Pauline McNeill
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“Does she welcome what I am setting out to do in providing an expansion in GPS technology for bail management and home detention curfew, in order to give reassurance around the community management of offenders? Pauline McNeill: Yes, I do. I would like an early indication of additional investment in GPS technology.”
“I have consistently raised my concerns about prisoners not being guaranteed time out of their cells, and a number of prisoners have written to me, as a criminal justice spokesperson, because they cannot get access to the rehabilitation programmes that it is vital for them to do in order to be considered for release back into the community…”
“Scottish Labour welcomes the opportunity to have an early discussion on the state of the Scottish prison system. There is a lot in the amendments from the other parties with which we agree. We have just heard a considerable announcement. I will address some of it, albeit briefly.”
“The Cabinet Secretary for Justice has just taken up his post, and I respect the fact that he is at least attempting to put some bold proposals out there. I will address some of them briefly. Changing the definition of long-term sentences from more than four years to more than five years has serious implications.”
“What investment is the Scottish Government prepared to make to commit in the longer term to robust alternatives, such as GPS monitoring, which is referred to in the Scottish Labour amendment, to ensure that communities are safe? I do not mind saying that I have had this conversation with many previous cabinet secretaries.”
“On the release of long-term prisoners at 60 per cent or two thirds of their sentence, when I was not in Parliament, one of the big issues around the release of long-term prisoners was that the public thought that a prisoner’s sentence would be served in jail, and nobody could really follow the number of years that they would spend there.”
The complete record
Every one of 391 lines we hold for Pauline McNeill, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 8.
“It seems to me that, given the significance of an assisted dying bill and the fact that people will have conscientious objections to it, these provisions are the most important thing to get right. As the bill stands, it says: “An individual is not under any duty … to participate directly in anything authorised by this Act.” Amendment 226 adds the words “directly or indirectly” and makes clear the range of roles that could fall within the scope of the bill. When we talk about conscientious objection, we must be honest about what participation could look like in practice. It is not only doctors and nurses who may find themselves involved; it could also be pharmacists who are asked to dispense substances, a delivery driver, a receptionist arranging appointments or administrative staff.”
“Amendment 226 strengthens the conscientious objection provisions in section 18, which are essential if the Parliament is to legislate responsibly in such a sensitive area. Specifically, the amendment, which is to section 18, on page 12 at line 28, leaves out subsection (1) and inserts: “No individual, in any role or capacity, including— (a) medical practitioners, (b) nurses, (c) allied health professionals, (d) pharmacists, (e) administrative staff, (f) receptionists, (g) delivery personnel, (h) students, (i) trainees”. The arguments here are similar to those made by Michael Marra and Jackie Baillie. This is probably the single biggest issue about the operation of the bill, so it requires intense scrutiny.”
“I give Pauline McNeill and other members of Parliament the assurance that that has the highest priority, but it can be concluded only when the investigation has been carried out and we are satisfied that it is safe for access to the station to be delivered.”
“In relation to Glasgow Central station, I make it clear that every effort is being made to open the station as soon as possible, but that can be done only when we are assured of the safety of the station. Colleagues will understand the potential vulnerabilities that exist after such a major incident so close to the station. It must be said that the efforts of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, which were explained to me yesterday, were astonishing and avoided the spread of the fire into the Central hotel—as I will always call it—and into Central station. Its efforts were intensely targeted to make sure that that was avoided. Although the sight is devastating, we have avoided a much greater incident through the skill and professionalism of the firefighters. The safety assessment will be undertaken.”
“I know that he has been having discussions about the implications and I presume that the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Fiona Hyslop, will also be having such discussions. Have there been any talks about what more could be done—including running more buses—to help people get to work or to appointments until we know when Glasgow Central station will be fully open? The First Minister: I entirely understand the deep emotional connection that Pauline McNeill sets out. That is why I am here today: I understand the depth of sadness experienced in the city of Glasgow about what has happened and, for those reasons, it is right for me, as First Minister, to answer this question today.”
“I sincerely thank the First Minister for being here today and for the strong statement that he has made about Glasgow. I add my sincere thanks to the fire and rescue workers and to everyone else who is still ensuring that the fire has been dealt with, and I thank the senior officers who briefed me last night. The situation is truly heartbreaking for Glasgow. I am probably Glasgow’s longest-serving elected member and I find it deeply emotional. We are still waiting to find out about the damage to Glasgow Central station. Recent media reports indicate that that there is no major damage, although the architect of the glass roof has expressed some concern about that. I am sure the First Minister agrees that things must be difficult for the thousands of commuters who rely on the station, and for the network itself.”
