I am fully aware of the criticisms of the act from fans against criminalisation and I understand their perspective but also we discussed would alternatives to prosecution be something that they would be supportive of and they certainly gave the impression to me Mr McMahon, I appreciate you weren't there that they were supportive of that I would hope that the clues in the name fans against criminalisation if we can avoid criminalising fans unnecessarily that would be something that they would support and in relation to the other issues that Mr McMahon raises that members of the Irish community in Scotland have a proud heritage and I would entirely supportive of them promoting their heritage what we have to recognise is that and the courts have done work on this through case law there are certain songs and acts which can constitute an offence that's for the courts to determine not ministers but there are clearly strong sentiments and I recognise the strong views of fans against criminalisation in this respect but we will continue to have discussions with them on the implementation of this act Alison McInnes, followed by Joe Mason Thank you very much I welcome the funding for the diversion from prosecution projects and the Government will know that I've raised concerns about the dangers of disproportionate criminalisation particularly of young men and I do welcome that step that you've been taking Can the minister tell me what assessment has been made of how many people, particularly young people might have been disproportionately criminalised as a result of the act and how many people each year does the minister envisage will benefit from the diversion from prosecution Minister I'm happy to write to the member with some further detail about the underpinning of the financial figures we've used in funding programme which will probably help to explain the kind of estimates about numbers involved I have had some informal discussions with SAC or as are my officials about the effect of this but we do believe that it is highly effective in having 100 per cent reduction among those who have been going through it so I very much welcome the member's support I know that it's something that Alison MacKinnis has espoused herself and I'm very grateful for her warmers today on the subject and we'll make sure she gets a detail of the underpinning assumptions about the numbers going through the scheme John Mason, followed by Neil Findlay I note from the report that the main victims of offensive behaviour seem to have been Catholics, some 84 per cent who have traditionally suffered from discrimination in Scotland and the luxuries of the act are likely to be Catholics and football supporters from a Catholic background Minister? Well it's certainly important there are a number of different facets of hate crime that are covered by the act but clearly discrimination on the basis of religion is one that inevitably the debate finds on it is true that 84 per cent of all the charges in the most recent year were in relation to behaviour derogatory towards Roman Catholicism that involved a reduction welcome reduction in previous years there are six charges for behaviour derogatory towards Protestantism which is 12 per cent of all charges and one charge for behaviour derogatory towards Judaism and Islam so I think the vast majority of the offences at the moment are in relation to Roman Catholicism and people abusing Roman Catholics and I would certainly hope that people of that faith would welcome the act in tackling the issue but I would stress there has been welcome reduction against those who are Catholic and against those who are Protestant both Neil Findlay followed by Willie Coffey The appalling murders in France following the publication of cartoons in the Charlie Hebdo magazine had politicians of all parties declaring yesterday's Charlie in defence of freedom of speech yet at the same time here working class football fans are hauled before the courts for singing songs or wearing t-shirts that I and the minister may not like what does the minister think of the double standards that play in relation to freedom of speech First Minister The first thing to say is about the act is that it does not forbid freedom of speech in Scotland what it does is regulate behaviour within regulated football matches in Scotland and travel to and from them and in a situation which might prove inflammatory perhaps in a public bar where the match is being shown we are not saying that people are not entitled to have these views but they are not entitled to to purvey them in a situation where they may cause offence and particularly lead to perhaps violence or hatred and it is the case in football grounds that you have two teams and two sets of fans and you have to accept the fact that it is not a homogeneous group of people within a football ground indeed if I was to say in relation to the sterling work university sterling work that 47% of Celtic fans were certainly in support of tackling offensive behaviour in the form of singing in support of terrorist organisations and loss of life and that outnumbered the number of Celtic fans who were against tackling that through legislation so I think we need to get this in perspective the majority of fans do support tackling offensive behaviour and they do support the act Willie Coffey followed by Paul Martin Thank you, can I ask the minister if the Scottish Government will provide a briefing on the outcome of this review to the British Irish Parliamentary Assembly which I am a member of so that they may receive a balance to you of the implementation of the act Minister? I certainly would accept that Mr Coffey's point that there are sensitivities around such issues particularly as Mr Wiman has mentioned in relation to the Irish community in Scotland so I am more than happy to make sure that all the material in relation to the evaluation the Government's report response and the UGov survey and any material we feel would be helpful will be sent to the association so they can want to emphasise that we strongly support the Irish community in Scotland this is about tackling behaviour which can potentially lead to disorder Paul Martin followed by James Dornan Obviously offensive behaviour and I hope the minister agrees is not as close to football fans and of course the second element of this legislation is respect of threatening communication and that includes some of the online activity that we have seen take place is helpful to a number of individuals which has been well publicised recently Can the minister advise me how many of those crimes have been recorded in over the last year? Minister? There are relatively small numbers as Mr Martin may well be aware of offences under the act I suppose the issue that Mr Martin is trying to raise is if it would be a measure of success if there are more cases under the act I would hope that the act has sent a strong signal that you need to behave yourself in social media it's difficult to say and I'm not attributing any views to Stirling University or to our justice analytical services who did the work for the Scottish Government in this