 Good morning and welcome to the third meeting of the Education, Children and Young People. First item on our agenda today is to take evidence from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Covid Recovery, John Swinney MSP and his officials on the redress for survivors historical child abuse and care reconsideration and review of determinations Scotland regulations 2022. I welcome the Deputy First Minister to the committee this morning. Good morning, Mr Swinney. The Deputy First Minister is accompanied by Paul Beaton, the legislation and contributions unit head of the Scottish Government, Clare Montgomery Solicitor, the Scottish Government legal directorate, so good morning to both of you as well. Mr Swinney, can I invite you to first speak to the draft instrument? Thank you, convener, and I'm grateful for the opportunity to discuss this issue with the committee this morning to explain the detail of the affirmative instrument before the committee. As the committee will be aware, we passed a significant milestone at the end of last year with the launch of Scotland's redress scheme, which opened for applications on 8 December. I'm pleased to inform the committee that we have received more than 2,000 calls to the scheme since its launch, and more than 250 application forms have been received. That represents a significant step towards facing up to the wrongs of the past and the harm-caused society's most vulnerable children. As we move to deliver redress to survivors, we must ensure that the scheme operates fairly for all. Part of that is providing mechanisms to be able to reconsider and deal with determinations under the scheme that were made in error, including those relating to the outcome of a redress application. That clear goal is what the draft regulations before the committee today seek to achieve. Section 75 of the Redress for Survivors' Historical Child Abusing Care Scotland Act 2021 creates a reconsideration process whereby a redress Scotland panel can revisit a determination already made under part 4 of the act should a concern arise that it was materially affected by error. That includes where there was a potential mistake made in making the determination or where it is thought that the determination was made on the basis of incorrect or misleading information. Where the panel determines that an error has occurred, it must put that right. Importantly, where an applicant is not satisfied when they are told the outcome of a determination, they can request a review. Safeguards are included in the act so that when the review is linked to the determination of a redress application, an applicant cannot be prejudiced by exercising their review right. In practice, we hope and anticipate that we will very rarely require to use those reconsideration and review processes. As robust measures have been embedded throughout the application process and wider scheme to reduce the opportunity for error, error and potential fraud. However, those draft regulations aim to ensure that we have suitable mechanisms in place to support people through the reconsideration and review processes if required. They also allow us to respond in a fair and effective manner to all possible outcomes of those processes linked to the determination of a redress application. Whilst the range of possible outcomes is complex, the principle underpinning the proposed amendments to the act is simple. As far as possible, we wish to put an applicant back in the position that they would have been had an error not occurred. That may mean that an applicant is offered a different redress payment than the sum that they have been offered or have accepted previously, or that they may benefit from a fresh offer where an error has led to them not being given one before. In those scenarios, we intend that they will be given the option to do what is right for them, with the benefit of legal advice, by either accepting or rejecting the new offer. The waiver is a key and much debated aspect of the act. It is essential that the way in which it operates is fair. Those draft regulations therefore seek to amend section 46 of the act on waiver. The effect of the proposed amendments is that when an applicant is issued with an updated or fresh offer of a redress payment following a reconsideration or review, the waiver linked to that offer will reflect the contributor list at the time that the offer should have been made rather than the date of the offer itself. That will ensure that, where the offer is accepted, survivors do not miss out on any opportunity that they would otherwise have had to raise civil proceedings. When a person has already signed a waiver to accept a redress payment offer, which changes following the reconsideration or review process, we consider that it is only fair that they have the opportunity to reconsider that choice and receive legal advice at this critical stage in the process. We have therefore made provision for that and ensured that, if a person is content to accept a new offer, the waiver signed to accept their original offer will remain in place. If they decide that accepting the new offer is not the right option for them, they will be able to reject it, and any waiver signed to accept the original offer will be rendered off no effect. In the interests of fairness, we have also made provision for a waiver to be rendered off no effect, where it is determined that a person ought not to have been offered an award under the scheme. As I have stressed, those draft regulations ensure that people have access to support and advice, along with the provision for the payment of legal fees and reimbursement of costs and expenses, allowing them to fully understand and engage with the reconsideration and review processes and to make the choices that are right for them. That is the final draft instrument in a package for implementation of the redress scheme, and I welcome and appreciate the cross-party support that has ensured that we have delivered the scheme that survivors deserve. I hope that I have provided members with a sufficient overview of the draft instrument, and my officials and I welcome any questions that the committee may have. I ask if any members have any questions or comments on the draft instrument, you may indicate in the chat box. You rightly put great emphasis in the statement that you have just given us on fairness. In terms of the principles of fairness, at each point in the process, will the person at the centre of the process, which is clearly a claimant, have legal advice and will that be funded? There will be guidance that goes with the instruments that I have set out today in that way that we have worked through. I should acknowledge at the outset that it is a complex instrument. The reason for its complexity is that there are multiple permutations that have to be provided for to establish legal clarity, hence the complexity. I have looked at the issue very carefully with my officials and there is just no easy way around about it. Guidance has to accompany the instrument, but in relation to any judgments that a survivor is making, they will be supported by having access to legal advice at any point. It has been a crucial element of the redress scheme in its entire design that all applicants must be able to make informed judgments about what is the right course of action for them to take, that must be funded. There is a schedule in the instrument that sets out the arrangements for meeting the cost of legal advice, where that should be required by applicants. As you said, there are very few examples of that at all, but in the case where there is any suggestion of fraud, the legal advice for the individual concern would still be part of the funded package of support that they would get through the process. Is that right? That is correct, because we have to be—obviously, the consideration of what has led to the circumstances that have given rise to reconsideration must ensure that individuals are supported without prejudice in that process. A conclusion that fraud has perhaps occurred is that it is not a starting point to the process, so individuals have to have the access to the necessary advice to support them in that process. As you said, it is a very complex situation, with many permutations, but you have been very clear in your answers around the principles of fairness being upheld at all points in the process, as far as the individuals at the centre of the process are concerned. Do any other colleagues have questions for the Deputy First Minister? We will now move on to agenda item 2. Our next item of business is to invite the Deputy First Minister to move motion S6M-02797 that the Education, Children and Young People Committee recommends that the redress for survivors historical child abuse and care reconsideration review of determinations Scotland regulations 2022 be approved. I invite the Deputy First Minister to speak to you and move the motion. I move the motion that stands in my name and the comments that I have placed on the record are adequate contribution to the explanation of the order. I move the motion in my name. The question is that motion S6M-02797, in the name of John Swinney, be approved. Are we all agreed? The committee must now produce its report on the draft instrument. Is the committee content to delegate responsibility to the deputy convener and I to agree the report on behalf of the committee? Are we agreed? We are agreed. I would like to thank John Swinney, the Deputy First Minister and his officials for their attendance today. Thank you very much. I will pause briefly before we move on to item 3. Our third item of business is the consideration of subordinate legislation, the nutritional requirements for food and drink in schools Scotland amendment regulations 2021. Do members have any comments on this instrument? Maybe I can start off by saying that I have questions about this instrument. I have specific concerns about any legislative regulation that involves reducing the requirement to maintain nutritional standards in the food that we serve to children in school. The 2020 regulations are designed to keep salt, sugar, fat and saturated fats in food and drink that are provided in schools to an appropriate level. When we have a regulation, which is now in effect because this is a negative instrument, that means that ministers have already enacted the regulation, the questions that I have are why, at this stage in the pandemic, why is the regulation now being brought forward? Have there been examples where the regulation has been applied in schools in Scotland since it was enacted in December? What is the reporting method for that? How long will the regulation be in place? On what basis will it be removed? If there is no date at which it expires, which there is, at what point will it be removed? Clearly, I do not think that anyone wants to see that particular amendment to the regulation on nutritional value of the food that we are serving in schools. I do not think that we want to see that perpetuated longer than it is necessary, if it is necessary at all. I am not entirely clear why it is necessary at this point in time. Those are the questions that I have. There is nobody here to answer those questions. I am going to bring in Willie Rennie, because he wants to add some words. I agree with all the questions that you have. In fact, all the papers that we have received are no explanation for why that is required. We have seen some of the media reports about how councils have found it difficult to get supplies of the right quality. We do not know how widespread that is. Is it on-going? Why is it the case? The original regulations that were brought in were introduced in April, which was quite a significant time after the start of leaving the European Union and well into the pandemic. I am puzzled as to why that is required. Also, so soon after the order was brought in in the first place, why was an escape shoot, if I want to put it that way, from providing the standard? Why was that not considered as part of the regulation in the first place? Why is it being brought in now? There are issues around timing and just the explanation as to why it is necessary. I just think that we should try to get those explanations from the minister before we proceed. Thank you Willie Rennie. I think that there are quite a lot of questions that arise in relation to that. What we will do as a result of this conversation is part of our meeting and the comments that Willie Rennie and I have made is that we will, with the agreement of the committee, have the clerks send a letter to the relevant minister, to teach him an understanding as to what the answer star questions are so that we can bring that back for consideration. I hope that that is agreeable to colleagues. Fergus Ewing. Yes, thank you, convener. I think that it is perfectly reasonable to ask for more information, so I have no objection to that. When we are asking for that further information, convener, I wonder if we could add to that request that we get an update as to the progress that is being made and the current status and take up of the food for life programme, which involves councils receiving assistance in order to, if you like, support local purchasing of food locally with local supply chains. I think that the soil association is involved with that and that I had former involvement with it from time to time and visited, for example, East Ayrshire, which is seen as a leader in that regard, but also Highland Council, where they do things like purchase food from a local butcher, which serves hundreds of schools. Those things are difficult and are not easy to do, but we all support the purchase of local food rather than buying chickens from Thailand or whatever. If we are going to ask for