“Successive committees have acknowledged that, unless a Government plans for support for prisoners who have drug addiction and other related health problems when they are released from prison, they will continue to reoffend. It is about time that there was a Government that was able to take that on. Is it any wonder that our reoffending rates are sky high? This has to be a priority for whoever forms the next Government. I thank the clerks for their support for this important work, and I hope that the report will be useful for the next Parliament. 16:10”
“A recent survey cited by the Prison Officers Association found that “40–75% reported a drug problem or tested positive for illegal substances on entering prison.” One officer noted that the physical risks to officers caused by drug taking, especially drugs such as spice. Drugs are affecting prisoners psychologically, causing them to attack officers. Drugs are a real and live issue in Scottish prisons. It comes as no surprise that those who are on the front line of the current situation—prison officers—are reporting low morale. It is vital that we turn the situation around. One of the committee’s recommendations is that there should be “a national standard for pre-release healthcare planning should be introduced”.”
“During our visit to HMP Edinburgh, we viewed the grids that had been installed to prevent drones passing through or near windows, but, as one prisoner pointed out, there are some very clever people in jail and it is only a matter of time before they find a way round that. There are serious concerns about the use of drones, up to and including concerns about their capability to carry weapons. The Scottish Prison Service and other witnesses frequently told the committee that synthetic cannabinoids known as spice are the most serious and current threat to safety and wellbeing in the prison estate.”
“As one prison officer put it, “At Glenochil and other prisons there is little to stimulate or engage prisoners—no wonder they take drugs.” Police Scotland also provided a major clue to the nature of the problem when it “emphasised that many of the same networks control both community and prison drug markets, using prisons to maintain influence and collect debts”, which is a point that the convener made in her opening speech. The public often wonder how drugs still reach our prisons, and that is probably one of the reasons why the committee delved into that question a bit further. As we have heard today, the reality is that there are many ways to bring drugs into prisons, including the increasing use of drones and small, impregnated parcels being brought in through various means, including by visitors.”
“Low staffing levels increase the risk of incidents and limit the time for meaningful engagement with prisoners. The unpredictable behaviour associated with synthetic drug intoxication also means that officers are often the first responders to emergencies. I was struck by our sessions with prisoners, who spoke candidly about drug use in prisons and their other experiences. One ex-prisoner had been given a seven-year sentence but had served 19 years because he was unable to cope without using drugs. Others in the group said that the trauma that they felt after reflecting on their crimes led them to taking drugs when they were in prison although they previously had not. The lack of meaningful activity is definitely also a factor.”
“The committee launched its inquiry because repeated investigations, powerful testimony from families and staff, and the findings of the people’s panel all showed that Scotland’s prisons are facing systematic failure in responding to substance misuse. Witnesses told the committee that, “in their view, prisons have become de facto holding environments for people whose core needs in relation to substance addictions are more clinical than criminal.” The committee concluded that, without an acknowledgment of “the underlying health-system shortcomings, efforts to reduce drug-related harm in custody will continue to fall short.” The nature of the problem is complex, but it begins with Scotland’s prisons being severely overcrowded and understaffed.”
“It will complement the work of the independent inquiry and, more broadly, the work of the inspectorates, which will continue in parallel to the inquiry. The Deputy Presiding Officer: A number of members wish to ask questions, so we need succinct questions and answers to match.”
“It is about survivors having faith in the process, and providing an independent inquiry will allow survivors to have that faith, which is hugely important. I have been keen to engage and reflect on some of those engagements, including with Ms Constance at the cross-party group very recently. We need to ensure that survivors have faith in the process. I also announced today further work in relation to the truth project, which John O’Brien will lead on. That will also bring a new approach to survivor engagement and will, I believe, strengthen our approach in Scotland. It has worked very well in other parts of the United Kingdom, and I am very pleased that John O’Brien has agreed to lead that piece of work with us.”
