o improved outcomes for children in recognition of the trauma, abuse and other adversities experienced by so many children that are in conflict with the law. Respondents also recognised that reform in this area would allow the rehabilitative potential of the children's healing system to be maximised. Fundamentally, amendments 85 to 88 would remove the ability of 16 and 17-year-olds in solemn proceedings to have their case remitted to the PR to arrange for the disposal of the case by a children's healing. However, I understand that Ms McCall is not moving those amendments. Turning to Russell Finlay's amendment 206, I note that there are parallels with amendments that were debated last week that sought to take and have regard to views of the person affected by the child's offence or behaviour in the children's healing system. I note in particular amendment 168 that was not supported in the vote of the committee. Amendment 206, I do not believe, is appropriate. The legislative framework for victim impact statements that concerns the criminal justice system provides that they can be made in certain courts and in relation to certain prescribed offences only, in cases where it would be possible for such a statement to be provided, as we have already heard. That might have already been received and considered by the court ahead of the case being remitted. The amendment does not specify which offences it tends to apply to. If it is all offences, it would go even wider than the existing measures in the criminal justice system. In addition, the purpose of victim impact statements is to inform sentencing and, as the committee is aware, remittal to the children's healing system does not constitute a sentence nor does the healing impose a sentence. I absolutely understand what she is saying. I wonder the children's healing system being a welfare system. Would restorative justice play a part in that to understand the impact that actions had had on the other child who had been harmed? Yes, I would say so. As I am going to come on, there are already vehicles in the children's healing system for victims, for the impact on a victim to be taken into consideration. I appreciate that. Following up on that point, I accept again what she is saying about the amendment itself. It may well be that it was a pro-bring amendment and there is still further work to go. However, the principle that has been established in terms of the current provisioning under the criminal justice system, as compared to the new provisioning, in very serious cases where we recognise there could be an uptick particularly around rape and serious sexual assault, is the minister willing to give further thought to how the voice of victims can be heard within the process even whilst not accepting this amendment because there clearly now is a marked difference from the opportunity for people, which is so important to make their voices heard. Even more important, I would argue, than providing a written statement for a victim, it is taking their place and literally having their voice heard. Will the minister give further consideration to that even though I fully accept that the amendment itself may not be perfect in terms of the legislation? I can certainly explore that. The impact of the child's behaviour on a victim is currently a consideration within the hearing system. However, a victim impact statement, as the member noted, is at the moment the way that the amendment is at the moment. The victim impact statement I think risks disproportionately influencing panel members' decision making. As we have already said, the central plank of the hearing system is that decisions are taken in the best interests of the referred child. However, it would certainly be a look at exploring that more. I spoke last week about not turning hearings into a mini court setting. I think that we have to be very careful about transforming the ethos of the hearing system. The consideration of the panel must be through the lens of considering what compulsory measures are necessary to safeguard and promote the referred child's welfare. In doing so, it can include any measure necessary to prevent the child from causing further harm to others. As I say, the impact of that behaviour can be on all a victim can already be taken into consideration. In relation to amendments 89 and 91, the Scottish Government— I have been on that because I will not get a chance to sum up, will I? I offer an intervention. The Minister suggested that the amendment does not specify which cases it relates to. However, how does that position hold up when, in fact, if we look at section 15, it does specify it arguably because it is cases that are remitted pursuant to section 15? I wonder if she can address that point. Also, can she address the time point that my colleague Ross Greer intervened on and I responded, saying that there are matters that could arise between the initial statement that she has talked about and any further statement? Can she address that point? Sorry, Mr Kerr, could you repeat your second point for me? Yes, I can. Ross Greer intervened on me and, in my response to him, because I think that it was a fair intervention, he said that, if there has already been a statement made at an earlier stage in the process, arguably he is asking people to relive the trauma. However, I responded to him and said that all that the amendment does is give the option to the victim. It allows the victim the option to make a further statement. That point was not addressed in your remarks and I wonder if you could say your thoughts on that. My thoughts around that are really come back to the whole idea of the victim impact statement and challenging the ethos of the healing system. I really do not think that I can be any clearer on that. I do not believe— I do not expect that, because what I was saying was that it gives the victim a further opportunity. It is not about the ethos, it is about offering a further opportunity. Why do you reject, minister, the opportunity being afforded? As I said, the impact on a victim is already taken into consideration. I believe that the option of a victim impact statement in the setting of a children's healing system is not necessarily in keeping with the ethos of the healing system. That has been quite clear. In relation to what Mr Kerr was asking about the types of cases, it does not specify exactly what types of cases it is referring to. You mentioned earlier on about disproportionately impacting panel members if there was a victim statement using their own voice there. Surely, from the point of view, it would also be about the panel having the fullest information possible and the fullest understanding of all the facts and the whole matter in its entirety? Absolutely. As I have said multiple times, each referred child's case is different. It would be for the panel to decide what information they required in order to inform their decision, and they would have appropriate avenues to gather that information from the various different services that are involved. In relation to further information in the children's healing system, last week, the committee agreed that it was not appropriate to give further voice or to give that opportunity. I am a little unclear as to why we are debating that again when it has already been agreed that that should not be the case. With all due respect, Minister, I have already made reference the fact that this is a committee debate, and I am going to facilitate as much discussion and debate around it as possible. Can I move swiftly on to Rosmine Call to wind up? Turning to amendments 89 and 91, the Scottish Government is absolutely committed to tackling domestic abuse. In approaching the bill, we have promoted ensuring that children in conflict with the law can access the age-appropriate healing system where possible in line with children's rights. The remittal framework in the bill covers specific instances where courts have levers not replicated in the healing system, and we have listened to testimony during stage one from victims organisations. The point has been made that enabling more 16 and 17-year-olds to access the healing system might mean that the age group is more likely to be in relationship, and that brings consideration into possible offending around domestic abuse. The Lord Advocate's guidelines will, however, determine those cases, which can be referred, and the procurator Fiscal will retain the discretion to prosecute. The joint referral framework and guidelines will be updated and published after the bill is passed, as it would be following any active Parliament. Amendments 89 and 91 will enable courts to be able to make a non-harassment order, or NHO, where the court is satisfied on a balance of probabilities that it is appropriate to do so to prevent a victim from harassment, or where the child has been convicted of an offence under domestic abuse legislation to protect the victim of that offence, and to, thereafter, be able to remit the case for disposal at a children's healings if that is considered appropriate. Remittal in this case would not affect the non-harassment order, which will remain in place, and, for example, breach of a non-harassment order would still be a criminal offence, which would be dealt with by the court. As the briefing to the committee from the Children and Young People Commissioner Scotland stated, our view is that that will ensure that the child receives the support that they need to comply with the non-harassment order and will therefore strengthen protections