information, I wonder if we could ask for information about that, because I understand that most of the 32 local authorities, certainly over half, are subscribers to the programme, but some are not, so it would be useful to get an update on what has been, convener, and I know that that will be close to your heart, a Scottish Government good news story. Thank you, Fergus Ewing. I am all for good news, as you do. This is not the butcher and the grandson of a small farmer. I am all for the idea of local food. We have discussed in the past informally the nature and the quality of the food that we are serving in school dinners in Scotland schools, so I will very much welcome your comments. I am going to bring in Bob Doris. Just very briefly, convener, the line of questioning yourself and Willie Rennie is absolutely justified. I will draw members' attention to just one line in the papers that we have for today's meeting, which says that, from the Government, this amendment is intended to be temporary, in response to specific circumstances, and ministers intend to revoke it as to the circumstances allow. That is precisely what we need more information and clarity on, so if that comes out within correspondence, that would be ideal. Yeah, thank you. That does crystallise the concerns that we have been expressing. Thank you for that, Bob Doris. At this point, with the committee's agreement, we will have that letter sent to ministers, and we will share the contents of the reply that we get. I think that everyone is agreeing. Thank you. On that basis, I wish to move on to agenda item 4, which is the evidence session that we have organised for today on drink and medial biking. Joining us today for a roundtable discussion is Jill Stevenson, the Diversity and Inclusion and Director of Student Services at the University of Stirling and the Director of Association of Managers of Student Services in Higher Education. Ellen McCrae, president of the Edinburgh University Students Association, Martha Williams, the girl's night in campaign, might grieve who is chair of the night time industries association. Looking for Michael McSqueen, I'm sure he's there somewhere. Oh, there he is. Superintendent Hillary Sloan, partnerships prevention and community wellbeing, arm prevention, Police Scotland. Andrew Greene, policy manager, pub operations, the Scottish Beer and Pub Association. Professor Sally Mapstone, principal and vice chancellor of the University of St Andrews and vice convener of the University of Scotland, and Kate Wallace, chief executive officer of Victim Support Scotland. Thank you for your time today. A bit of housekeeping to begin our session is intended to be a virtual roundtable. We've all been working on screens long enough to know some of the challenges that that might present in order for us to have a conventional roundtable and the dynamic of conversation around the table that we would normally have. It's intended that it will be conversational rather than a question and answer session. As I can't see everybody on the screen at any one time, please put an R in the chat box. I will come straight to you. Please do not wait to be asked to say anything, to want to say something. We want to hear from you and we want to hear you talk to each other, so I'll be monitoring the chat box. I'll make sure that everyone who wants to speak is brought in. If I can start our discussion, the number of reported crimes under the two relevant offences that we're talking about has increased significantly, particularly in quarter or last year. What do the panel think in terms of those offences? Has there risen significantly in 2021? Why has there been a spike in the reported incident of those crimes? Who would like to go first? I mean, maybe Superintendent Hillary Sloan. Would you like to start us off on that? Yes, thank you, convener. Obviously, as you've said, there was a significant increase in reporting of spiking incidents mid-October, which coincided with public concern in relation to the wider pace regarding violence against women and girls. That is where we have seen the increase. The reporting spiked around the Halloween weekend, but I am pleased to say that, since then, it has been on the downward trajectory. That is really good news from a Police Scotland perspective. What has been key to that, I am hoping, is the work that we have been doing in partnership with various organisations, some of which are represented around the table today, to share communications messages, to provide consistent message to all and to provide public reassurance to the public that they should have the confidence to report incidents to Police Scotland? What is your assessment as to what caused that uptick over the Halloween period? Was it in one specific geographic area? Was it one set of events? What was it? The three primary areas where the incidents have been most prevalent are in the student cities, Aberdeen, Glasgow and Edinburgh. It usually coincides with the start of the fresher week. We usually see an increase around that time, but, as you have highlighted, convener, clearly there was a significant increase this week around about Halloween. Again, that was due to other issues that were prevalent within social media, but, again, linking in with the universities and members of the people around the room today to understand what the issues were, to get a clear picture of what was happening and to share that consistent message among all of us to ensure that we were providing that support that was required for a particular student population. I agree with Hilary that there is still a lot of work to be done to gauge the extent and prevalence of spiking in Scotland. That is one of the issues that we might discuss today. How best can we work with young people to ensure that we get that information and can use it properly? It is relevant to say that that is obviously a matter that particularly affects young people, and that includes students. However, we should not think that that is something that is exclusively confined to the student community. That is perhaps an important point to register that spiking as a programme is more widespread than in our universities and colleges and in the towns associated with them. There is no doubt that it can be associated with the start of term and young people getting together. I think that that is true. However, Hilary makes a really important point in stressing the progress that we have made in getting evidence in working with our young people and our students to get out there and the kind of information both about how to deal with the situation in which you may think that you have been spiked, but also to prevent it and to generate that culture of support. A further point that I would like to make in relation to that is that prevention should very much be in relation to the perpetrators and that it really is important that we listen to students in this context and that we do not get into the culture of victim blaming, which really is not appropriate and does not help young people. Thanks, Sally. Let's hear the voice of the students. Thank you very much. I firstly want to start off by agreeing with Sally's point around that it is obviously not just students who are impacted by this, yet I think that it is true that every young person and student knows at least one other person who has been spiked during a night out. Within the student community, that does not feel like an uncommon occurrence yet. That does not make it any less frightening, of course. I think that there are issues that are presented with reporting and that is why I know that there has been an increase in spiking incidents or whether more people are just coming forward. I think that that comes down to a challenge of young people knowing how to report things. I think that there is a challenge when women and other young people want to come forward, but they do not know whether they will be believed or taken seriously. However, there are a variety of different reporting systems that may feel unclear. It is not certain whether I feel like quite a lot of young people do not know whether they should go to the police or to their university or to their students association, and understandably it can be a very emotionally burdensome process. Minimising the number of times that a young person would have to talk about this is obviously our goal. For example, our student associations advice place since September 2021 has had five drink spiking and two suspected injection spiking inquiries, but we know that there has been a lot more than that reported within the city of Edinburgh at the moment. I think that there is a real issue in trying to understand the scale of the picture due to the level of reporting. I would also like to add that there is a capacity issue within university systems that is currently struggling to handle the volume of gender-based violence reports that come on campus and that happen within the city. They are most definitely linked with, in some cases, incidences of spiking, but I will pause there. Thank you. Let's bring in Martha from the girls' might in campaign. Hi, good morning everyone. I just wanted to give another student perspective on one of the initial points, which was why now has spiking escalated. I think that an explanation that I have come to is that, obviously, the pandemic has been keeping us all indoors for years now. This beginning of term reflected the first time that people have been able to come out again and experience nightclub culture. I think that, with the spiking by injection claims, because those were so severe, they were taken more seriously by authorities, but they encouraged other victims of spiking to come forward after they had seen that it was becoming something that was being paid attention to. I think that spiking has always been a prevalent issue. I think that the pandemic has obviously prevented it from happening for a few years, because those environments have not been facilitated. My analysis is that once authorities showed that they were interested in spiking and that they were curious into the incidents of injection spiking, all the other victims felt as though their stories mattered and that they could come forward. I will go back to another point. In recent statistics that were gathered by a social media spike report over the past month, it was reported that only 36 per cent of people who believed that they had been spiked reported it to the police, and only 62 per cent of those who submitted it reported the spiking incident to the venue. It is still being massively under-reported. Obviously, there is only so much that the police and the authorities can do if they are not gathering those reports. What is the reason for that, Marthe? I think that there is such a culture, as Alan was saying, of victim blaming. People are afraid that, if they come forward, their story will not be taken seriously. Unfortunately, there is a lot of shame that is associated with sexual assault and things of this nature. It comes from a place of fear and years of oppression of women and people not taking sexual assault seriously. One of the main concerns should be changing that focus or changing that stigma, and encouraging people to come forward and show that, if they do, they will be supported instead of shamed. Stephanie Callans put a note in the chat function here to ask you a little bit more about the data from that survey that you mentioned. Can you just run through that 36 per cent that reported? How did they go about reporting? The data was gathered from a social media account that has made an outlet for people to come forward and report incidents of spiking that they think that they have experienced. It does not represent all of the spiking incidents that have taken place in general, just those that the social media account has gathered. The 36 per cent from the last month reported it to the police. I am not exactly sure of the process that they used to do that, but those are just self-reports. The 60 per cent of submitters reported it to the venue. I am guessing that that would mean that they reached out to staff at the venue either through social media or calling them. I am not exactly sure of the specifics of how people have gone about reporting those incidents, but that is what I gathered. I will turn to Kate Wallace. You might be able to add some further light. Thanks for bringing me in. The under-reporting of crime generally is an issue. It is about less than half of people who report crime to the police than say that they have been a victim of crime, so I think that Martha Spiggers will not be too far away. We know that under-reporting of spiking is generally an issue, and that is why that is fear of not being believed, fear of, and lack of understanding, as a previous speaker mentioned about the process. Actually, it is not 100 per cent being sure of yourself whether that has happened either. Fear of being retraumatised through the whole criminal justice process is a concern for many people who have found themselves potential in that situation. Our rape crisis has been asking around pathways for people who suspect that they have been spiked to be able to get access to health screening and testing so that they can find that out without going forward to the police. We raised that in some other roundtables that have been held, and we have not had an answer back on that as far as I know, but that certainly would help to find out whether they have been spiked. There is a culture of under-reporting around spiking. I agree completely with Sally that that is not just a student issue. Our rape crisis and the calls that we get to our helplines are not just a student issue. Also, the prevention and moving away from a feeling of victim blaming that it is all on victims