“In her evidence, she stated that she has been meeting the inspectorates nearly every week and that she has been impressed by the co-operation and quality of work, which is being carried out at pace. The work started in November and the inspectorates have appropriately engaged with Alexis Jay on her knowledge of the subject matter. According to the evidence that was heard in Parliament earlier today, therefore, there have been a number of different engagements in relation to the work of the inspectorates. My view is that that work will complement the work of the independent inquiry, but it is for the independent chair to arrive at the terms of reference, working with Government in that regard. There is an issue here in relation to independence, which goes back to the point that I made to Roz McCall.”
“It is extremely disappointing and, indeed, disrespectful to this Parliament and its elected representatives that that appears to have been the case in this instance. Jenny Gilruth: I will take Pauline McNeill’s points in turn, beginning with her question about expedited timescales. To confirm, the announcement that I have made today on an independent inquiry is not going to offset the timescales that are already set out by the inspectorate: those are set in relation to the work that will report in the summer. That will help to inform the terms of reference that Alexis Jay will then seek to develop, as an independent chair. Pauline McNeill also mentioned that there has been one meeting of the review. I know that Alexis Jay was in front of the Education, Children and Young People Committee this morning.”
“Has there been any preliminary estimation of the extent of grooming gang crime in Scotland? Given that there has been only one meeting of the review, I wonder whether, and how, substantial information has come to light. I think that the cabinet secretary has to share that information. If she is not able to share it today, I have to ask: what exactly will the inquiry be looking at, until it gets the evidence? Does it mean that the inquiry cannot get off the ground until victims come forward and give that data? The Deputy Presiding Officer: Before I ask the cabinet secretary to respond, I will take up the first issue that Ms McNeill raised. It is, of course, the case that one should not read in the media about an announcement of such significance before the information has been made known to this Parliament.”
“I thank the national press for the advance sight of this announcement; it would have been preferable if we had heard it in the chamber first. Scottish Labour fully supports the establishment of an inquiry into the full extent of group-based child exploitation in order to get to the truth behind the problem. I thank the cabinet secretary for her updates and I am grateful for all the work that has been done by Professor Alexis Jay. It seems that we do not have any early indications of what data there is to date, which the inquiry will scrutinise. The first phase was to report in the summer, but we now have an expedited timetable, which is welcome. However, I want to be clear about what has informed the decision to bring it forward. What do we know now that we did not know then? Has substantial information emerged since then?”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted yes. The Presiding Officer: Thank you. We will ensure that that is recorded.”
“How does the First Minister justify a real-terms cut of £3.9 million to the delivering equally safe fund, when, as he keeps telling me in response to every question that I ask, it is the Government’s core programme for addressing violence against women and girls? Why does the Government believe that it is acceptable to withdraw that vital support from women and girls who have experienced rape and sexual violence at a time when the demand for those services continues to rise?”
“This week, Glasgow and Clyde Rape Crisis closed its waiting list for two specialist services. That decision has come as a consequence of real-term cuts in the Government’s proposed budget funding for rape and sexual support services. I do not need to remind the First Minister that sexual crimes have never been higher—the data shows that there has been an 11 per cent increase in attempted rapes. It is therefore difficult to reconcile the Government’s commitment to tackling the epidemic of violence against women and girls with “a budget that reduces the real-terms value of the very services designed to respond to it.” Those were the exact words of the director of the Glasgow service.”
“In so far as the other points that Ms McNeill has raised, there have been instances in other cases in which there has been notification, on a case-by- case basis, of the fact that there has been a significant development in a particularly high- profile and sensitive case. That will have been for the purpose that I have said before: to ensure that there is no inappropriate or unlawful comment on live proceedings. It is critical to the rule of law that that is profoundly respected. That was the whole purpose of sending the minute to the First Minister in this case. We can give other examples of when that has been done, but I am concerned about ensuring that I protect the integrity of all the proceedings that those issues might relate to.”
“It was the submission of a minute to the First Minister that was in five paragraphs, and the very limited information that related to Mr Murrell’s case only took up a few lines in paragraph 3. We have made the minute available, and it is quite clear that it refers only to the preliminary hearing taking place, the charge and the tradition of law officers not being involved in the decision making. It also says that the case remains live, and that “Now that the case has been indicted, further procedure and the timetable for the case will be determined by the Court.” That is the content of the minute. There was not a briefing as we might understand it. It provides very straightforward information.”