for victims. On amendment 90, the committee will be familiar with the bill's remittal framework concerning road traffic offences. Just help me to understand, Minister, because just on amendment 91, the court that initially puts a non-harassment in place has a victim impact statement to assist it, but because the Government intends to vote down amendment 206, the panel may not be able to avail itself of the same level of information. Am I reading that right, Minister? As I've previously said, it will be up to the panel to determine what information they require to deal with an individual child's case, and that will be on a case by case. In terms of children who have been available in one forum and not the other? Well, yes, but that is because of the differences in the settings. The remittal in this case would not affect the... Yes. Minister did not support six of the amendments that I brought last week in this space, giving opportunity to ask victims for an opportunity to intervene in various different points, which were slightly narrowly focused on this amendment. Where does the minister intend victims to have their say, and at what point? As I've said very clearly, the impact of any act on the victim will be already taken into consideration by the panel, and the decisions will be made by that panel on how they feel is best to approach. I can't be any clearer around the ethos of the children's hearing system and how it is not a mini-court setting and that a victim impact statement going back to my previous response could impact on the judgment based on what is right for the child who is at the centre of the children's hearing system. I'm sorry, convener, but I really don't understand how I can be any clearer than this. The victim will receive, and as we debated last week, there is increased support through this bill for the victim and for information to the victim, but we have to remember that, in terms of the children's hearing system, it is the referred child that has to be at the centre of that and decisions that are made to best impact on the child at the heart of the hearing. Minister, I think that the number of questions that are coming in this regard gives an indication that the responses perhaps haven't been as clear as some of the committee members are seeking. Are you still carrying on to speak to your amendments? Yes, I have a little left, thank you. Sorry, remittal in this case would not affect the non-harassment order and it will remain in place, and for example, a breach of a non-harassment order would still be a criminal offence which would be dealt with by the court. On amendment 90, the committee will be familiar with the bills—sorry, I repeated myself there—the committee will be familiar with the bills' remittal framework concerning road traffic offences. Driving disqualifications can occur when a person accumulates 12 or more penalty points on their licence within three years. The so-called totting up provision in section 35 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 and this amendment extends the ability of the court so that it is able to impose a totting up disqualification and still remit the case to the children's hearing for disposal, if felt to be appropriate. So I would urge members not to press amendments 85, 86, 87, 88 and 206 and I would, if they are pressed, urge the committee not to support. I move amendment 89 and ask members to support the Government amendments within this grouping. Thank you now, I invite Ross McCall to wind up, press or withdraw amendment 85, please. Thank you. It's an interesting feeling to be winding up where the debate moved on in such a way. As I've already stated, I won't be moving mind, but I'm very concerned about the way that debate followed that process. It's interesting to be summing up really on something that is an additional amendment, but I would urge—if I was in that position, I would be supporting 206—I'm concerned about that process that victims—that disparity that's there and that the ethos holds true to possibly a detrimental respect. I'm very grateful, convener, and I will be brief. Does she share with me the concern that we seem to have a tautology argument over the word victim statement as compared to what it should be, which is an understanding of the victims' experiences at the time that either panels or, indeed, courts are reaching a decision? A quick answer is yes, I agree with that, but I will state that I'm not moving my first amendment, which is 85. Ross McCall seeks to withdraw amendment 85. Does any member object? The amendment is therefore withdrawn. Our next question is that amendment 86, in the name of Ross McCall, already debated with amendment 85. Ross McCall, to move or not move? Not moved. I call amendment 87 in the name of Ross McCall, already debated with amendment 85. Ross McCall, to move or not move? Not moved. I call amendment 88 in the name of Ross McCall, already debated with amendment 85. Ross McCall, to move or not move? Not moved. I call amendment amendment 206, in the name of Russell Finlay, already debated with amendment 85. Liam Kerr to move or not move. I press that amendment. The question is that amendment 206 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are not agreed. There will be a division. Those in favour of amendment 206, those against and those abstaining. The result of the vote on amendment 206 is 4 against 5 with one abstention. Amendment 206 is therefore not agreed. I call amendment 89 in the name of the minister. Already debated with amendment 85, minister to move formally. The question is that amendment 89 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. The question is that amendment 90, in the name of the minister, already debated with amendment 85. Are the minister to move formally, please? Moved. The question is that amendment 90 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. Yes. Thank you. I call amendment 91 in the name of the minister. Already debated with amendment 85, minister to move formally. Moved. The question is that amendment 91 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are. Thank you. The next question is that section 15 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. I call amendment 92 in the name of Ross McCall. Already debated with amendment 11. Ross McCall to move or not move. I call amendment 93 in the name of Ross McCall. Already debated with amendment 11. Ross McCall to move or not move. Not moved. I call amendment 94 in the name of Ross McCall. Already debated with amendment 11. Ross McCall to move or not move. Not moved. I call amendment 95 in the name of Ross McCall. Oh, sorry, let me just say this is about detention in secure accommodation post 18. I call amendment 95 in the name of Ross McCall. Group with amendments 97, 103 and 104. Ross McCall to move amendment 95 and speak to all amendments in the group please. Ross McCall. Thank you, convener. Again, a section of probing amendments, hopefully, to move forward for debate. I am aware that there has been council decisions over the past recent years to reduce their residential estate. It begs the question of safeguarding. I think that safeguarding is very important and ensuring that there is a prudent level of safeguarding within our residential placements. We could so easily have a situation where an over 18-year-old by legal definition and adult is within a secure accommodation as it has been deemed important that liberty is withdrawn. Living in the same secure accommodation with a child, i.e. somebody under the age of 18, whereas placed there for them to stay out of harm's way. That is an unacceptable position. Giving the state of residential placements and residential estate across the country, I would be really interested if the minister could outline the safeguarding measures within the bill and how she would ensure that this scenario just will not happen in reality. That is a general feeling of this section. It is to start debate and, hopefully, to increase the debate on that. I am not 100 per cent sure that the safeguarding measures in place are sufficient. I would be very interested to hear what the minister has to say on that. That is proposed to the bill in 1995. The provisions in sections 16 and 17 of the bill, as introduced on enabling children to be detained in secure accommodation after turning 18 to stay in that accommodation, are necessary to keep the promise. The independent care review concluded that if a young person turns 18 during their time in secure care, there must not be an automatic transfer to a young offender's institute. There must be scope to remain in secure care for those who have turned 18. That change was recommended by a previous Justice Committee of this Parliament. The amendments in this group are contrary to that. I appreciate those approbent amendments. I find it disappointing, given the shared commitment that this Parliament has in keeping the promise to people who have experience of Scotland's care system. The approach in the bill has introduced support stability, continuity of care and support, and enduring relationships for children in secure care, as well as providing for gradual and improved transitions for children turning 18, which is crucial to support their reintegration and rehabilitation. I think that those benefits would be lost if those amendments were pushed and agreed. The bill, as introduced, is consistent with the UNCRC and international human rights standard by allowing case-by-case decision making. Where consideration is being given to a child