to prevent the situation and keep themselves safe. That culture absolutely has to be shifted, and that is something that Hilary mentioned. We saw a pretty unusual situation cropping up at the back end of October around spiking by injection, but by far the most prevalent method of spiking is additional unwanted alcohol. It is important to remember that. As we move out of the pandemic and the unusual situation that we have had around lockdowns and the rest of it, home parties are an issue as well. We have been seeing quite a different picture over the past couple of years, but ordinarily we would see spiking with additional alcohol as being the most prevalent, and house parties have been an area of concern for people as well. Given as many support pathways and victims who suspect that they have been spiked access to testing to find out if they have been without necessarily needing to report to the police and making sure that there are many referral pathways as possible in place so that people can access support and help for us as the way forward. Remember that there is no specific crime by spiking either, so that does not help in terms of engaging in prevalence. That is a very important point that you have just raised. You mentioned the settings in which you described it as additional and welcome alcohol—I presume that people put alcohol into soft drinks and such. Given that you have overtracked holes when you have not asked for that? What is the most likely setting for that? Did you suggest that it was more in a private setting? It is multiple, but it is not just one or the other. What I wanted to do was to make sure that people remember that spiking can occur outwith nightclubs and pubs in the nighttime economy, that spiking is an issue in private residencies, too. It is not an either order, it is not a more or less order. It is something that can happen and that people need to be aware of. As Sally said, we need to be addressing the perpetrators directly, that that is not acceptable in Scotland and not a country where we see that as an acceptable behaviour. We and Police Scotland have focused our communications on perpetrator behaviour. It is them that we need to communicate with and not with the victims. We are a victim-centred organisation and we have been completely victim-focused from the very start in relation to the issue. What I would say is that partnership working in collaboration with all the blue light services and the people that are represented around the table today has been absolutely key for us to share that communications toolkit that we pulled together. We shared that with all the partners around the table. We have made sure that the messaging is consistent and really encouraging people to report instances to us. Ideally, we want people to be confident to report matters to us, whether it is the day after or in a week's time. We want them to be confident in Police Scotland to report those incidents to us. From the collaboration work that we have done with the partners, that has really helped that piece. We need to keep working on it. The networks are now established. We are all communicating with each other on a fairly regular basis. We are all cited on any issues that might be that we can raise with each other. For me, the absolute key is having public confidence for people to report incidents to us. Every single one of them will be taken completely seriously, will be investigated thoroughly and, more importantly, what we did also issue was what to expect document for those people who were reticent about reporting to Police Scotland in the first place, put their mind at rest about what would happen in relation to their reporting and incident to us in the first place. That has been widely disseminated. I hope that that should make a real difference for those individuals who are maybe a bit fearful of reporting in the first instance. I do have a comment earlier about reporting. Someone who has a victim, someone who has had this perpetrated upon them, how would they normally be reporting? Would they go to hospital? Would they go to the venue? What is the typical reporting journey? I suppose that it depends on the individual convener and what they wish to do themselves. Obviously, we have the bystander awareness training that we have been sharing with licensed premises staff, which encourages them to look out for signs of where any person is in distress. The person could report to somebody within the licensed premises, they could report to the Scottish Ambulance Service, they could report to their local A&E, or they could report via 101 or 999 to the police. There are various ways in which they report that. For me, the key is making sure that those communications then come back to Police Scotland so that we are sighted on if the individual is in agreement and that we will then become involved and then provide that wraparound for those individuals and help to sign post them as well with regard to further assistance should it be required. I want to make a quick point. One of the key issues in the whole conversation is the fact that there is such a lack of clarity on the procedure for reporting spikings. I think that that goes back to education of the culture of this whole, the all of these incidents, but mainly as a student, as someone who this could very well happen to, and I know a lot of people who this has happened to, nobody really knows the exact procedure, that is no clear-cut procedure and I think that is one of the fundamental issues, because if that is not being widely publicised as something that should be done afterwards, then people will not do it. It is already a trauma that they have experienced and so that they may be not completely motivated to then do all this research to find the specific thing that they have to do afterwards. Something that should be a focus from here on out is establishing a clear procedure of who to go to and where to go to. I am sure that that is one, but I think that it just needs to be more integrated into the education that is surrounding this topic. It is up then that we turn to Jill Stevenson from the University of Stirling, the director of the Association of Managers of Student Services in our education, Jill. I hope that I can pick up on some of those points. I am notwithstanding the valid points that have already been made today about this not just being a student issue but a wider societal issue, I just obviously want to reassure the committee how seriously universities take this. Other than prevention, which I think that we can talk about more, our primary focus is really on encouraging students to come forward if they have been a victim of any type of gender-based violence, but including spiking, encouraging those reports and ensuring that we are supporting them effectively. On reporting, I can advise that almost all universities now have been really increasing their efforts in introducing reporting systems, centralising reporting systems to encourage people to come forward with reports, and those can be either named reports or anonymous reports that will then be dealt with centrally. We have all of us again, if not all, have trained up staff who can then take those reports and are trained in disclosures. Some of the institutions have what you would call SPMOs or SPLOs, and they are sexual violence liaison officers who are trained to take those reports. Their role is then to work with people who come forward with disclosures and basically ascertain what support they need. People may want to report formally to the university or to the police indeed, or they may just want support, such as counselling or emotional support. That is what we have been investing in to help to respond to those reports, as well as investing in the reporting systems that I mentioned. There is also a lot of training on first responders as well. Although SPLOs are more trained in dealing with disclosures, we understand that a report of the site could come into anybody in the university. It could be personal tutor, somebody in accommodation, it could be a cleaner, for example. We are also investing in training to help staff to understand where they would direct students to if they disclosed something like this so that they could get support. On communication and awareness raising, it has been really important for us to, because of the transient populations that we have and all the valid points that have been made about concerns about reporting, there has been a lot of work put in to try and encouraged students to feel comfortable with coming forward. The points that have already been made about not using victim blaming sentiments but encouraging support. You will see examples of those campaigns at pre-entry, welcome and induction programmes in university to really get into people's minds early on in their student journey and then throughout as well. I think that Hilary's point is right about communicating with perpetrators that this is their fault, their responsibility and that this will not be tolerated in universities and wider society. However, I do think that there is that important message to victims as well about whether they will be believed or supported, so please do come forward. I think that there are some good examples of that during the pandemic as well, not just about spiking, but examples of messages that went out to students that said that, if you have been socialising when you should not be, for example, during the pandemic, do not let that be a barrier to come forward. You will not be judged for that, you will not be supported, so the same sort of messaging is now going out for them for spiking as well. I might touch on that later, but one final point that I want to really make is that universities are part of our real partnership approach to that. The importance of partnership is vital. We are an important cog in the wheel, but the partnership approach across cities is important. Again, I can talk more about examples of really good partnerships that are in place with the nighttime economy, which will clearly have a role here. Martha mentioned, Jill, that young people have been locked in, locked down. That was one of the reasons that she gave, which I think is very plausible to this uptick that we saw. There was also a comment from Ellen about the endemic nature of gender-based violence. Has there been anoptic across the board in relation to reported incidents of gender-based or sex-based violence? Again, that is such a complex question, because there are all types—I would have probably deferred the police on prevalence across that—but we know with all types of gender-based violence that it is under-reported across society. Our focus, as I say, in universities is trying to encourage people to come forward. Yes, there will be—since people have brought reporting systems in, they will be seen increasing, but I would say that that is a really positive thing for us to see people, more people coming forward. It is variable depending on the type of offence and type of systems that are in place, but I agree with the points about under-reporting across society and, as I say, we defer to Police Scotland for more on that. Hilary, do you want to make a quick comment on that? Then I will bring in Kocab Stewart, who has a point about what might be addressed to Mike and Andrew. Yes, convener, thank you. Probably what I would say is that the confidence in people to report incidents to us, whether it is gender-based violence or any other crime, is absolutely key for us. We want people to come forward and report instances to us. I know that there was discussion there about a wee bit of confusion around how the incident should be reported. Police Scotland wants to hear from anybody who is the victim of any crime. That is really important to get across here, that we want to hear from those individuals. I think that that public confidence is absolutely key. Working in collaboration with the partners is absolutely key to increase that public confidence, to give people the courage to report incidents, and then for us to provide that support, that victim-centred support to them as we undertake the investigation. Maybe I will just ask you directly again for clarity, at least from my understanding. When you described the uptick that we saw in October around freshers and in spiking, was that in line with the trend in relation to the general gender-based violence, gender-based victim? I would not be able to comment on whether that has been an increase generally with gender-based violence, but what I said previously was that spiking incidents traditionally increase roundabout freshers week. That spike at that time of the year is familiar to us. The volume was more than in previous years. I just wanted to bring in Andrew Greene here. I thought that it was important to get the perspective from the pubs and the licensed trades. I am particularly interested in their perspectives on that, but also regarding staff training and how the bystander model is working. Thank you very much. Both myself and Mike here represent trade bodies, so we probably have very similar perspectives on that. Just to confirm from our perspective, we encourage our membership and the pubs that are covered in our membership that these are serious events that should be taken seriously when they are reported to staff. Alerts and well-trained staff are key within that to detect the signs, the behaviour and when people are falling ill and what they should be doing about that. They should have safeguarding procedures as part of their wider framework for looking after their customers anyway, but we encourage them to always take reports to staff seriously, so that they should activate their safeguarding procedures when they are reported, whether that is looking after the