“There is already concern about the court delaying the case until 27 May, so will the Lord Advocate be more specific about whether it is normal practice for a First Minister who is not the complainer in a case to be briefed in this way, and will the Lord Advocate tell the Parliament whether there are any other aspects of the trial that will be briefed to the First Minister? The Parliament needs to know how many times this has happened, because it seems that, if it is the only time, it could be a dangerous precedent to set. The Lord Advocate: I understand that it is suggested that there has been a briefing. It is important to look at what actually happened.”
“Is the Government concerned that when short-term sentences are eventually automatically reduced to 30 per cent of the sentence, and if it adopts the Sentencing and Penal Policy Commission’s recommendation to ban sentences of one year or less, that could result in charges increasing sentences to take account of those measures? Has any work been done with the judiciary to ensure that the purpose of those measures is not defeated? Angela Constance: The member raises a point about the risks associated with up-tariffing. It is important to note that issue when we are considering any measure. We have a lot of work to do to consider the Sentencing and Penal Policy Commission’s recommendations collectively and individually. We will do that with as much rigour and pace as we can.”
“I do not have any criticism of the Government in this regard but, if the Government recognises that that has happened, then, for the avoidance of doubt, we must ensure that the right of the child that we are dealing with today does not undermine that ethos in any way. It is imperative that nothing in the bill does that. I would like to hear what the Government has to say about that. I do not see why the Government would be opposed to amendment 24. As I have said, the 1918 act is a very relevant piece of legislation. I would be interested to hear what the Government has to say. I will strongly support amendment 24 for the reasons that I have set out.”
“It is part of a modern system that reflects the minority character of the Catholic community while giving choice to all parents regardless of their religious background. I think that that is right for a modern Scotland. 16:00 This is what I want to say to the Government— although I have obviously not yet heard the Government’s argument. The Government must recognise that there have been periodic attempts to eradicate or remove Catholic schools from the education system. I have had many letters over 20 years, and that point has been argued by the Humanist Society and others. Everyone has their view.”
“I will make a short contribution in support of amendment 24, in the name of Paul O’Kane. We are debating legislation on the right of a child to withdraw from religious education, but it is important that that does not undermine the ethos of denominational schools. If we ask any headteacher what is successful about those schools, they will say that their entire ethos is about the discipline and character of that school and that, without that, they would not be as successful. The 1918 act is a key piece of law for Catholic education, which is enshrined in our education system. The 1918 act corrected historical inequalities, and it is important to note that that is one of the things that it does. We have a highly successful Catholic education system.”
“Over the past decade or so, there has been an increase in excess of 50 per cent in investment in justice social work. On the points that have been made about technology, although all those matters need to be carefully considered and managed, it is important to build on the substantial progress that has been made in electronic monitoring and to take it to the next level. I believe that that will be important in reducing reoffending and increasing victims’ confidence.”
“I accept that point and, indeed, the points that are raised in the sentencing and penal policy commission’s report about the need to improve public understanding of how sentencing works. That understanding is crucial for confidence. On the point about increasing public confidence, however, we have to be prepared to step back from campaigning and build consensus around what actually works to keep our communities safe. We owe that to the communities that we seek to serve and, not least, to victims. I speak as a cabinet secretary who has written parole reports and supervised community payback orders. I am also the cabinet secretary who has substantially increased investment in community justice services. If the budget passes, I will have increased it by £35 million in total.”
“I thank the Scottish sentencing and penal policy commission for its work, in which it recommends a presumption against sentences of up to two years, potentially, whereas the Government is looking at short-term sentences of a year or less. If any serious long-term thinking has been done, can the cabinet secretary say with confidence that she will be able to implement the proposal fully and soon, using electronic monitoring? And does that mean using GPS technology? That would be the first step, at least, in providing some confidence in the Government’s thinking here. Angela Constance: I agree with Ms McNeill about the public understanding of sentencing in Scotland and the structures of the sentences that prisoners serve.”
“Scottish Labour is concerned about how the public now view sentencing in Scotland’s justice system. There have been constant changes to how long short-term prisoners are kept and to the time that they spend in our jails. Communities are feeling uneasy and are finding it difficult to follow how sentencing works in Scotland. Only a year ago, short-term prisoners served 50 per cent of their sentence. Today, or soon, it will be 30 per cent, and we know that that is driven by high prison numbers. Over a long time, I have listened to successive cabinet secretaries talk about alternatives to custody. It is fair to ask what groundwork has been done in those 19 years and what long-term thinking has been done over the period, so that the cabinet secretary can confidently say that the Government has robust alternatives to custody.”