respect that they are saying that the act has been responsible for a decline but I am saying that we should be welcome the fact that there are not more offences under the act because that means that hopefully people are observing the correct behaviours James Dornan followed by John Pentland Thank you The evaluation found out in 2013-14 that 100% of supporters attending away games had negative references to a person's sexuality yet the number of offences relating to sexuality under the act is very low What work is the Government taking forward to tackle homophobia and sport and the under-reporting of homophobic offences? Minister? I suppose it's a point that we should note and I've tried to emphasise that the act covers a form of behaviours which goes well beyond traditional sectarianism and into homophobia, transphobia, biphobia and other offences Mr Dornan raised an important point that the Scottish Government has funded Leap Sports Scotland, an organisation that works for greater inclusion of LGBT people in sport and against homophobia in a sports context since 2012 and is funding that to the tune of £38,800 in this current financial year One of Leap's objectives is to promote equality and diversity through challenging discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and we believe that it is an effective means to address the issue of homophobia, biphobia and transphobia and I hope that I'll provide more details to Mr Dornan for his information John Perlin, followed by Gil Paterson The reduction in offensive activity is due to a number of factors some predating the act and also part of a general reduction in violent crime One factor that both the minister and his predecessor stress is crucial is education yet this is undermined by a 25 per cent cut in funding for projects such as not by mouth while the minister assure us that educational programmes will be safeguarded Minister Mr Pentland raised an important point I am very supportive of the activities done by Neil Blymouth and other organisations on our behalf in the community, we invited those organisations to submit revised bids for the current year fully in the knowledge that there would be a reduction in funding because we do have a long-term commitment to try and phase out not trying to create an industry here, sectarianism an industry that has a long-term future in Scotland far from it, we want to eliminate sectarianism but I recognise the very important role that these organisations are playing so we will continue to engage with partners such as Neil Blymouth on very positive work that they are doing in our schools I have seen for myself just how valuable it is but we have to recognise that the organisations need to work with stakeholders at a local level to try and mainstream that activity so it does not become project funded in perpetuity Gil Paterson, followed by Alun Smith That is another question of young people in education I know that the UGov poll found that 82 per cent of respondents believed that offensive behaviour at an act and around football matches is harmful and that is a bad wind influence on young people Can the minister expand on what work has been taken forward to better educate young people on the issues that can contribute to the offensive behaviour at football? A side from the sacro scheme, which I will not go over again is certainly a significant investment which takes the total investment to around £140,000 We will provide further funding support to other organisations, the 38 community organisations that I mentioned that are doing projects at a local level Another scheme that is funded by Scottish Government is Community Links which I also had the pleasure is Community Links Southern Lanarkshire South Lanarkshire anti-sectarianism project which is another example of a project that is focused on increasing campaigns and educating social media users of the risks of posting sectarianism and offensive material on Facebook, Twitter and similar sites. The work that is being done by censing sectarianism within schools and other organisations including the Scottish Book Trust to publish a very useful graphic novel called What to Walk about sectarianism I will certainly commend to the member but I will try to make sure that information is available to him. I will try to make sure that information is available to him. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. I will try to make sure that information is available to the member. breathing into further training for police to stop the act being used unfairly and inappropriately? I am happy as I have been to the camera to go on record to say we will continue to work with a number of partners, fans groups, clubs and others to make sure that the implementation of the act is as good as it can be. In terms of the interview that is mentioned, in terms of interpretation of particular songs or banners, I think that that's the matter to the courts. The reason behind the朝 is not to be defined by it's legislation.ifen behaviour, we will, in going, leave that to the courts. The sheriffs are dating on what they feel is inappropriate in that setting, but I will happily commit to the member that we will continue to engage with the groups and to ensure that we improve the implementation of the act. The minister tells us that he is keen to understand the basis for opposition to the act. Isn't it clear from Parliament's official report that that was part of Parliament's concern when we passed an amendment at stage 3 requiring ministers to consult before preparing a report in the review period? Why is it that the Scottish ministers themselves didn't consult publicly on the matter before commissioning the outsourced research? The outsourced research that Mr Harvie refers to was done by extremely reputable academics at Stirling University. I'm not sure that Mr Harvie is not casting any aspersions, but I just make the point that it's a high-quality research done by independent researchers. They have done extensive work in consulting, but probably the very groups that Mr Harvie would want the Government to engage with through a consultation exercise. We have had the evaluation. We believe that there is nothing specified in the act about how the review ought to be undertaken. We have done what we believe is the best thing to do in terms of undertaking the evaluation, and we have consulted with key groups, including fans against criminalisation, who have invited to take part in that, and other supporters, groups, clubs, procurator, fiscal service, police and other stakeholders. It has been a wide-ranging evaluation that has brought in as much opinion as we can. I believe that it is a fair reflection of those consultation inputs. I take the point that Mr Harvie makes, but I think that we have done a successful exercise in evaluating the act, and I hope that Parliament agrees. I thank members and the minister for allowing us to get through all the questions that people wanted to ask. The next item of business is a debate on motion number 13511, in the name of Derek Mackay. On stage, one of the Harbour Scotland Bill, members who wish to take part in