health of the customer or making sure that they have got their friends with them or that, if they want the police, the police are called, but then also making sure that they are accurately recording and logging those events so that there is some sort of evidence or trail if the police do become involved at a later date and possibly also for any internal procedures so that they can improve their own activities for later, for looking after customers. It has taken extremely seriously, but it also falls within a wider remit of general welfare and safeguarding of customers, and you are right. Alertness of staff and well-trained staff are a key element in that, whether it is understanding that to look out for the signs in customers, to look out for the signs in the behaviour of other customers towards the friends within groups, and also appreciating that spiking is a criminal offence. As was mentioned earlier, that includes alcohol spiking. Extra measures of alcohol is a criminal offence, so staff need to understand that. If they are aware that that is going on, they stop that. That messaging is key across the process. Sorry, it is difficult with the virtual thing. It overlaps a little bit. I apologise for that. I am happy if Mike wants to come in as well, if he has got anything to add. You keep records so that there is trail, which is great. Can you give me an indication of, has there been an increase of your record keeping? I meant numbers for the clumsy wording there. Maybe I should clarify that. We would recommend that venues should do that as part of their procedure. They should record that. Whether a venue does or doesn't is entirely down to them. Maybe that harks back a little bit to some of the points that were made earlier about consistency, how those things are recorded and what should be recorded. So some consistent framework would be essential. Otherwise, it is largely up to the venue what details they are taking. They would probably be doing that from prior experience and their involvement with the police as to what evidence is useful. When it happened, who they think was involved, potentially was there any CCTV footage available, those sorts of details, but anecdotally, if I go back to was I noticing any increase? No, I would go back to the superintendent's comments that, spiking per se, you see an increase in reported events around about freshers week every year, but otherwise, we weren't hearing from our members of any extra concerns this year over and above what they had in the past. Obviously, it's a very serious thing and should be taken account of, but were we noticing anything over and above, I'd have to say, from what we were hearing from members, no, we weren't. Equally, that's not an official poll, that's not measurement, that's just an anecdotal. I'm just interested in taking you back. You were saying that it's good practice to keep records, but there is no compulsion and there's no expectation. What do you think would be the opinion of the industry if there was that idea to bring in some kind of enforcement that venues have to keep records? What do you think they might feel about that? They want to know what was driving it. We talked right at the start about the consistency of reporting. I think that something that underpins all of this is that we perhaps don't have a very accurate sense of what is the prevalence of this. The adoption of any legislative or mandatory requirement has to be underpinned by some sort of solid evidence as to why that's coming in. We'd want to be happy that that justified any framework coming in, but I suppose I don't think that you should be looking at spiking in isolation. Potentially, if you're going to bring something in, there are other welfare and safeguarding instances that might occur in a venue that you should be recording as well. Therefore, any framework that you're going to adopt should arguably be wider than just thinking about drink spiking. That's an important point to make if we're looking at gender-based violence as well as that. Mike, did you want to come in there? Yes, thank you very much and good morning, everyone. I just want to add a little bit of context to what Andrew is saying. Primarily, my organisation represents the late night side of the hospitality sector. Of course, for us there are different things at play here. It's worth mentioning that when we're talking about the record incident procedures for late-night venues, it is a mandatory thing. It's a condition of licence that all incidents of any sort are reported. Our members are very familiar with those procedures, our staff are very familiar with those procedures and are used in conjunction with CCTV. It does, in fact, provide a pretty robust system for checking back over any kind of incident that may have happened either on the premises or outdoors at the premises, because very often incidents of one sort or another will happen outside of premises that technically would not necessarily be the responsibility of the premises, but by and large, premises take those responsibilities or take the duty of care very, very seriously. On training, again, the late-night economy has been at the forefront of training initiatives working with various groups over the years on bystander training, both in engagement with Police Scotland and with other organisations. That is an issue that has, as I will, continued to be taken very seriously. That is just for a little bit of further context from a late-night economy perspective. I agree with a lot of the comments that others have made here. I agree that this is not a problem that is unique to the student community, but there is a clear correlation between freshers week and an upsurge in reporting of spiking. Some of us in this round table have been involved in on-going round table discussions with the police and with the Scottish Government and other bodies on this. One thing that I would say about the upsurge that happened around Halloween, and we saw reporting of it from members that people had made representations that there had been spiking incidents and the police obviously have that information to hand to. One thing that I think is relevant to that is the fact. The point was made earlier in relation to people being locked down for a couple of years. One thing that I think is very key to that upsurge is that, in fact, there was no freshers week in 2020. 2021, in effect, was a double whammy. We see that in our industry, not just in relation to spiking but in relation to all sorts of behaviours within the late-night economy and the activities that students undertake. There is a clear pathway from leaving school through university or college coming into the big bad wider world, going out with friends and all the stuff that we all know that people do. A lot of the learnings that young people take is peer learning. The 2020 intake of students did not have the opportunity for that peer learning because there was no freshers week. I am just trying to illustrate a point here that I think that that definitely, in my opinion, contributed to the upsurge in incidents, certainly in reported incidents, around the Halloween period. In many respects, it is a very positive thing that this is being drawn into the public consciousness in the way that it has. It has presented difficulties for a lot of people, particularly in our industry, but it has also drawn attention to it and it has caused various groups, including the people around this table today, to take seriously some of the actions that are required. Finally, I will go back to the procedures around it and, for me, the consistency in how the reporting of those incidents happens is a key thing. The protocols around that. The chief superintendent said that they would always encourage people to report to the police, and that is quite correct. However, we have reporting to venues, to the ambulance service, to student services, to the police. There needs to be clear pathways for victims or people who suspect that they are victims to report that type of incident in a way that can be measured and tracked. That is not ignoring the difficulties in that, because there are real difficulties. Testing, for instance, is not a straightforward, simple thing. Many of the substances that are believed to be involved in those incidents cannot be traced in the blood scene after 24 hours. There is a conflict about the needle-spiking thing, where many experts have said that it is impossible to inject somebody with a needle with the sufficient quantities of the type of substances that can cause those effects. There is still a great deal of uncertainty about what is really going on here. What I would encourage the Scottish Government to do, if I can be so bold, is to look to introduce protocols that are clear and simple for venues, for student services, for students themselves and for others in the communities, without alarming people about it. However, make clear what those pathways are. I think that the final thing that I would like to say is just on the training issue. The consistency in training is vital. At the moment, there is not a plethora of training agencies out there who can help with bystander training, for instance. It is left to venues to try to locate those services themselves and to bring that in for their employees. There should be a more concerted approach to that, where there are easy access points that are encouraged and supported by the Government to allow that to happen. I am sorry that that was a long ramble, but I sat and waited to hear a lot of the other points first. I have got all that opportunity. I think that you have comments about needle spiking. Have you seen any evidence whatsoever of needle spiking across all the different businesses that you represent? Has anyone come in for it said that they have seen any evidence of needle spiking at all? We have had reports that some people have reported needle spiking. It is nothing like as prevalent as it was— In the venues that your association— Around Halloween, I know of a handful of venues where there were reports of needle spiking. In each of those occasions, the police have investigated it, and in each of those occasions they found absolutely no evidence of it. I hope that the police superintendent can back that up. To my knowledge, there has been no confirmed or affirmed incident of a needle spiking situation in Scotland during that period. I will bring in Willie Rennie in a second. I will work with a couple of questions for you and Andrew really. You mentioned the training, your staff training. Help me to understand what they are looking for and if they see it, how do they intervene? What happens if their intervention has no effect? What do they do? Will you just talk me through that? I mean, staff are trained, again. I am only really talking for the late night economy, but I staff are trained to watch out for all sorts of behaviours. Responsible premises is trying to keep potential perpetrators out of their premises as much as possible. That front line of the SES badge stewards is a vital component in that. Staff within the venue, staff on the bar, are trained to watch out for anybody who may be, for instance—I agree that drink spiking is probably the most prevalent form of it, but they are trained to watch out for people who are double-loading drinks. For instance, if, for the sake of argument, I went to the bar and ordered a drink for myself in a triple vodka for my companion, that is an alarm bell. If somebody orders half a dozen shots of a spirit, our staff would be trained to gauge where those drinks are going for once they leave the bar. They are not just willing, they are not going to agree that there is somebody or that there is a guy. That is the third time that he has been ordered six shots of tequila. I wonder what is going on there. Staff are very aware of that. Of course, that cannot be taken to be universal, but it is certainly encouraged by our association and by responsible operators. What would they do, Mike? What would they do after they have noted that there is something suspicious going on in relation to the pattern of buying shots or whatever? The first port of call would be to report, depending on the seniority, to report to the charge hand on the bar or to the manager of the venue, depending on who was most local to whatever was going on. The manager would then speak with the head steward. The steward would monitor the people that have been identified and generally keep an eye on the situation. As I said, that is something that our staff do all the time. They are watching all the time for any signs of inappropriate behaviour of any sort. It is important to note that, from a venue perspective, anything that becomes a problem becomes a problem for the venue. Quite apart from looking after the safety of the individual, which is our primary concern at all times, nobody needs to end up in a situation where three out of their six stewards are effectively taking out of the game for 45 minutes waiting for an ambulance to arrive, which is what happens. It puts pressures on from all sorts of sides. Generally speaking, in late-night venues, things are pretty well oiled machines, things are run in that kind of way. I am confident in saying that the vast majority of late-night operators have those sort of protocols in place. A typical venue would have a pretty open communication channel with the police on duty in the locality that the venue is situated? Absolutely. Most venues of the type that I am describing are in radio communication with each other and with the venue manager. Generally speaking, someone who has a charge hand on the bar would also have a radio link to the stewards and to the manager. Those things happen quite quickly. From there, communication with the police and the