remaining in secure accommodation beyond the age of 18, that decision would be made on a case-by-case basis to ensure that the decision is in the best interests, and not contrary to not just that child but the other children in that facility. I apologise if that has already been covered. What consideration has been given thus far should a young man in secure accommodation elect to self-identify to a different gender? I mean that specifically from a safeguarding perspective. Has the detail of that been worked up? Obviously, that has been much discussed at the justice committee. I will touch on that a lot throughout my comments, but what I would say is that that is for secure care centres to deal with on a case-by-case basis, so I really could not sit here today and see how that specific instance would be dealt with. Discussions around that, so I will continue. If Ms Thomson would like to come back in, I am more than happy for her to do so. The specific considerations will be detailed in the regulations, and that will undergo parliamentary scrutiny and are subject to the affirmative procedure. If it is concluded that remaining in the secure accommodation will not be in the best interests of the young person themselves or in the best interests of any other child, the young person would not remain in that secure accommodation. I hope that that alleviates any concerns that the committee and others outside Parliament might have regarding any potentially negative implications for the other children that are cared for within that secure accommodation setting. Although secure care centres do not currently support children over the age of 18, they are supportive of that change. As I say, discussions are on-going as to how that will be implemented. Secure centres are already working to prepare for implementation of this element of the bill if it is passed and to ensure that the needs of all children and young people in their care can be met. Those provisions also received positive support in the public consultation on the bill proposals in 2023. There is no distinction on secure care that is based on gender, as I will discuss later. Each centre has its own considerations on each case and how that would be managed. As I say, those discussions are on-going just now, and I am sure that, if the member wishes further information on that, that could come at a later date. What is the consideration and the balance of young people who are not in secure accommodation but are identified as needing secure accommodation, as compared to those who have reached 18 and may need to stay in secure accommodation? What is the balance between the push to get in and the need to stay in as they travel past their 18th birthday? Do you mean that there is an over-capacity problem? Or an under-capacity problem? Sorry. That is not something that we have been met with in recent years. There has been capacity in the secure care centres. Again, that would be an issue that we would have to deal with at the time, on a case-by-case basis, in discussion with the secure care centres around that. It would really be what is best for the children involved. While I can imagine that, I am sure that Mr Whitfield can as well, I probably could not lay that out in black and white here, because, as I say, it would not be a decision for me as a minister to take. Amendments 95, 97, 103 and 104, on the other hand, would remove the ability to allow children to be detained in secure accommodation before the age of 18 to remain there. Obviously, that would mean that those young people would require to move to a YYY on their 18th birthday, regardless of their needs. We have seen that where children have been moved on their birthday. Regardless of their needs, vulnerabilities or best interests, and regardless of how much or how little of their sentence remains to be served, which could just be a few days. I am sure that the committee would agree that that would be a lot of upheaval for a young person to be transferred to a younger offenders institution for simply a matter of days. For children detained under sections 44 and 216 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1995, there is actually no provision in law for those children to be detained in YYYs. Therefore, on turning 18, those children would either need to be released or would need to be moved to another place. That would be chosen by the local authority, but not secure. As I said, Ms McAll's amendments will mean that young people detained in secure would be subject to a cliff edge. However, I appreciate that Ms McAll has said that I believe that she said that she does not intend to press them. If pressed, I would not be able to support them. Thank you, minister. Now, can I bring back Ros McAll to wind up press or withdraw amendment 95, please? I was talking about a very specific scenario, which I am really not 100 per cent sure that I actually got a sort of response for. It is safeguarding. Whilst I understand that it will be on a case by case basis, and whilst I understand that that would be for local authorities to decide, there has also got to be an absolute certainty that there is the financial and support provision there to be able to make sure that that happens. I am not 100 per cent convinced by the answer that we have got that feel safe in place. As much as I understand the Young Offenders Institute position, and I have put forward some amendments that I think people will be concerned or even worry why I am doing it in that direction, but there needs to be an option and it needs to be in place. I am really not sure that that is there, but I will not press those particular amendments, but I am still concerned and will look to discuss this with the minister as to how this moves forward for stage 3. Ros McAll seeks to withdraw amendment 95. Does any member object? No. The amendment is therefore withdrawn. My next question is that section 16 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? I call amendment 96 in the name of Ros McAll already debated with amendment 11. Ros McAll to move or not move. I call amendment 97 in the name of Ros McAll already debated with amendment 95 to move Ros McAll to move or not move. I call amendment 98 in the name of Ros McAll already debated with amendment 11. Ros McAll to move or not move. We are now moving on to the minor and technical grouping. I call amendment 99 in the name of the minister, group with amendments 101, 115, 116, 117 and 118. Minister, to move amendment 99 and speak to all amendments in the group, please. Thank you, convener. Once again, as you have noted, the amendments in this group are all minor and technical amendments. While I am happy to explain any of them in detail of committee members' wish, I am equally happy to move amendment 99 and invite members to support it. There may be technical amendments, but surely the minister ought to put it on the record as to why those amendments are necessary and therefore being put forward so that at least the committee can understand, but certainly anyone looking at the official record is able to understand in the future. Of course, I am happy to. For those children who are detained under section 205, which is punishment for murder in section 208 on conviction on indictment of the Criminal Procedure Scotland Act 1995, the Scottish ministers already have powers to direct the place and conditions of detention, although those powers will be subject to new section 208A as inserted by section 17 of the bill, which provides that children may not be detained in a prison or a young offenders institution. In respect of amendments 99 and 101, where a child is convicted and sentenced under solemn proceedings, under sections 205 and 208A of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Scottish ministers direct where the child is to be detained. Under the provisions of the bill, children under the age of 18 will no longer be placed in a young offenders institution in any circumstances. As I have already noted, that change is essential for Scotland to keep the promise. Amendments 99 and 101 clarify that, although the Scottish ministers cannot direct the person while a child is detained in a prison or a young offenders institution, on turning 18, a person can be transferred from secure accommodation to a YOY, should they not remain insecure until a maximum age of 19 and in due course to a prison. Amendment 116 clarifies the early release provisions that apply to certain children convicted on indictment and sentenced to detention under section 208 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1995. Amendments 7 of the Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings Act 93, the amendment was of a technical nature rather than substantive. It ensures that children who are detained under section 208 of the 95 act will be subject to the same early release provisions if they are then sentenced, while also detained to a determinate term of detention or imprisonment of four or more years and by virtue of section 275 of the 93 act, such terms of detention or imprisonment are treated as a single term. Amendment 115 is consequential on paragraph 73 of the schedule of the bill, which amends section 245A of the Criminal Procedure Act 1995 to enable a restriction of liberty order or RLO to be made in respect of any child under 18 rather than 16, as is currently the case. A local authority must provide supervision of and advice, guidance and assistance for a child during the period when a child is subject to an RLO. This amendment means that the relevant