“I move, That the Parliament regrets that cuts to police officer numbers have disproportionately fallen on local divisions, reducing the number of officers on the frontline; is deeply concerned about reports of rising crime, particularly violent crime; recognises that the proportion of people reporting that they feel safe after dark is at the lowest point on record; considers that failures to modernise the court system and support mental health care have resulted in a poor use of police officer time, which should be focused on reducing crime; believes that there is a need to restore community policing, and calls for the creation of community and crime prevention officers in every council ward in Scotland. 16:07”
“I believe that the most significant task ahead is to deal with the challenge of so many officers who are—as I said—leaving the job early. We must invest properly in the service to sustain police numbers. We must properly support police officers. We must reduce the practice of cancelling leave so that we have a strong, well-equipped police force that serves in communities, so that those communities see that their police officers and their police service are visible to them.”
“I see that as the most vital issue in policing today. More than 1,700 police officers have quit the profession in the past two years, and officers are leaving at the rate of 16 every week. Too many officers are disillusioned and are leaving jobs or taking early retirement. We need to start making police officers feel properly valued, and we need to reverse that trend. There are now more than 1,000 fewer police officers than when Police Scotland was formed back in 2013. It is no surprise that that is having an impact on officers who are currently serving. The Scottish Police Federation has said that the Government’s budget as drafted falls well below what is needed to stabilise officer numbers and meet rising demand, and we have still to see the full impact of that.”
“Police Scotland has made savings of more than £1 billion, but it has not been allowed to reinvest any of those savings back into our police force. The police estate has been decimated, with a staggering 150 police stations closed in the past two years. The public consensus is that that is compromising community safety. However, there are still some crimes to which the police do not turn up, as a result of what is called the proportionate response to crime initiative. It is unacceptable that Police Scotland was the last force in the United Kingdom to roll out body- worn cameras. It is important for police officers to be able to fight crime in the best way, and with the best equipment, but, in Scotland, they have not been able to do that. Given all that, it is unsurprising that so many officers are choosing to leave their careers early.”
“Only this week, David Kennedy, the head of the Scottish Police Federation, highlighted claims that the police are expected to operate like a “nanny force”, by plugging gaps in social services, which is leaving communities without “adequate protection from serious crime.” It is reported that 80 per cent of call-outs involve no criminality, with police time being increasingly taken up by public safety concerns, wellbeing checks and mental health crises. That simply has to end. It is no surprise, therefore, that police morale is at an all-time low. Police officers must be allowed to do the job that they are trained for, as the public would expect. However, our police service has been hollowed out since its creation 13 years ago.”
“Between April and October last year, police officers responded to more than 122,000 incidents, which represented one in five of all incidents that officers attended. However, the vast majority of such calls do not involve criminality. Expecting police officers to fill the gap left by our struggling national health service is placing a huge strain on our already stretched police force. As part of our plan to combine NHS 24 and the Scottish Ambulance Service into a strengthened emergency response health board, Scottish Labour would create a dedicated mental health response division. That would be a default blue- light service for mental health crisis calls, and so reduce the number of calls that would require Police Scotland to attend.”
“Scottish Labour believes that strengthening community policing is an essential part of the strategy for dealing with such young children. We would restore at least 360 police officers to the front line in local divisions, which would boost community policing teams. That would mean that every council ward in Scotland would have a named officer who would build relationships in the community and gather intelligence on crime in local areas. We believe that building relationships in our communities is vital to fighting such crime. We would also reduce the amount of time that police officers have to spend stuck in accident and emergency, through our new mental health response service. Scotland’s police officers currently have to deal with almost 700 mental health-related incidents each day.”
“The increase in the carrying of weapons is understandably causing fear in communities. Will Linden, deputy head of the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit, stated: “The biggest challenge we have is increasing carrying of weapons”. In the 12 months to April last year, weapons were found 231 times during searches on children—the highest total in eight years—and a 10-year-old boy in Edinburgh was the youngest person to be caught with a knife. Jimmy Paul, the unit’s head, has said that he is worried about recent trends in which young people view violent content online and use social media to organise fights. Although fewer of our older children are getting involved in violence, more of our younger children—eight, 10 and 11-year-olds—are doing so. That trend is of concern, he said.”
“Vital to any high-performing justice system is a well-trusted, visible police service. Scotland’s police force is respected across the world, but there can be no doubt that, in the past 19 years, the Scottish National Party’s lack of leadership and investment has reduced public confidence and eroded the police’s ability to respond to all types of crime. Police stations are closing, officer numbers are dwindling and crime is not being responded to. People want to see and feel the presence of the police, but that must mean their presence in all Scotland’s communities. Our communities must know that the police will turn up when crime is reported and that it will be investigated to the highest standards. Violent crime in Scotland is rising—including sexual crimes such as rape and attempted rape—as are domestic abuse and weapons offences.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what financial or practical support is being made available to poultry producers affected by the latest avian influenza outbreak. (S6O-05484)”
“The work that the commission has done is independent, and it is important that we can all pursue these matters together. Business Motion 14:23”
“I reassure her that, given the breadth and complexity of the recommendations in the report, we will consider them carefully. I am acutely aware that our remand population is currently higher than it was in pre-Covid times. Ms McNeill will be aware of the new bail test, which was finally implemented in May this year. There have been some changes to bail and, in particular, progress has been made on assessment and bail supervision. However, further work needs to be done on bail support to increase the prospect of people meeting the requirements. There is considerable progress, but there is much more to do on the use of technologies. I will come back to Parliament in a few days, when we can continue the discussion and debate in the collaborative tone that Ms McNeill has exemplified.”
“The sentencing commission’s report suggests that only suspects with a prospect of being sent to jail for more than two years following conviction should be held on remand. The report says: “Remanding people accused of minor crimes, or those who fail to attend court due to disorganisation, is disproportionate”. It also points out that the “High use of remand” often results in “loss of housing, employment, income and family stability”. Does the Government support that view of remand? Will the cabinet secretary outline how the Scottish Government plans to improve ways in which those who are bailed into the community are supported and monitored, to give reassurance to victims? Angela Constance: There are a lot of detailed questions in what Ms McNeill said.”
“The benefit of this measure is that it will help to achieve a sustained reduction, in the same way that the previous STP40 programme reduced the population from what it would otherwise have been. When we change the automatic early release point, that has a sustained impact, whereas we all know that emergency early release, although necessary, has a temporary impact.”
“Angela Constance: I remind Ms McNeill of the clear political commitment that I gave to the Parliament as a whole in answering Audrey Nicoll’s question yesterday, when I said that, although a statutory review cannot be provided for in secondary legislation, if the Parliament agrees to the automatic early release point being reduced to 30 per cent, we would review that change in the same way as if such a review was provided for in primary legislation. I put on record the reasons why I think that that is important. With regard to the outcome of this proposal, it is predicted that it will reduce the prison population by between 239 and 312 individuals.”
“Yesterday, the cabinet secretary said that the change in the release point for short-term prisoners from 50 to 40 per cent of their sentence that Parliament agreed to just over a year ago was “projected to result in a sustained reduction of approximately 5 per cent across the sentenced population of short-term prisoners in comparison with the situation if no change had been made.”—[Official Report, 3 February 2026; c 27.] Can the cabinet secretary tell us, before the consultation, what effect that reduction from 50 to 40 per cent has had? I presume that some projections have been made in relation to the proposal that the release point be reduced to 30 per cent. If the Government cannot tell us that today, what is the point of doing what it proposes?”
“It appears as though, in a few days’ time, Scotland will move to a position in which short-term prisoners will serve 30 per cent of their sentence on a permanent basis—that is, for all time. Let us be clear about that. I want to try to understand what that means and why the Government thinks that the measure is necessary to meet the issues that the cabinet secretary referred to.”
“As I said, I believe that the bill should have been a Government one, and the reasons why it is not are not clear. All committee members were completely dissatisfied with the time allowed to scrutinise the bill—on that point, we were as one. Today, we are dealing with the general principles. We are not dealing with a bill that is perfect, but we are being asked to support or not support the general principles. Scottish Labour is clear that there would have to be further consideration of some of the bigger issues and some amendments to the bill, but today we will support its general principles at decision time. 16:31”