manager generally, or one of the door stewards, would simply use a mobile phone to do a 911 or just attract the attention, depending on the location, if there is police about on the street. That would be the other way that that would happen. There are pretty straightforward communication levels. What can be an issue is attendance times with the police. Similar to what I have described with stewards in a venue, police are occupied with one incident or in one part of a city centre, for instance, it can be difficult for the police to attend as quickly as they would like or as we would like, but the same goes for ambulance services. There is an ancillary issue of the availability of first responders across the board in terms of blue light and that is a point well made. Will there be any who has been very patiently waiting to jump into the conversation? No, that is all. It is fascinating. What has come to be very clear is that the bigger threat that has been present for a long time is the use of alcohol and applying alcohol into their victims in order to gain control. Is there a danger that the recent publicity over drug spiking with a needle or in the drink is giving an unfair or an incorrect focus on that when what we want people to do is to be alert to the traditional drink spiking with extra alcohol, triple shots and so on? The second question is to the students and victims and others. Are the pubs and venues uniformly—I do not think that it is uniformly—but are they meeting Mike's standard that he set out about what you expect from the staff in order to deal with that? If not, how do we change it? I do not know who wants to go first. Kate, do you want to go first? I think that you were the first to raise the whole alcohol triple shot issue. I think that it is about understanding at all, which is why I mentioned the alcohol point and having an understanding about spiking across the board. One of the things that I just wanted to do as well was to clarify the legal situation in Scotland, because it is different in England. Andrew Green talked about a crime. The crime in Scotland is two, but one of them is about administering the substance for sexual purposes and then the other crime in Scotland is drugging. The legal position is different in Scotland. There is no specific, as I said earlier, crime of spiking per se, if it does not fall into either of those two categories. I do not think that it is an either or, as I said before, Willie. I think that it has been alert and aware of all of it. I agree with some of the comments that have been made, as I said earlier, on reporting and referral pathways. We have to get to a position where we have a trauma-informed response across a number of different organisations where people are given choice and control about who it is that they want to report to and when. Everybody is clear about that, so that we have a no-wrong-door approach on that would be what I want to see. Certainly, as Hilary said earlier on, we are making moves towards that, but I do not think that we are there yet. Unfortunately, the conversation that we have just had around injection spiking is not helpful from a potential victim's point of view. We spent a lot of time this morning talking about moving away from victim blaming, but we need to be really careful about how that message comes across to people who fear that they may be dismissed, who are not quite sure what has happened to them and where, as someone said earlier on, some of these substances lead people's system really quite quickly. Here, in a message that there is absolutely no evidence to support a claim, it is not the same as saying that this has not happened and nor will it ever happen. I think that we need to just be really careful about our communications and our messages around that, so that we truly are encouraging people to come forward to report. We have really effective support in place for people from a number of different places, depending on the choices that they have. Everybody is clear on what the next step should be. I go back to my point about people being able to access testing and screening at that point without reporting to the police, because that is really important. That is what I want to say. A trauma-informed approach to this across the board is what is coming out for me this morning about something that we have still got. We have made some headway into it, but we have still got quite a bit of work to do together on it. The question about pubs and venues is that there are probably others on this that are better placed to respond to that than I am. The feedback that we get is that it is patchy, but others might be able to give you some more detail on that. Just take them in order. Sallie Mapstone? Thank you, Willie. Kate has made a lot of the points that I wanted to make, but I just want to add in a couple here. There is quite a lot of evidence that the victims of spiking are predominantly women. That is a point that we have not explicitly acknowledged today. It explains some of the association of spiking with gender-based violence, and again that is something that we need to take on board, because that is one of the broader contexts in which it is necessary to consider spiking. I want to get back to the point that you were also looking at, Willie. Because of the association with gender-based violence, we often associate spiking with malice and assault, but spiking can also take place, as a number of colleagues have said today, in an attempt, a misguided attempt, to bolster a good night out. That is where the education side of this is so incredibly important, that we build a cultural awareness that that kind of thing is not fun and risks you actually coming into the zone of being accused of a crime. Kate is quite right to keep mentioning and raising the issue of spiking in the criminal context in Scotland, which is not that clear and really comes in under other types of crime, rather than being unlawful offence in its own right. I think that that is something that would merit some further inquiry. Just one other point is to build on what a couple of colleagues have said. Students' feedback to us is that, when they are trying to build this culture of support, they are increasingly finding out that students will say that they would like to have testing available and testing strips available. That sounds very simple and it sounds like a sort of nice solution or a way of engaging with this problem. The whole testing strip culture is a complicated one. Some tests only test for one drug, which may not be a particularly, if you like, relevant drug in a particular community. Some tests for a variety but are not widely available. They are actually quite expensive within the student community. In my own institution, we have, if you like, stockpiled some testing kits, but we are not just handing them out readily, because they are quite expensive. It is about £40 a strip. You can get them in batches of 15. However, if they are being administered via a student's association, that can add up to quite an expensive bill. When we are really trying to build the culture here of protection and prevention, those are some of the things that we are going to need to get into from the resourcing perspective. A couple of quick observations on points, and then there may be a more substantive point about bystander training. One of my observations was that there was a point made about instance of increased during freshers week. I just wanted to sort of give my perspective that victims, of course, then maybe students but not necessarily perpetrators. I think that we could be looking at, certainly, the presence of opportunities with that population and also Sally's point there about actually that it could be something else altogether. There was also a point made about, because it was not a freshers week during the pandemic, that there was maybe not an opportunity for the education to be going out to students. I just wanted to come back on that to say that it was actually quite the opposite. In the actual universities, we are really investing in communications, messaging and training around that in an online capacity and have really strengthened online programmes. As I said before, work has gone into induction and welcome as well. Just to reassure about the work that is being done on that, we have definitely taken an alternative approach to that during the pandemic. Indeed, we will be working on a more blended approach going forward. To my point about bystander intervention and training, I think that there is a point that Stephanie raised earlier in the chat about training and protocols for young people, because, as well as being potentially victims or perpetrators, most people can be bystanders. It is an area that universities and colleges have been investing in as part of training. Some have done a lot of training on things like consent and those areas as well. I think that one of the most common areas of training is around the bystander approach for GVV more widely. A point that has not been raised yet is that there is equally safe in universities and colleges co-leadership group, which is a group that has just developed the new joint strategy for preventing and tackling gender-based violence in universities. We are now identifying the priorities for the coming year with a range of partners, some of whom are represented here today. That is a place where, if we look at the priorities around training, that is in that strategy and can be rolled out across universities. The training course is also needed in the licensed premises. I keep going back to that, and it is not just universities. I think that my could make a point about where are the providers for that and can be sought. Universities could be helpful. The gender-based violence and violence against women sector have obviously been engaging with a lot of providers on bystander training, so there are a suite of providers that could be utilised in that regard. I think that then, when Sally's point then, we have not mentioned resources yet, but there is a resource-intensive area. You look at universities and they are very comprehensive and transient populations. We are very committed to the training and to the support that needs to be put in place, but there is a cycle of students coming in. Sally mentioned the point about testing and student unions as well, and student unions are also invested in training, too. It is a resource-intensive area. It is useful to continue to discuss. The only significant investment from the Scottish Government in preventing and tackling gender-based violence in universities and colleges was around it back in 2016, with the development of the Equally Safe Toolkit at the University of Strathclyde. The approach now is to have an equally safe leadership group. Discussions about the resourcing will be important. How do we prioritise that to focus on the actions that are going to make the greatest impact across the sector and in wider society? Specifically, I just wanted to add something that I said earlier about the perception that there is a need for mandatory searching on entry to late-night premises. I just wanted to make clear, as I said in the chat, that the natural fact is the condition of licence that the patrons have searched on the way in, just to respond very quickly to what Kate said on the needle biking issue. There is absolutely no sense that I would be, as certainly anyone in our industry, the victim blaming thing is a serious concern. I completely agree with you. I am not suggesting for one minute that anyone who suspects that they have been the victim of needle spiking should not report it. I was simply responding to Mr Rennie's question that, had we seen reports of this, I can only answer that question honestly. The honest answer was that we have had a small number of reports of it, but none of them have been substantiated. I am merely stating the facts as we know them. Lastly, on Gill's point about the fresher situation, the point that I was really making, Gill, on that was not that universities or students' associations or anyone else was negligent in any way in terms of the advice that they were making available to students. What I was referring to was the student to student here learning that there is an actual part of the student journey. I think that is what was missed. I was not for one second suggesting that universities have been in any way lacked. I have a student son myself who was part of that 2020 intake, so I understand the issues around it personally, quite apart from professionally. To continue the theme specifically, Martha, you, as part of the Girls' Night in campaign, you have been boycotting bars and clubs. Is that a general boycott or is that specific? Can you explain why that was felt to be the most direct action that your campaign wanted to take? Maybe you could get Ellen to comment on that as well, because we haven't heard from Ellen for a while. I want to make sure that we hear her voice. Towards the middle of October, when all the incidents were escalating, we felt, when I say we, I mean my student community, felt as though nobody was taking the allegations seriously. Specifically, night clubs wanted to acknowledge doing anything to make reforms in the way that they were handling the situation and the safety of their patrons. In order to gain attention, we decided to organise a one-night boycott of all night clubs to really get their attention. In the process of building up to that boycott, the Girls' Night campaign gained a lot of traction and a lot of attention. The discussion was really started and we all started to have this conversation about things that we can do to tackle these spiking incidents. The way that we communicated with night clubs instead of boycotting them