local authority must provide such support to any child under 18 who is subject to an RLO, as currently this duty only applies to children under 16. Amendment 117 is a consequential amendment and removes paragraph 12 from the schedule of the bill. This is no longer required because the change made by amendment 116 removes the reference to remand centres which paragraph 12 seeks to repeal. There are no such facilities in Scotland and no plans to reintroduce those. To do so would be inconsistent with the promise. Amendment 118 makes minor consequential amendments around local authorities duties in relation to children detained under the Criminal Procedure Act 1995. The amendments are in consequence of part 2 of the bill and are important to ensure that there is effective oversight of the discharge of local authority duties to children who are detained via the different criminal justice routes. Such oversight is important, given the particular needs, risks and vulnerabilities that those children are likely to have experienced and the significant impact that is being detained has on those children and their rights. Local authorities have key duties towards those children and the amendment to section 5 of the Social Work Scotland Act 1968 ensures that Scottish ministers have powers to issue directions to local authorities, not just for those children and young people detained under section 51 of the 95 act while awaiting trial or sentence, but also for those children and young people detained in summary proceedings under section 44 or detained for fine default under section 216 of the 95 act. That is an important change to ensure that such directions can be provided consistently to cover all the criminal justice routes in terms of which a child may be detained. The amendment to the Public Services Reform Act 2010 removes an existing unnecessary definition of social work services due to other changes in the bill. The number of children subject to an RLO is relatively low at any one time, but from April 2022 to March 2023 there were 43 new RLOs for under 18s. None of those were for children under the age of 16 and 83 per cent of the orders made were for those aged 17 years old at the order start date, with only 17 per cent aged 16 on the order start date. Although that might have some financial implications for local authorities, given the small numbers of children being made subject to those orders, it is likely to be minimal. It is noted that, owing to other changes in the bill, the demand placed by children on justice social work is likely to reduce, but owing to the funding structures of justice social work, no transfer of these savings is possible at this time. I move amendment 99 and invite members to support this amendment and all other amendments within the grouping. The question is that amendment 99 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes, we are agreed. I call amendment 101—no, it's not. I call amendment 100, in the name of Ros McAll, already debated with amendment 11. Ros McAll to move or not move. I call amendment 101 in the name of the minister, already debated with amendment 99. The minister to move formally. The question is that amendment 101 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes, we are all agreed. I call amendment 102, in the name of Ros McAll, already debated with amendment 11. Ros McAll to move or not move. I call amendment 103, in the name of Ros McAll, already debated with amendment 95. Ros McAll to move or not move. I call amendment 104, in the name of Ros McAll, already debated with amendment 95. The next question is that section 17 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are now going to move on to the next section, measures for children who have committed an offence. I call amendment 105, in the name of the minister, grouped with amendments 207, 208 and 209. Minister, to move amendment 105 and speak to all amendments in the group. Thank you, convener. Government amendment 105 aims to ensure that children and young people with a mental disorder who are convicted of an indictment and sentenced to detention are provided with the most appropriate level of care and treatment at the right time. Currently, while a court can make a hospital direction in respect of some 16 and 17-year-olds, those who are not subject to a compulsory supervision order, a court cannot make a hospital direction in respect of a child under the age of 16 or those aged between 16 and 18 years old who are subject to a CSO. The Scottish Government considers that that should be addressed, given the clear benefits for the child of being able to go straight to hospital for mental health care and treatment, as opposed to the child transferring to a hospital from another setting of detention. Hospital directions are very rarely used for 16 and 17-year-olds, however, ensuring that they may be applied for in exceptional defined circumstances for children is both desirable and necessary. The inception of specialised facilities at Fox Grove, the first medium secure national secure adolescent inpatient service in Scotland, changes the backdrop of how the complex mental health needs of children and young people are met in Scotland. The opening of Fox Grove this year will mean that there will be age-appropriate forensic mental health provision for adolescents in Scotland, including those who are subject to hospital directions. Amendment 105 makes no change to the nature of hospital directions or the conditions that must be satisfied for them to be applied, other than making them available to all children aged 12 to 17, with a mental disorder who are convicted of indictment and sentenced to detention. Turning to Martin Whitfield's amendments, and whilst I understand the intention behind the amendments, I would not support them in this instance. Amendment 207 would place a duty on Scottish ministers to promote the use of alternatives to the detention of children, convicted of an offence, and to report annually on the steps taken to achieve that. It is not entirely clear whether that is a general duty to promote alternatives to detention, or whether Mr Whitfield wants ministers to promote alternatives in specific cases of individual children who have been convicted of an offence. If the amendment is intended to be general, which we would assume it is, there is already provision in that regard, if the amendment is intended to be specific to an individual case, that would undermine the independence of the judiciary, and I am sure that Mr Whitfield does not intend that. Except in respect of punishment for murder, the decision to deprive a child of their liberty on conviction is an independent decision of the courts, and in doing so, the court is required to comply with ECHR. For those children convicted of an indictment under section 208 of the 95 act, there is a presumption against detention, ensuring that the court can only impose a period of detention if it considers that no other method of dealing with that individual is appropriate. For those children convicted summarily under section 44 of the 95 act, the court may order that the child be detained in residential accommodation for a period of not exceeding one year. A presumption against detention is set out in guidance, including that published by Scottish ministers, and that is in line with the UNCRC, which says that deprivation of a child's liberty should be the option of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time. Indeed, the use of alternatives to deprivation of liberty for children is a cornerstone of the Scottish Government's whole system approach, in which the use of alternatives to detention are already promoted. In practice, local authorities have a range of alternatives available to depriving a child of their liberty, which they can put to the court as options instead of detention. The Scottish Government's vision for youth justice and standards for those working with children in conflict with the law, both published in 2011, represents a shared foundation between the Scottish Government and partners to continue to support an approach that keeps children out of the criminal justice system and promotes the use of alternatives to detention. Data on the use of alternatives to detention for under-21s is currently published annually in the criminal proceedings in Scotland, which is published on the Scottish Government's website. In relation to amendment 208, restorative justice is a voluntary, supported process of contact between someone who has been harmed and the person who has caused that harm, and both parties can withdraw consent at any time. Section 5 of the Victims and Witnesses Scotland Act 2014 already gives the Scottish Minister's powers to issue guidance about the provision of restorative justice services. Such guidance, aimed at service providers and facilitators, was published in 2017 and outlines the key principles of restorative justice. To ensure that restorative justice processes are available, they are delivered in a coherent and consistent and victim-focused manner across Scotland. That includes where children are the victims or the alleged perpetrator. In addition, the restorative justice prescribed person's Scotland Order 21 was made under the 2014 act and provides a list of prescribed persons who must have regard to that guidance. The list of persons includes the Scottish ministers, a local authority and persons who provide restorative justice services. The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that restorative justice services are available across Scotland where the needs of persons harmed and their voices are central to that process. The services must be available at a time that is appropriate to the people in case involved. It must be consistent, evidence-led, trauma-informed and of a high standard. The Scottish Government has been working in partnership with Community Justice Scotland and the Children and Young People's Centre for Justice in order to deliver on that commitment. Information about restorative justice and the work being undertaken to achieve that vision is published on the Community Justice Scotland website, which provides a means of reporting. The Scottish Government is also committed to exploring or consulting on the recommendations in respect of restorative justice and the children's hearings report. Turning to amendment 209, measures within the bill already do aim to enhance the rehabilitation and reintegration of children by ensuring that they can access age and stage-appropriate welfare-based systems, supports and services when required, namely the children's hearings system and secure accommodation, as well as enhancing the safeguards available to children who need to go through the criminal justice system, including in respect of reporting restrictions. Section 21 of the bill includes provisions to ensure that those detained in secure accommodation are treated as looked after for the purposes of sections 29, 30 and 31 of the Children's Act 1995. That includes aftercare up to the age of 19 and 26, in certain circumstances, to aid a child's transition to adulthood. As detailed in the policy memorandum for the bill, the Sentencing Young People's Guidelines stated that rehabilitation is a primary consideration when sentencing a young person. That is in line with article 40 of the UNCRC, which provides that all children under 18 who have been accused of committing a crime have the right to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the child's sense of dignity and worth, which reinforces the child's respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of others and which takes into account the child's age and the desirability of promoting the child's reintegration and assuming a constructive role back into society. The rehabilitation and reintegration of children who have committed an offence is already a key tenet of the Scottish Government's whole system approach to preventing, offending by children and young people. A package of support should be detailed in a child's plan to help them to successfully integrate back into their community. That is incorporated in the standards for those working with children in conflict with the law. Adding a duty for the Scottish ministers to report on something that is led by local authorities does not appear to fit with the role of the Scottish ministers. In summary, I move amendment 105, but I cannot support the other amendments in this group and ask members not to press them. Can I now ask Martin Woodfield to speak to amendment 207 and the other amendments in the group, please? I am very grateful, convener, and I am conscious of time on the committee, so I will try to make this as short as possible. The purposes behind these amendments in some cases have been addressed by the Minister, so it may simply be a case if the Minister is open to responding to questions rather than submission last time. It may facilitate my ability or decision on whether I push or not. Firstly, can I welcome the Government's amendment in respect of this? If I look at my amendment 207, which is the alternative to detention of children, the Minister was right that this was a generic requirement, rather than a requirement specific to any individual act, which would be completely inappropriate given the nature of assessing from the individual's point of view. First, is the Minister confident or is the Minister certain that the reporting provisions that she has already outlined, plus the requirements within the UNCRC, mean that this information will be available on an annual basis to the public, albeit that, rather than coming specifically from a Scottish Minister, it may lay in a variety of places? I'm very grateful for that. That's very helpful. Again, if we move to restorative justice for children, of course, restorative justice can only work when all parties are open to it and maintain openness towards that approach as they go through the system. One of the challenges that we've seen in restorative justice in other environments is where there's a misunderstanding as to what the restorative justice is, but more appropriately, perhaps, a misunderstanding amongst those that surround the individuals who take part in restorative justice, rather than, again, the Minister was right to make mention of the 2017 publication. Is there an intention to revisit, to review, and indeed republish that guideline, guidance under the provisions that we've already amended by the committee into the next bit of the act, but also to take it forward? Subsequent to the publication of the guidance 2017, the provision of restorative justice services across Scotland was inconsistent and, in some places, potentially non-existent. Therefore, the Scottish Government subsequently published the restorative justice action plan, which sets out a further vision that restorative justice would be available across Scotland. Now, that has been slightly delayed, as I understand it. I believe that the services were hoped to be available by 2023. However, work-to-date has been some great complexities revealed in implementing and coupled with the impact of the pandemic that has held up delivery. However, the commitment to establishing restorative justice services across Scotland remains. As I said, there have been some complexities thrown up, and we need to consider how we get that right. However, the commitment remains, and I am more than happy to discuss that further or update the member on where we are with that. I am very grateful. Let me rephrase the question, then. Would it be the best intentions of the Scottish Government to review and republish what starts as the 2017 guidance, as soon as possible, given the important nature of restorative justice, not just within this bill but in a wider context across Scotland? Is the Scottish Government happy to give best endeavours to achieve that? Yes, absolutely. We have been committed to exploring and consulting on that further. As I said, this is something that we looked at in relation to the children's heathens redesign report. I am very grateful. That brings me to the last amendment that is in my name, 209, which is the rehabilitation and reintegration of children who have been guilty of offences. That is very important. I am grateful to the contributions that the minister has made, because it is right that the rehabilitation and reintegration is a paramount part of how young people can reintegrate into the communities. We have heard in a number of amendments that have been put forward today. Indeed, last week, that sits at the heart of what we are trying to achieve here. Again, with regard in this case to the reporting principles of it, is the minister absolutely confident that there will be sources of reporting, not necessarily through the Government but available to the public that can measure the success of rehabilitation but also reintegration of young people at the end of their period of involvement? I am confident. Given the extra attention to this in terms of whole system approach, I am confident. However, going forward, if that became something that I was not confident about, I would certainly be looking to take action in that front, or look to what could be done. I am very grateful for those assertions. Martin Whipfield, you have had quite a good discussion between yourselves there, but I will call you to wind up with this group now, please. Nothing further to say, formally moved. That is helpful, minister. The question is that amendment 105 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes, we are agreed. I call amendment 108, in the name of Ros McAll, already— Or did I say? Oh, that is my—literally, I need to get my wind. My eyes are tired. I call amendment 106. Apologies to the people who are taking notes of this. 106, in the name of Ros McAll, already debated with amendment 11. Ros McAll, to move or not move. Not moved. Thank you, Ms McAll. The question is that amendment—no, it is not. Call amendment 107, in the name of Ros McAll, already debated with amendment 11. Ros McAll, to move or not move. Not moved. Thank you. So look at that, 12, 59 and 41 seconds. The question is that sections 18 to 21 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? William. All right, thank goodness. So did I. Okay, so that concludes our consideration of the bill at stage 2 today and the committee will continue its consideration at its meeting on the 7 February. Thank you all for your time. I now close the meeting. And can I just—you've closed the meeting.


Come with me as I explore Kirtian's simulated hospital ward. It's like walking into a real hospital, complete with a reception area, waiting room, viewing room and multiple hospital rooms. Inside these rooms you'll encounter life-like mannequins who can move, breathe, bleed, make sounds and even simulate a full birth. How crazy is that? Adding to the realness are fully stocked crash carts and medication stations ready for you to level up your medical skills. Whether you're an aspiring nurse or midwife, the Kirtian simulated hospital is the ultimate training ground.


Hey guys, what is up? Welcome to my channel for today's video. Kind of a two-in-one video. I don't know, it's like a get ready, a little portion of a review. The main focus of today, my eyes of a star palette finally came in from Charlotte Tilbury.  So we do a full face of Charlotte Tilbury. If you are only interested in the quad and what I have to say about the quad, I will put the timestamp right here. Just go ahead, fast forward to that. It's a pretty quick demo. So I'm not going to take too much of your time, but if you want me to take your time and you want to see just how I got this whole shebang using all Charlotte Tilbury products, then just keep watching. You guys always ask me where I get my headbands from. Get them from random places. Forever 21 is the best place. I can't remember specifically where this one is from, but Forever 21 has the best ones. I've also gotten some from Charming Charlies and just random spots here and there in the Dollar Tree. Yeah. All right, so I'm going to start off with the Wonder Glow Instant Focus Beauty Flash. So it's been a while since I've used this. As you can see, this is just a sample, but yeah, I'm not too moved by this. I just prefer if we're talking about bases for Charlotte Tilbury. I prefer using her Magic Cream. That's my favorite primer of hers, even though that's more so skincare not necessarily made for makeup. But I like that as a pre-makeup primer. Then also, I just prefer her Hollywood Flawless Filter Highlighters as a base. So this time, it's not moisturizing. It does give a very natural sheen to the face, but it really doesn't do much. I feel like, I don't know. Maybe that's just me, but we used it today. I have a new friend right here, so we'll just avoid that. All right, now let's move on it to foundation. I'm using a mixture of the Airbrush Flawless Foundation and mixing it with a little bit of the Light Wonder Foundation. I don't know, I don't feel like going full-full coverage today, and this one's pretty light coverage. Both shades are way too light for me, so just ignore that. I'm just gonna look on the lighter side today, which is okay for some reason. Most of the Charlotte Tilbury base products that I have are all way too light for me. I like to use my fingers first to really blend the formulas together. I'm just gonna use my sponge. I love both products that I'm using though, but both are really, really beautiful. I'm going to mix on the forehead. Now, I don't own any Charlotte Tilbury eyebrow products, so I'm just going in with my Sigma brow pencil and quickly going to go ahead and do that. And then I've been using this Ardell Brow Enhancer, and it's such a creamy product. It's really great for sculpting out the brows. Then I'll take just a flat synthetic brush like this, and then just blend it out. All right, let's move on to the under eyes. I'm going to use my Charlotte Tilbury under eye corrector. I love this thing. I think it's really amazing. And sometimes on really natural makeup days, I won't even put another concealer on top because if you just use a touch of this, you can get away with wearing it alone because it just corrects those circles and adds just a hint of brightness without being too unnatural looking. But of course, it's also great before your regular concealer as well if you want more coverage. You see how that just brightened my under eyes without adding too orange or salmon of a color? Now, I'm actually going to mix two concealers on my under eyes. I'm not the biggest fan of the Charlotte Tilbury Magic Away concealer, but I'm going to use it today because I'm trying to finish it. The color that I have is just too bright and I find the formula to be pretty drying underneath the eyes. I'm just going to put a little bit of that in the inner corner. Mine is a little bit dried up, honestly. It's ready to be thrown away and I don't think I'll repurchase it. And I'm going to use a touch of my elf hydrating camo concealer because this one is a bit too deep for me, as you can see. So we're just going to mix them together and get the perfect potion to make sure both colors really had a chance to blend into each other if you're going to do this. So that way it doesn't look like dark out here and then only bright in the inner corner and you really have to mush the two colors together. And then I'm going to set the under eyes with my magic loose setting powder. I like this powder a lot. I feel like Charlotte does have some better powders, but overall it's a nice setting powder. Nothing extremely special about it, but I have been enjoying it. It's not my favorite for setting the under eyes because I feel like sometimes, depending on which concealer you're using it with, it can darken the under eyes or make it look a little bit too textured. It just depends on the concealer that you're using. I'm going to set the inside of my face as well. So to bronze today, I'm of course going to use my Charlotte Tilbury airbrush bronzer. I was going to use my film star bronzing glow because it's been a while since I've used that, but looking at the colors of the quad is going to be a bronzy look. I'm using a refer number five brush for this and I don't want to apply it too much because my skin is a little bit more on the fair side nowadays, obviously with winter. So I'm just going to use a light hand with this product. We will do a blush and bronzer and all of that after the eyeshadow quad. So let's get into it. If you want more of the details on this collection as a whole, I would recommend you check out my original video of the original two palettes. But if you don't know, this is a collection of three eyeshadow palettes and a few other things as well, mostly having to do with complexion. So they changed the packaging for this collection. As you can see, it has this beautiful star design. She released the three palettes all at different times. This one was the last one to join the team. It does look like it's only currently available on the Charlotte Tolbury website if you're interested. And here's what it looks like. I haven't even touched it yet. It has this gorgeous Hollywood embossment. This is $53 and this color is eyes of a star. This is described as a gold amber, chocolate brown and terracotta palette. Honestly, of the four just by looking at it, this is the prettiest, you guys. They really did save the best color story for last. Now, just like the other two, I do feel as though it's not necessarily a unique color story. Like here we're talking depth. You can see they all kind of have that similar satiny formula. So this one, it looks really pretty. I don't know. It looks like a great basic palette, but I really enjoy the colors. I'm going to use just a touch of my Kaleidos eye primer. Just a touch. And in case you missed this, these are made in Italy and they do have an 18 month shelf life. We're not going to do anything crazy because I do just want to get a feel for the formula. So with the BK202, we're going to go into this shade right here and I'm going to focus this in the outer corner right here. So I'm going to just place my initial application and then I'm going to blend it out from there. As per usual, it's blending out really nicely. It's a pretty soft color, but I'm sure you can build it up. So that's just with one layer and it blended out really, really nicely. So it's really great if you're kind of a beginner to shadow because it's not going to be too hard to work out and you can use heavy hand and it's still going to look really nice. The refer at number 12 brush. I'm also going to work this along the lower half of the last line and this color isn't pulling very satiny on the eyelid. It works great as a matte shade. Now, it's not a drying mat. So mature lids, you're really going to love this formula because it looks matte on the eyes and it's not going to make your eyes look dry. All right, let's play around with this golden shade and we're going to apply this to the center of the lid, kind of leaving just a little bit of the front part of the lid open. Really pretty. Let's try it out with a brush. I've been loving the Tom Ford number 11 brush for these luxury shimmers in particular. Wow, that almost applied even better with this brush and this palette already, I would say packs more depth than the other two palettes and now we're going to go in with the lightest shade. I'm using a Wayne Goss number 7 brush and we're going to pack this in the inner corner and I'm not getting as much gleam as I was hoping. I wish she would have made this shade more sparkly like she normally does with the shade because it's actually matching the other textures in this palette. You know, I like the sparkle. Let me apply with my finger just to see to get any more out of that. Not really, but it's still really pretty. All right, now we're going to build some depth. I'm using my refer 14 brush and we're going into the deep shade. So let's see how this does. So I'm starting it off along the lower lash line. Really nice. So that did build a little bit of depth. I'm going into my refer number 12 brush. I want to build the depth right here in the outer corner. The shade actually is not as pigmented as some of her other formulas. Like the formulas in all three of these palettes are different than her regular line. In her regular line, these would pack so much more of a punch. Now, that doesn't mean it's bad. You know, if you are newer to makeup or you prefer the soft kind of formula, you've never been a fan of those super pigmented mattes. Then I think you will really like it. I just dropped my brush because there is something to be said about how well these formulas work. So I do like it. Don't get me wrong. But for this shade in particular personally with the formulas that I prefer, I wish it did pack a little bit more of a punch so I could use it as a shadow liner. Bridge this over. I'm going to jump back into this shade and kind of blend everything out. All right. So overall, I think the quad is really beautiful. It's kind of nondescript though. It's not something you don't already have in your collection. Everything worked really well. I think what I don't like about this, I would say is I like a little bit more of her sparkle and dimension that she adds in her palettes. This one doesn't have it. It really is a true satin eye look, which is really gorgeous. I think if you have more mature eyelids, you would really enjoy this. And if you have more of a deeper complexion, I also think this one would make a great everyday palette. It would be a little bit more soft on your skin tone, but still really stunning because I do think you can build these colors up a little bit more of the three. I think this one is probably my favorite. I just think it's a really great wearable palette. There are other palettes in her line though that I do prefer. So if you want to shell out the $53 for a Charlotte Tilbury quad, none of these three are the direction that I would recommend. Also, let's quickly talk about how this has almost half the product of her regular quads. So yeah, I mean, it's really, really nice. It's really pretty if the color story speaks to you and you like the more Gillet type of formulas that are a little bit more soft inside. And I do think you would enjoy this, but it's personally not my favorite. All right, let's finish up the rest of this look. I think for eyeliner today, I'm going to keep it pretty soft and I'm going to go with the Barbella Brown Rockin' Coal Pencil. I've been wanting to play around with this a little bit more. I'm not as familiar with her eye coal formula. So I'm going to quickly just do a quick baby wing that I always do. That was a really, really nice pencil, very easy, smooth application. I'm going to use the Push Up Lashes Mascara now really quickly. So I'm going to pop on some falsies really quick. Then we'll be back to finish the lips.  I almost forgot to do blush and highlight. I'm a little bit out of order. Normally I have my cheeks sped up by now, but I'm going to dig into this Stone Rose Instant Look in a palette and I'm going to go for the lower blush right here. I've been really enjoying this palette. I've been enjoying using this as the only thing to create my look, really following along with the steps that it gives. And I've also been enjoying just kind of digging into this palette. I really enjoy the bottom half in particular. I think the eyeshadows, you know, are a little bit dull for my taste, but the cheek products are absolutely beautiful. Look at this gorgeous, rosy blush. I highly recommend this palette, especially if you're short for time. It really is nice just to have everything all in one. I did just mention that it's been a while since I've used my Filmstar Bronze and Glow. I have the shade Light. So I'm just going to use the highlight in here, which is a really nice, gorgeous, soft highlighter to give you that glow from within. I know I'm not using my favorite Charlotte Tilbury highlighter right now. I was trying to dig into things I haven't used that frequently recently because I'm always using my Charlotte Tilbury stuff. Blips. I pulled the lip sheet in the shade Iconic Nude. It's an iconic color. I love it. And then I picked out Super Nude as the lipstick for today. I just thought it would go really beautiful with the eye look. And it does. I was right. Let me get myself together, you guys. All right, and here's the final look. As always, Charlotte is one of the best brands to get an everyday look with. To sum it up with the focus of today's video, the Eyes of a Star flawless eye filter palette. It's a good palette. It's nothing special though. And I will say it's probably my favorite of the three that came out, but I also like a lot of her palettes a lot more. So that is all I have for today's video. I hope you guys enjoyed it. If you aren't subscribed to my channel already, I would love it if you would consider taking time to do so. I will see you guys in the next one. Bye guys. Have a good one.


There's our tubes, our little snorkels, and it looks like a charger and a couple of batteries here. This is a 20 volt, 4 amp hour lithium ion batteries, so just go in there like that, and there's our light. Okay, so while that battery is charging, I want to go over a couple of things. Here's your on and off switch right here. Looks like it's blue in the camera, but this is actually purple. Right here is your speed, it's a little dial here, it's got 1 to 5, and then when you go past 5, it clicks on the high, but in between, it's like a volume knob, it doesn't like click each time, so like if 3 is not enough and 4 is too much, you can kind of go in between, so technically it's got more than 6 speeds on it. Just line your holes up with your tabs right there, push it in until it clicks.  And that's it. It's on there nice and tight. It also has this little feature, this little cutout here. So you can hang it in your garage, so it's nice and handy for you.


space. The final frontier. I'm not gonna do the full quote. Instead, let's talk about the manga, Break of Dawn, from Tetsuya Ibai. Hey everybody, welcome back to the manga geekdom. Like I said at the intro, we're doing another review this time for Break of Dawn. Now I have to be honest with you, even though this book came out in 2011, I had no idea about its existence. It was only until recently when I was doing a solicits video that I'd learned about it and was genuinely intrigued. It's in the not too distant future of 2038 and we follow the character of Yuma who is obsessed with the return of the SH3 Arville Comet. And on a particular summer day, which is super important and we're gonna circle back to that in a bit, Yuma and his friends, along with the Autobot Nanako, stumble upon a marooned alien ship that is disguising itself as an apartment building. And if that's not crazy enough, the ship's AI crashes Nanako and takes over her system so that it can communicate with the boys, asking for help to get back into space. I love a good sci-fi story, but more than that, I love a good coming of age story. And that is what Break of Dawn is. It's this beautiful mashup with these kids that are coming into their own, finding more about themselves through the course of this one summer and how they're going to move forward after making this epic discovery. The 10 chapters that soon follow are about how they're going to make this happen, the secrecy behind it. Suddenly there's an importance to that summer and that adventure that these boys are in that nobody else can know. There's also a morality question when it comes to AI. The character of Yuma is not necessarily a fan of the Autobots, this case Nanako, has a really rocky relationship with her, but as the story progresses, seems to change as he is perceiving things differently thanks to this alien AI ship. This book has a very wholesome feel, normal Down to Earth characters that are suddenly thrown into this adventure thanks to our main protagonist. Also there's a subplot of bullying that happens between two characters. It's not a huge part of the main plot of the book, but it's nice that it's there because you see them work out those differences bit by bit and the end result is you have a tighter niche group of protagonists on this quest. Unlike other alien stories, Break of Dawn deals more with artificial intelligence and the future of it. Even though these robots and programs and in this case alien ships don't live and breathe like us, are they still sentient enough that we consider them part of the ecosystem? Do we consider them part of our circle of life? They are capable of expressing emotion, they are capable of understanding and reasoning and all that stuff. So the book kind of dwells in that it doesn't go too in depth, but it's an interesting topic nonetheless. There's a point towards the end where Yuma is asked a very difficult question and his answer sort of ties everything back together to the themes of the book. The art style for the book wonderful, I really enjoyed it. I think that was my favorite part of it. I like the cartoony aesthetic for the characters and how well they interact with the fantastic landscapes. There is the fabled apartment building rooftop that is integral to the plot. That looks great. It's not your typical sci-fi story and I like that about it. And one thing I said at the beginning that I wanted to talk about here before we wrap up is the sounds of Break of Dawn. The actual book is written as an auditory experience. There are a lot of kanji written throughout the book that specifically point at sound effects that occur in every scene. It's a summer story and it's so uniquely Japanese and the sound effects reflect the birds and bugs like the cicadas for example and how prevalent they are throughout the story and you constantly see the sound effect for the cicadas for example as they are outside. So you can imagine how nostalgic and rather wholesome it is that it brings back those feelings of summer and adventure and growing up school. So if you want to get a better experience for that I do suggest if you do have the book in hand find one of those summer birds and cicada loops that you can find on YouTube and play that on the background while you're reading the scenes and it totally enhances the experience and you sort of get it. Now the ending mostly sticks to the landing. It does have a somewhat predictable outcome. There are a couple curveballs thrown at you that I wasn't expecting at first glance. I thought I was gonna go on a different route. However there is an epilogue chapter towards the end that I thought was just weird and insanely abrupt. There are no plans to continue this story and I felt like oh they totally want to set up a new story but no this was back in 2011. We would have gotten something else by now. This is a one and done thing. It's over. It brought some elements to this all ages book that I don't feel like it mashed well with what we had just read. But the overall book I thought was nice and it's a manga that I wholeheartedly recommend as in all ages read for families and young kids that want to read something different that's not shown in Jump Magazine or something like that. I do recommend Break of Dawn. But what about you guys? Did you read Break of Dawn? Let me know in the comment section down below and if you haven't what are some of your favorite coming of age stories in manga and anime or some of your favorite sci-fi stories as well. That about wraps it up. Thank you so much everybody for tuning in. I truly do appreciate it. Consider subscribing if you're new here. I talk about all the manga that I'm reading and all the anime that I'm watching. This has been another video for the manga geekdom. Thank you so much. God bless, stay safe out there. I will catch all of you on our next video.


Yeah, now we've got a couple of questions that look pretty good. I don't have the answer to, here's the first one. Oh my, our bossy says, wanna make sure I understand the loss. Let's say I receive crypto or by crypto less than 10K. And tomorrow that surges to 100K and I sell it. What do I need to do? That would be short-term capital gains, but Shian, what do you got with this one?  And your situation has nothing to do with 6 to 50K, we just talked about. Yeah, this is only if you're dealing with businesses. And again, if the business that you use your crypto to buy a good service or product and they don't get your information, it is on them and they face those repercussions for 15 days or a filling charge, it's not on you. But this one is just a straight up short-term capital gains which is pretty hefty. In the United States, it is of course in your tax bracket plus whatever state that you live in if you're in California and York, have fun paying a bunch of that. But yeah, hopefully that actually happens but hopefully it's been a year or so you can use or you can get into long-term capital gains unless you're in Germany. Apparently if you hold it over a year you have no capital gain which is a good reason to move to Germany. All right, Sasha asks if people get airdrops over 410,000, that's an interesting number. And don't even notice they are charged. Oh, this is for, again, this is just for, this has nothing to do with airdrops and you're getting more than $10,000 because this is for businesses. Only if you interact with business. Again, if I give Sheehan, right now Sheehan would you like a Bitcoin? Sure, I know. I'm gonna send you a Bitcoin right now and I send you a Bitcoin which is worth I think $43,000 right now. Has nothing to do with it. And it's just, it's for me to him. And that transaction actually isn't even taxable as well because of moving wall to wall. Has nothing to do with this law. This is all about businesses interacting with businesses or not. And CryptoClutch says this is only if you send or receive another party what if more than 10,000 is transferred to a decentralized wallet? Nah, no, right? Again, I don't see a business here. The 6050I has nothing to do with this transaction. Exactly. So, and I will say, here's a question I get a lot. Am I gonna get taxed? Let's say that I have it in Coinbase and I move it from Coinbase, a centralized exchange to my cold storage wallet, my nano ledger or my tandem. Do I get taxed for that transaction? No, no, no. You're just transferring crypto from one account to your own to another. I know. It's similar to, you know, I know probably, you know, but for the viewers, it's literally like, you know, moving cash from one bank account to your own to another bank accounts. There's no taxes involved there. Ron H. says it correctly, what happens in DeFi state? I'm gonna use that. What happens in DeFi stays in DeFi. Very nice. No one pays tax in crypto, says Alex. I gotta tell you, that is a recipe for disaster because I know people will say, well, that's taxation is theft. It may be, but also it is punishable by law right now. I'm not here to say that you have to, you do what you do. I'm not your dad or financial advisor. I'm definitely a CPA, but I will just tell you that there's a reason why they busted Al Capone and not for racketeering, but for tax evasion because the government has that ability. So definitely get into a program that you can report that because if you're on a centralized exchange, I guarantee they have your information. They have your social, they have your ID, they have your information and they report to the government. That's just the truth. Ah, this is a good one. It's always something I like to touch on. Voyager, FTX, Celsius, those type of things. So Voyager got back 33% of their original claim, which is paltry, awful. Celsius looks like they're wrapping things up and people are gonna get paid out. I think around 70%, it's pretty good. FTX is getting screwed the hardest, I think. And I'll let the other people talk about that, but how do we deal with this? Because now that there's a resolution here and in part, Sheehan, I think that Voyager is still trying to claw back things. What's this take Celsius? Let's say that, look, you're gonna get 70% back and that's it. Can we now claim the 30% loss or how does this all go through? Yeah, I think first of all that the whole process, that 70% has to be the final number. Because if there's any type of possibility of you receiving like the remaining 30%, you cannot establish a loss because it's kind of like a pending loss. So let's assume that 70% is 70% like you're not gonna get any dime about that. In that case, yes, 30% could be deductible and there are so many things that you had to kind of go through to see the exact type of deduction you can get. And sometimes you can get a deduction, but if you do not itemize on your tax return, you're not getting a benefit. So there's like so many things that you need to kind of like pass for you to get like an actual tax benefit out of that 30% that you wanna deduct. Yeah. Makes sense. So if this gets a little bit confusing for everybody, just remember that there is help out there. It's not like when Sheehan got into crypto, Sheehan, how long you've been in crypto and dealt with crypto as far as like accounting? Since only crypto like since like 2017, 2018. Yeah. And then so back then, how many CPAs were specializing in crypto? I mean, not many. I mean, still there's not many. I think there's a lot of people who are looking for CPA help too. Yeah. So just be aware that now there's a little bit more. So if you need help, there's help out there and don't like me personally, I'm scared of taxes. So I'm always trying to like make sure that everything's in compliance. So I don't wanna, I've already gone through an audit before like over a decade ago. I don't wanna do that again. Once you go through the one, you'll know what I'm talking about. Let's see. The only place I don't have taxes is my grayscale Bitcoin and Roth. That's a good point. A Roth IRA. If you have a Roth IRA or any kind of IRA, can you do any kind of trading within the IRA account and not face taxes? If the IRA account like custodian allows you to do that. Sure. I mean, it's Roth, right? So because you already contributed the money on like you paid taxes for. So the gain is gonna be tax-different until you get it back. Yeah, that's what I just wanna verify. I trust there's one that I've been using for the last two years or so. They told me I could. I did it every so often and I'm like, I should really ask Shehan that question. So great, we're good to go. Shehan, it's 5.30, when do you gotta get out of here? I can happy to wait for another 10 minutes or so. Okay. If there's any questions, yeah. That was a bowl of the questions. Do you have to show the IRS how much stake rewards you get for the year? And this is a big thing because like for staking rewards and airdrops, let's just cover the staking first. You do staking in a pool, you get a stake reward every five days. How do you get taxed for that? Is that when you sell the, let's just take Cardano, like we have a stake pool. You get a Cardano today. You get 10 Cardano, each Cardano was worth roughly 50 cents, 55 cents. How do you get tax on that? Yeah, so according to the IRS guidance, staking income is taxed at the time you receive those rewards. So let's say like the time I get the rewards today, it's worth 50 cents. Let's say in two weeks, