 The next item of business is topical questions. In order to get in as many members as possible, succinct questions and responses would be appreciated. I call question 1 Liam Kerr. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and on behalf of the chamber, let me take this opportunity to welcome you back to your post. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that Police Scotland is considering closing more than 40 police buildings. Cabinet Secretary, Angela Constance. Responsibility for the police estate is a matter for the chief constable and is subject to regular Scottish police authorities scrutiny. Those proposals are now subject to consultation, and I know that Police Scotland is keen to hear about any local concerns. The Police Scotland estate strategy that was published in 2019 recognises that much of the police estate was outdated and underused. In delivering the strategy, Police Scotland has prioritised co-location with partner organisations in modern, well-equipped accommodation, with more than 60 co-locations delivered across the country thus far. Liam Kerr. In Aberdeen, it is reported that five stations—Mastrick, Rosemount, Seaton, Winhill and Torry—may all close. SPF General Secretary David Kennedy says that those closures are due to a lack of funding from the Scottish Government and will be devastating to community policing. Does the cabinet secretary agree with the police, and has she demanded that today's SNP budget avoids inflicting yet more pain on our police, our communities and Scotland? I will, of course, leave it to the Deputy First Minister in the not-too-distant future to outline this Government's budget, which, of course, will prioritise public services. I am aware that the number one priority of any Government is to protect the public. It is, of course, a matter for consultation. Mr Kerr and other colleagues in the north-east will want to feed the very specific comments around any proposed closures in Aberdeen or elsewhere. I know that Police Scotland stands ready to engage in the detail of any local concerns. With respect to funding, I would like to advise Mr Kerr that, through capital receipts, Police Scotland has invested £31 million back into the police state from relinquishing disused or old buildings. I remind him that this Government has continued to make year-on-year investment in policing, including the doubling of capital budgets since 2016-17. The police do well with what they are given by this Government, but due to slashed police budgets, in September Aberdeen was also chosen as the guinea pig for a pilot scheme in which some crimes in the city will not be investigated. Cabinet Secretary, what criteria will be used to judge if that pilot has been a success? What impact has it had on Aberdeen's communities? Is it the Cabinet Secretary's intention that the pilot be rolled out across Scotland? Of course, Mr Kerr once again refers to operational matters for Police Scotland, and I remind him that, in terms of this financial year, the Government has increased the police budget by over 6 per cent. That is equivalent to an additional £80 million this year. No-one, for a minute, demars from the consequences of more than a decade of Tory austerity, but this Government will stand proud by the decisions that we have made. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I would be grateful if members would restrain and not let's not have speaking while we are setting tree. As the consultation is undertaken and the chief constable and SPA give this matter careful consideration, does the minister agree with me that it is important that we consider that there are high maintenance costs and environmental inefficiencies in much of our policing estate, including in my constituency. To enable 21st century policing and opportunities for collaboration co-locating with local partners, there are potential benefits here for the public in rationalising the police estate. I agree with that. We all want our public services to be efficient and to be effective and to be accessible. Collocation with suitable partners makes best use of the public sector estate and, importantly, offers opportunity for increased visibility, closer working and increased collaboration between Police Scotland and partners. Police Scotland has now over 60 examples of successful collocation. One of the best examples is, of course, in my constituency. The West Lothian Civic Centre sees Police Scotland working alongside the local authority, Crown Office, Scottish Coaches and Tribunial Service, the Scottish Children's Reporters' Administration, Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, and all of that seems to me to be the best use of public resources at the straight and times at the hands of the Tory Government elsewhere. Colleen MacNeill. I want to close 29 stations as unprecedented enable impact on communities across Scotland at a time where confidence in police is falling. Stations such as Leithan, Edinburgh and Stewart Street in Glasgow have high usage. Stewart Street in Glasgow is a city centre station that is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It is difficult to see how the city centre of Glasgow could be adequately placed without Stewart Street. Does the cabinet secretary agree that the source of the issue is a poor capital budget settlement for Police Scotland? I ask specifically what representations the cabinet secretary has made to prevent the mass closure of police stations? It is important to recognise that the police presence in our communities is not solely defined by buildings, but instead it is defined by the nature of the work and the nature of engagement. Of course, the roll-out of mobile technology has changed the way in which police officers work. She raises specific matters in relation to police stations in the centre of Glasgow. I am sure that Ms MacNeill will make her feelings known as part of the public consultation. As we all know, capital has not been inflation-proofed by the UK Government, but, nonetheless, it has more than doubled the capital budget for policing since 2017-18. I do not think that it is the co-location that is the issue. The issue that people have is that, if the new facilities are not true like for like replacements, we may, for example, see loss of facilities such as holding cells. In the case of Greenock, for example, that may not mean that officers will have to go to Governor Clyde Bank if they are arrested or accused. Does the cabinet secretary share my concern that modernisation or so-called rationalisation must never come at the expense of public safety or, indeed, officer productivity? If Mr Green was aware of the publication of the news release by Police Scotland last week, he would have seen that the safety and well-being of their officers and staff was paramount. That is not the only reason, but it is one of the reasons for driving them forward in terms of implementing an estate strategy that ensures that not only do the public have fit-for-purpose facilities, but that officers and their staff have fit-for-purpose facilities as well. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the roll-out and use of tasers within Police Scotland, in light of reports that they have been used 131 times and discharged nine times against children since 2018. The provision of tasers and the deployment of specially trained officers or STOs is an operational matter for Police Scotland. Since the initial deployment of STOs in June 2018, Police Scotland received approval from the Scottish Police Authority's Police and Performance Committee in September 2021 to enhance its taser capability to around 2,000 STOs. That additional roll-out is expected to be completed by April 2024. The use of or the presence of a taser provides officers with an option of de-esculating a situation more quickly, ensuring the safety of the public and police officers. Every incident attended is judged on its own merits and every discharge of a taser is reported to the Independent Police Investigations and Review Commissioner. Of the nine times a taser was discharged against a child under the age of 18, seven were judged proportionate and two remain under investigation by the Commissioner. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. When tasers were rolled out to police divisions across Scotland in 2018, the public was assured that the large rise in discharges of weapons was not expected. Since then, 20 people have been left with injuries and now we hear tasers have been used 131 times against children, with the taser actually discharged against a child as the cabinet secretary acknowledged on nine separate occasions. Does the cabinet secretary agree that this points to a slide towards an enforcement model of policing? Will she consider scaling back the deployment of tasers in Scotland? Let me stress to Mr MacArthur that no one wants to use a taser on anybody and particularly a child. The discharge of a taser is always a last resort. Each incident must be treated on its own merits and it is vital that the threat or risk posed to the wider population—a police officer, as well as the child or young person—is the primary consideration. Each officer is trained and aware of their responsibilities. Since 2018, there have been nine occasions where an individual under 18 has involved the actual use or discharge of a taser. On each occasion, that incident is referred to the independent investigation and review commissioner. The use of tasers on children gives rise to particular concerns. Not only are children at increased risk of long-term physical injury from high-voltage shocks, but sustained psychological trauma can also result from such encounters with police. Last week, this Parliament unanimously agreed legislation incorporating the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child into Scots law. With UN representatives, Scottish children's rights campaigners and others calling for a complete ban on the use of tasers against children, will the cabinet secretary now give that proposal proper consideration? I hope to give some reassurance to Mr MacArthur. There are, of course, two pieces of legislation that are highly relevant in this regard. Tasers are prohibited weapons under the 1968 firearms legislation that is reserved. Any police force that wishes to deploy tasers can only do so with approval from the Home Secretary. He is right to point to the unanimous passing of UNCRC legislation by this Parliament. We hope that royal assent will be achieved at the start of next year. That bill will require all public authorities to report on a regular basis on how they are compliant with the requirements of UNCRC with respect to devolved duties. It may be of some reassurance to Mr MacArthur, and I am happy to write to him in detail that the training in and around the deployment of tasers is robust, rigorous and scenario-based, and there is also the role of the national advisory group, which includes advocacy organisations and human rights and children's rights. That informs the equality and human rights impact assessment. I thank the response to the question, but in the previous response, the cabinet secretary confirmed that the taser regulations are in fact reserved. The UNCRC that we passed so successfully here cannot be used by children. Will the Government take steps in the near future to ensure that the UNCRC notifies that specific element so that young people who are affected in this way, as is the call for the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, seek protection under their human rights here in Scotland? The Government will always strive to advance the rights of a child. It is also the right of every child to be protected in very difficult circumstances. I will, of course, am happy to correspond with Mr Whitfield and, indeed, any other MSP on the matter, because I am conscious that time is running out. There are some complexities on the matter, but I could give some reassurance in and around the training that police officers receive on the matter to deal with highly fluid situations in which they have a duty to protect police officers, members of the public, and not least a child or a young person who is at risk or at distress. Discharging a taser carries significant responsibility for officers, therefore it is absolutely vital that they undergo thorough training before they are authorised to carry a taser. I appreciate that people are coming into the chamber, but I would be grateful if everyone could do so quietly. It is vital that officers undergo thorough training before they are authorised to carry a taser, with a focus on de-escalation and an understanding of the incidents in which it may be appropriate to use a taser. I ask the cabinet secretary to outline the processes in place to ensure that this is the case. Taser use is limited to specially trained officers who must undergo rigorous training and each officer to qualify to use a taser and take part in yearly refresher training in order to continue to be issued with a device. Ms Nicoll touches on an important point that, given the discharge of tasers in comparison with their overall use, that would demonstrate that in very difficult situations that the presence of an officer who is trained to use a taser does enable the de-escalation of an incident and furthermore to that. The deployment of tasers also allows the de-escalation of incidents from a safe distance, but it is a complex matter where the rights and responsibilities of all have to be protected and I am happy to correspond further with members.