with no productive solution was that I gathered data and suggestions from all of the followers and the supporters about things that night clubs can implement to make their patrons feel safe in the environments that they are facilitating. In an open letter that I sent out to as many establishments in Edinburgh, which is where I am based, I detailed all the things that my peers and everyone who had experience in the night club industry in Edinburgh wanted to see night clubs enforcing in their establishments. It was a one-night boycott just to get the conversation going. What response did you get to your open letter? I just sent out to establishments. Some of them responded and some of them were the statements of their own, disclosing what they were going to implement. We felt that there was some productive aberration. Some night clubs in Edinburgh did not respond and, to my knowledge, have not made any productive implementations since the increase in spiking. It was a varied response. You never know to what extent those establishments are taking performative action to make sure that they do not lose business, but we did see some change in the culture of night clubs. As someone who has attended night clubs since then, I can say that I have seen some productive change. What are those changes? I would say that increased staff attention is one that has definitely made me feel more safe. Just feeling as though there are people who are watching out for your safety when you are not necessarily in your complete state of awareness in these environments does make me feel as though that is something that can prevent these incidents from happening, because not only do you feel safer as a patron, but you would hope that perpetrators are more hesitant to commit these acts because they know that they are being watched and that there is that attention to these possibilities. Additionally, the issue of increased security is one that is quite controversial. I have seen that it has become quite a controversial debate within my platform, because you do not want to give too much power to people who will abuse their power to act on their prejudices or biases, but at the same time it is incredibly important to make sure that these perpetrators are aware that they cannot be bringing substances, drugs and needles into these establishments. Security is something that needs to be discussed. We have seen a lot of creative responses, lids on drinks and things that have been implemented to specifically focus on drinks biking. The general consensus is that there needs to be a high level of diligence in the staff and what they are doing to make sure that everyone who is in their establishments feels safe. What you have heard from Andrew and Mike this morning reinforces your confidence that the industries are taking this seriously? I definitely do. On a higher level, authorities are acting with diligence, but it just needs to be monitored more on the level of nightclub leadership. I do not doubt that there are implementations in fact to make sure that these processes are happening, but I think that some establishments are just not necessarily up to the standard that they need to be. Ellen, would you like to add? Yes, please. I think that speaking specifically around Edinburgh—that is the place I know best—within online forums and just talking amongst friends, students are aware of nightclubs that feel more dodgy and where there seems to be a collection of nightclubs, not that they are linked but ones in which students are more wary and cautious of going to because of the cultural perception that they do not take things as seriously or that there are a number of incidents that have occurred there and there do not seem to have been very dramatic changes in acknowledging or addressing that. Edinburgh University Students Association has its own club night, and I am grateful that we have not had any reported instances of spiking within our own venue. In acknowledgement of the increase in cases and students and young people feeling more uncertain and unsafe about being in nightclub spaces, we have done some of the things that Martha has already mentioned, much like the things that we have already heard. We have included those. We make sure that people know that our attendees know that there is a well-being space for them and that, if they are feeling unwell or just need some support, they can receive that directly within our venue. We can even offer them safe transport home, and I suppose that that is part of being a student association, which we can offer that service to. However, our security will not just expel you from the venue because you seem intoxicated. They will make sure that you are feeling okay and that you are safe and able to make your way home safely. Our attendees can also access free water from TAMPA-free dispensers from our staff. Attendees also require a ticket that is linked to their student account. Again, that is something that we have available to us as a Students Association to make sure that we know who has been in our spaces and can protect them. I am particularly interested to hear about what support is available to those who have already experienced spiking. We are talking a lot about prevention in the future and what we can continue doing, but how can we support those who have already experienced spiking and have already experienced gender-based violence through spiking? How can we make sure that they still feel supported by their mental health and wellbeing? Is it still supported, especially if they are a member of a university or just a young person's community? How can we make sure that they still feel able to enjoy the city and the campus that they are part of? I do not have any answers there, but I would be really keen to hear them. Well, let us not lose that point. I think that I can see that Kate wants to back in, but before I bring Kate in, I am going to bring in Stephanie, who wants to come in. Before we hear from Stephanie, Ellen, the role of social media discussed the reputations of certain venues. How do you assess the impact of social media on this whole subject, specifically around the issue of reputation? I think that social media can have a huge influence on reputation and people's perceptions. You can know so much about a nightclub without attending it through social media and reading things on public forums, especially if they are pages that are linked to your community. We have anonymous posting platforms in Edinburgh University through Facebook. If you know that those are people like you living in the city that you are in, the students do trust what they read. It definitely feeds into the nervousness in which people feel around being within the city. I have never felt unsafe in the city of Edinburgh until I have started seeing such a mass increase of people's testimonies being publicly shared on social media platforms that can reach so many people. I would not want to change that. I would want to know what people are experiencing in the cities and where those areas are, so I can try to keep myself safer. However, it is absolutely a fact that, with the increase of social media testimonies, without a match from local authorities, local nightclubs, matching with their own statements and acknowledgement of those issues, people feel unsafe and you can feel more cautious walking around in a city that you once loved and felt very safe in. Thank you, convener. I am just waiting for my mic coming on there. I am kind of interested in and certainly I realise what has been said there about doing something for victims now and I am not disagreeing with that at all. My question was really about what are the next steps. We have had the ministerial round table that had police NHS 24, COSLA, victim support, nighttime industries, re-crisis and other public organisations involved in that round table. However, I do not see anything down here that speaks about next steps. Particularly, we are referring to what Mike was saying earlier on about having evidence-based reporting protocols at possibly a national level where there is some information provided for nightclubs that are easy to follow where people are doing similar things. Is there a forum or a group in place already? I know that we have equally safe in colleges and their core leadership group, but is there an overaction group that takes into account all the different organisations who are looking at doing a piece of work and sitting down and looking at what perhaps those protocols should be and also what protocols for bystanders, for young people themselves as well? I think that Gill wants to come in on that on what I can see. Thank you. I was actually going to come in on support, which I might do in a second if that is okay, but on that point, I mentioned the equally safe core leadership group for colleges and universities. As I said, that is putting together the strategy and is now working on the annual operational plan for priorities. Certainly, reporting protocols and standardising the method, consistency and quality of reporting and the awareness and visibility of reporting are a core priority for that group. I noticed on the chat, Gill, that you and Mike were having in our chat box, which is not being broadcast, of course. You are having a discussion. Maybe you could just recap on that. You and I seem to be in the same space when it comes to establishing consistent reporting protocols. Sure. The point that I was making was that given the equally safe group, we clearly focused mainly on the university and college sector, and that is a priority. The point that I was just making to Mike and that he has come back to say, yes, let's discuss it. I said that I couldn't comment on maybe four other licensed premises and the nighttime economy on reporting and licensed premises, but clearly we both think that there are valuable discussions on how we link up on that. As I mentioned, there are really good examples of partnerships in some of the cities. There are the two fearless initiatives in Glasgow and Edinburgh, but I can say that there is the Sterling GVD partnership, where we are lazing between not just the university but all the key partners across the city and the nighttime economy on how we might work together on that. In answer to Stephanie's point, there are vehicles where this discussion gets carried forward beyond these more public ones. All the local authorities have a violence against women and girls partnership or gender-based violence partnership, so that to me would be the key forum for citywide approaches or regional approaches to look at that. Sorry, convener. I was just going to say that there is not something at a national level just now that is kind of over-action, and is that something that is needed? Well, as I say for the university sector, there is because of the equally safe group that looks at national and that feeds into the regional levels as well. Yeah, but there is not that over-action multi-agency approach at a national level. Is that something that is missing? Sorry if I wasn't making myself clear there. Yeah, and again, I probably need to ask others what for are there. There is obviously equally safe Scottish Government strategy, and there is a higher level group that looks after that strategy in its widest sense, so there is a forum there, and then the equally safe and colleges falls out of that, and then, as I said, the regional one is there. So there is a forum at a more national level looking after that strategy, but we will be chaired by Scottish Government ministers. If it is okay to be in support, although you might want to ask more on that. No, no, please do care on that, and then you can create. That is your area. Thank you. This will not take long on support. We know that some people will come forward to report when that happens immediately, but often people will take a long time to come forward to report for lots of good reasons that have already been addressed. Another area that the university is working on is having that important place. I mentioned a couple of times the sexual violence liaison officers. They have been quite intensively trained, not just on taking disclosures, but on providing that sensitive, trauma-informed approach. Their role will be to also refer on to other types of support, either on universities or externally. I can say for example that my university is sterling. There are partnerships in place with rape crisis, victim support and women's aid, to name a few. Rape crisis and victim support will also come on to campus to hold clinics so that people can access that. I know that that is common across a number of universities. I just segue slightly into wider support, mental health and counselling support. Those two areas are so linked, and that is a high priority for universities. As you will know, investing in mental health and counselling support, all universities have been investing in their mental health strategies and associated staffing. Clearly, I have also provided some welcome investment counsellors over the past couple of years in universities. Between the university's investment and Scottish Government investment, that has had some really positive effects on the mental health and wellbeing support for students where we started to see really good reductions in waiting times. We need to think about how we can continue that funding and those approaches. One point is that, as we know, NHS and special services waiting times are extremely long for mental health support and also for specialist support and sexual violence. I reiterate the point that universities are putting a lot of investment and work into that. There is that danger of being seen as filling the gaps in wider services such as NHS and specialist services. It is important that we do not lose sight of that. Thank you. Kate, I am on the same vein. Thank you. I just wanted to come back to the point about an overarching group that was made. Police Scotland has a group that they have been running with partners, but it is not of the same magnitude as the ministerial roundtable. What you have heard is that there are different sectoral groups involved in different partners, but my understanding is that there is not an implementation group that is following on from the ministerial roundtable with the type of people involved in it that were involved in that group. That was the first time that we have been involved in such a broader group. I would make the point again that thinking through the lens of not all speaking, as was mentioned before, is about an intention around sexual assault. Not all of it is happening on universities and college settings. I try to think of an overarching group that would mean that there are robust and clear pathways around reporting and support, no matter what the avenue in the forum is really important. I thought that that was a helpful point. The point about support that has been made as well is that there are a number of organisations ourselves where we support victims of any type of crime, whether it is reported to the police or not. We are an organisation that has a very broad dream and works across the whole of Scotland. We will be aware of other organisations that have more specific areas of focus, for example, rape crisis in this space, which will support victims of serious sexual assault. There are a number of third sector organisations, and we have helplines. We receive calls on that issue and we have local community support that can be put in place. One of the things that concerns me is that there is a conversation on one of the roundtables where, for example, with the Ambulance Service, I was asking them about their referral mechanisms for people where they have attended to provide a first response. What do they do afterwards? Their response to me was that they provide information to the police, but they do not appear to have a referral protocol in place with other third sector organisations or anyone else to provide emotional support afterwards. That would be an area of focus that I would like to see developed so that people can be provided with appropriate support at any time. Just on the points that have been made around NHS mental health services and other specialist support, that is very stretched, and that is challenging as all organisations that are providing emotional support but not necessarily counselling, for example. The pandemic has not certainly helped with that. The other point that I want to make around reporting is that the response that people get all the way through the system or the process is really important. We are focused a lot on health, on immediate responses, for example, by venues, but there is also the issue of how the criminal justice system treats people all the way through. The lack of convictions in the area, the fear around victim blaming, the way that the lack of a feeling of a trauma-unformed justice system, quite frankly, does not help in that. Victim support and other organisations are increasingly concerned about the delays in the justice system itself. That will be putting people off from reporting, and that is a big concern. There has to be a systemic approach around getting this right and tackling this so that people are not put off from coming forward and do not drop out as the process progresses. The criminal justice system that we work in very closely is an issue that we have been raising in a number of forums with others, so I just wanted to make that point that as much as there are delays in NHS, the delays in the criminal justice system are absolutely massive just now, and that is not helpful in this area either. You said some important things there about the devastating impact that that has on the mental health and overall wellbeing of the victims of these sorts of crimes. I want to come back to the whole concept of crime in a minute, but I wanted to bring in Ellen MacDonald, who wanted to make a comment about health services in the context of this discussion about support. Ellen MacDonald Thank you very much. I am sure that everyone is aware of how stretch university mental health services are, but I also wanted to share some recent data that Edinburgh University has collected in December 2021 around students' ability to access GP services in the city of Edinburgh, because we have heard testimonial reports of students who are really struggling, so we were able to survey, I believe, around 2,000 students, 60 per cent of which said that they were registered with a GP, so they are definitely not nearly as close as we would want it to be, and those who have registered 13 per cent needed to try three to four practices to find a practice that would be able to admit them. Of those who are not registered with a GP in Edinburgh, 42 per cent of them had attempted and not been successful to find a GP. In terms of students being able to access health services beyond what the university is able to offer and is struggling to offer due to the capacity issue, the lack of availability or capacity within our GP services poses a huge challenge on young people who live within the city, as university students, as we have the numbers showing that not nearly enough of them have been able to or are registered with a general practice. I just want to share that. That is very useful and very insightful. I also want to bring back in Hillary Sloan, because there have been a number of discussions about national structures bringing people together under one roof, as it were. What is your comment on that? I see that you have made some comments in the chat box. I think that it is useful to get them on to the official record. Thank you very much, convener. I reiterate that there is a command structure presently in place that is headed by ACC Guy Ritchie. Within that command structure, there is a blue light group, for one of a better term, but sitting below that is the partners group that I mentioned at the start of this meeting. What I had suggested was in the chat bar that potentially those networks and relationships that have already been established from a national perspective could be used as the basis for taking that on-going work forward to progress some of the issues that have been discussed today. I have already had that conversation at a previous partners meeting whereby a lot of the messaging going forward will become business as usual among all those parties that are around the table. I thought that it might be a good opportunity to use that structure as a starting point. In that group that you are describing of the stakeholders, does that include everybody or all the organisations, for example, on this round table? More or less, yes. It will have student representation, the licence premises, various third sector organisations such as victim support and rape crisis, they are all represented at that meeting. I know that Willie Rennie wanted to come back in in the chat box that things may have moved on, but I do not want to lose the point that Willie Rennie wanted to make because it is important to get everything on the record. Willie, he is not at his desk. That is okay. I should have checked with him before I said. We lose Sally at the top of the hour. She has another commitment. We are grateful for the time that we have had with her. In your opening comments, Sally, you intimated that you would like to say something more at some point about working with young people. Maybe I would like to have you take the opportunity to do that now before we lose your presence at the round table. Thanks very much. I think that it has been a really useful discussion today. I think that we have moved the conversation on a lot. Before I revert to that point, I just want to reiterate the value of using existing structures in engaging with that. There are a lot of expertise around the table. Gilles mentioned the importance of the Equally Safe Group, which the Scottish Government is involved in. Drawing on the work of that group and building on it is really important, but, from a regional and national perspective, the kind of connections that Hilary is suggesting seems to me to be really important. It just seems to me that I go back to that initial point about students and young people being the victims of spiking. You can make a distinction between the two, which I was keen to do, but it is also important to read right across. A lot of what we are talking about here is consciousness-raising about how you lead your life and how you show responsibility and kindness and respect to others. That is general messaging, which is really appropriate to everybody. As universities, we certainly already feel, as colleges do, that we have responsibilities that extend way outside our particular sector and that we can help to model the kinds of behaviours that we want to encourage. My point was really more in that area, which is that we can take the instance of spiking. As an example of something that is, unfortunately, part of our culture, but one that we all have the responsibility to seek to redress and that, while that is not exclusively a student phenomenon, it is one in which we have a responsibility to work out with our sector, as well as within it. I will roll the discussion forward from that. There has been a lot of discussion this morning about the fitness of our criminal law in relation to the subject matter that we are discussing today. What should we view on that? It has been made clear a couple of times that we do not have a specific crime in statute that deals with that, as it is not called out specifically. Should there be? Well, convener, as people always say in these circumstances, I am not a lawyer, but it does seem to me that it is a bit of a problem that we do not have a specific offence that targets spiking. If you look at the equivalent legislation in England, which has its own limitations because, again, spiking is badged under the sexual offences act, in particular, but we do not specifically refer to spiking in our legislation. At the bare minimum, that needs to be looked at because specific references to spiking in legislation really could, again, seek to consciousness rays and give us something more to focus on in that context. As to whether and how we should pull out a spiking as a specific offence, I think that that is worth looking at. It should be part of some kind of formal review. Yes, I think so. I think that it would be useful to take a serious look at it and see if we need to construct an offence in that way. Surely that is almost a necessary follow-on from this conversation. Kate, I would like to turn to you with that same topic. You have already intimated that you have strong feelings about this. Do you want to elaborate on them? I agree with Sally. I think that the conversation that we have been having around the importance of people feeling confident to report and people feeling confident that they will be believed and that there is an appropriate response both within the support system but also within the criminal justice system, I think that looking at that would be helpful and making an assessment and looking at other jurisdictions and what they do. For example, stocking in Scotland has a specific offence now attached to it. That makes a massive difference for victims and how they perceive how they are going to be believed and taken seriously. I think that the conviction rate is a cause for concern for people, too. I agree with Sally. It should be examined further. Martha, do you have your view on that? Yes, I definitely agree. I think that all of those are really important points to be made. That needs to be definitely an emphasis on victim blaming being something that is not a part of our culture anymore. As you can tell, I am working my way around the table. I do not feel that I have any additional comments to add to that. I agree with everything that Kate said in today's roundtable. I thank Kate for all of those comments. I think that particularly what struck with me is the discussion and the point that you raised around making sure that we are not dismissing reports of needles, spiking or the damage that the media can do in saying that there is absolutely no evidence and what that can do in terms of young people, women and non-binary and trans folk feeling as if they are not believed or supported in a bigger and wider system. Kate, do you want to come back in and see that you put an R in the chat box? I think that the requirement around a sexual intent from an evidential point of view can be quite challenging for the police in the crown, so I do think that that is why it is worth looking at in more detail. I was going to come back on the point that Hilary made about extending the groups that Police Scotland has set up. Obviously, we would be more than happy to continue involvement in that if we turn that into an implementation-type group where we are, and as Sally says, making best use of what other forums are going on and what is being developed in other areas that may well translate well across the piece. That sounds eminently sensible to me, I have to say. Does anyone else have a view about the need—would it be helpful if there was a specific crime in law? I mean, I am looking to the industry in particular. Mike, Andrew, welcome back, by the way, we lost you for a bit there. Would it be helpful to you in the work that you are doing, safeguarding in the venues? Would it be useful, Mike? I think that a specific offence would hopefully raise the confidence of anyone who wants to report that, so that it will be taken seriously, and it aids the consistency and accuracy of reporting. On both levels, I think that it would be a bonus to do that, and it would certainly aid the industry and the trade to do that. I was just going to say the same thing. A colleague south of the border faced similar problems. I believe that there are three different crime categories in England that cover that issue, and so they can be reported in the context of different crime categories, which is not helpful at all. Anything that streamlines that and keeps the focus along with the reporting protocols. Those two things go hand in hand, and when you have that, then it is possible to build up an accurate picture of what is really going on. For instance, we shed light on the needle-spiking issue, which is clearly something that, at the moment, is very hard to quantify. Nobody seeks to engage in any kind of fit complaining about that. It is about trying to pull the information together so that we can act in concert with the relevant authorities to ensure that we are doing everything that we can. Thank you, Mike. I think that it cannot hurt on legislation, and it would help in reporting the numbers and getting a better sense of prevalence. Just a word of warning, of course. It has to be part of a fleet of measures. We know that having legislation in place for other types of sexual offences is not the panacea. The reporting rates are low, and the course conviction rates are low. Yes, it may act as the turn to some, and it will have a purpose, but we obviously just cannot rely on that, and it is about really increasing confidence reporting, but increasing the conviction rates most importantly. I think that it is worth going back to Hillary Sloan and reflecting on what Jill has just said. What, in this specific area of needle-spiking, what are the barriers to getting convictions? It seems to me that one of the things that I have picked up, at least, is is to actually get the evidence beyond the reporting. What are the barriers? As you say, it is obviously the individuals involved who have the confidence to come to the police in the first instance. We have an investigative strategy that has been shared throughout Police Scotland as a whole, and there are various mechanisms within that strategy to look at how to get information that can potentially lead to a report going to the Procreate or Fiscal. Obviously, it is getting that case to court. There are issues in relation to that, but we are really open to working with partners to try and overcome those barriers. The key for me is to make sure that people are confident about reporting the incidents in the first place. Our investigative strategy will then take over, and we will go through all those different inquiries in order to get as much evidence as possible to be able to put perpetrators or offenders to court. Before we conclude our evidence session, I want to make sure that my colleagues, members of the Scottish Parliament who are on this round table, whether they have anything they wish to add. I was conscious of the fact that Willie Rennie had wanted to come in earlier and we did not get him in. Willie is there. Do you want to come back in and make the point that you were going to make earlier? I think that we have broadly moved on. I think that what is clear is that there is some excellent practice going on in the various institutions in which many of them are reflected. What I was not clear about was how we are making sure that everybody is applying that best practice. How do we target those who perhaps, through an offer of their own, need extra help and support but are oblivious to the support that is available? How do we make that happen to make sure that everybody is like the people who are here today? Would anyone like to come in on the back of Willie's comment? While you are thinking about it, I might ask Stephanie to come in. Thanks, Stephen. I am thinking as well, just on Willie's comment there, possibly through council licensing might be the approach. The question that I wanted to ask was—I know that we have covered to a degree as well about drugs testing at venues—but I was wondering specifically what Martha and Aileen had to say on that, because I can imagine that a lot of the underreporting and a lot of the issues with young people and a lot of the trauma is that feeling of confusion and fear and uncertainty about what is happening, not knowing the kind of ambiguity and feeling quite helpless about the situation, if that might help to improve the reporting of it, as well as helping people to deal with the trauma itself. However, I do realise that it is quite complex and that there are practical and financial things to take into account as well. Let's get James Dornan in as well. Those of you who wish to—we thank Sally for being on the right table. We know that we only had you to 11 o'clock, but we say thank you for giving us your time. We can bring James Dornan in, and then we can get some responses from our round table. Thank you, Stephen. I can see the benefit to it in terms of the message that it sends out, the importance that we are giving it. It seems to me that sometimes what happens is that we do these things for the right reason and then we create a rod for our own backs. I worry that this one would be a really complex piece of legislation, because where do you draw the line on the spiking? For example, about somebody who was saying earlier that spiking drinks with alcohol is still, by far, the most common. What happens if you buy your mate a double without his permission? Where is the line drawn and how do you target those who need to be targeted? That is one of the difficulties, although I have definitely supported legislation before, which is about sending out that strong message. I can see where a strong message could be sent out here. I just worry about the practical difficulties. The first question was to come back on you on that. I think that it is Kate. I think that any legislation on what we have currently is problematic too, I suppose, is the first thing I would say. I think that it is about which is most helpful and which is least problematic. I would be pointing towards the stocking offence around unwanted and focusing on that word and looking to whether that could be applied to spiking. There are issues with the legislation that we have currently got in terms of the intention that lies behind it, and that is why we are looking at something different that would be helpful. However, I can give you a straight off the top of my head, easy answer to what we need. The least problematic piece of legislation on where it is word-bead, but certainly from my point of view, as I have said before and others have said, I would say that it is definitely worth pursuing, because what we have just now is not. If we had a legislative structure that was without issue, we would not be asking for it, and we would not be discussing it. However, I think that it needs to be looked at further, and the drafting, legislation drafting people will be the best one to come up with how it should be wanted, that was a thought. Kate Shields Just to once again agree with Kate, I feel that legislation really does legitimise people's experiences and their fears around spiking and that they are on safety within some of our spaces within the city. I might have to have Stephanie's question repeated, but I think that people's hesitancy to come forward and report some of these instances comes from a lack of transparency around what the procedure actually looks like and also that feeling that you will just be giving your report, and there is no additional support towards your wellbeing and your mental health that comes in accompaniment to that very raw and exposing experience in which you might not even be believed and nothing might come of it. I think that in terms of an individual feeling, just as a playing piece in going through a very emotionally exposing reporting process is definitely something that disincentivises people coming forwards. I would really want to emphasise that point around having readily available mental health and wellbeing support for those who do come forward, whichever method they choose to report through. I said at the beginning that at the moment it is very unclear to people who they should be reporting to. Is it the police? Is it the nightclub or the venue or the bar? Is it the university? Is it the students association? It is not clear, and that only adds to the barriers in the way of people coming forward about that. I have a couple of quick points. Just in response to Stephanie's question or remark in terms of consistency of the approach in the industry, I just wanted to note the point that the trade bodies represented here. In fact, they are all slightly different across the licensed trade, but in the case of our own representing the late-night economy, it is a non-funded, it is a member's association. There is no resource there, no matter how much we might like to roll out a best practice thing beyond the immediacy of our own membership. The way that that can be improved is along the lines of the initiative. Wellbasket City Council brought forward an initiative two and a half years ago, three years ago, and it has been set to a night-time economy commission with various input from different parts of the sector. Having those kind of structures in place would help Scotland-wide. That would be a very useful thing. We see in Manchester, for instance, where there is a night-time economy adviser to Greater Manchester Council, and that has been very effective in bringing together all the different elements of that huge conurbation that Greater Manchester is. That is why I say that Scotland-wide body could be a very useful way of bringing forward that type of best practice approach. Before I come off here, I will respond quickly on where you draw the line with getting your mate a double. It is really important to acknowledge that getting your mate a double, if he is not asked for it, actually does cross a line. That is why, in my opinion, there should be legislation around that, because otherwise people will always say that I was just having a laugh or whatever and it is my mate. To me, that addresses the very point. In this day and age, we have to acknowledge that. He cannot buy other people double the amount of drink that they actually want unless they have asked for it. Bob Dorriff. Can we follow the conversation this moment? It has been fascinating and very helpful. It was a supplementary relation to Mr Dorriff's suggestion that reviewing the law and speaking could be challenging and complex. I am just wondering from the panel this morning whether there is a wider benefit to reviewing the lack of legislation on speaking, because it would force Government and wider society to yet again review Scotland's relationship with alcohol that is involved with women's groups, youth groups and the licensed sector, with Police Scotland and wider society in general. Is there a wider intrinsic value of holding a consultation to see what reviewing legislation on speaking would look like irrespective of the complexities? Someone wants to come in on that. Do not see anyone taking you up on your question, Bob. Kate? Just to say that I agree and that would be one of the benefits. I also agree with Mike's point that he made about unwanted additional alcohol or substances being given to someone is not something that we should be tolerating in Scotland and I agree as well with the points made around Scotland's relationship with alcohol and substances. It was part of Sally's point earlier when I was on the tip about Scotland's definition of a good night out and what can be done to enhance that step over a line. I think that it would be useful. James Dornan, I want to come back to that point. First of all, I am a non-drinker, right? I am not somebody who is going up and buying doubles for my mates. It highlights the difficulty in what we are talking about, because we are talking about changing a whole culture for people of a certain generation, if you like, who think that they are doing the right thing. However, I agree with everything that has just been said in relation to it, but they are doing the wrong thing. Education has to be there. If there is going to be any legislation, education has to be a massive part of that, if not before it, but certainly as it is coming out, if it does happen. I agree with James Dornan on that score, that is for sure. I agree with everything that has been said in the past few minutes, because there is value in exploring it. However, to reiterate the point that I made about it, it is part of that bigger picture that supports the point that was just made among the notes of education, communication and that whole strategy as well as the legislation. I think that we have come very naturally to the conclusion of this morning's round table. It has really been interesting and really valuable for me to speak personally. It is really valuable to hear each of you talk from your own perspectives about this issue. What has been really heartening is the degree of unanimity that there is about next steps and how different stakeholders can work together. We will watch on with interest as to what happens next, but I think that there has been a lot of stuff here that is greatly encouraging. I would like to thank Gilles Stevenson, Ellen McRae, Martha Williams, Mike Grieve, Superintendent Hillary Sloan, Andrew Greene, Ballymapstone and Kate Wallace for their time this morning. It is very much appreciated by the entire committee. Your contributions have been much valued. The public part of today's meeting is now at an end. I will now suspend the meeting and can I ask members to reconvene on Microsoft Teams, which will allow us to further consider the agenda items that we have taken in private.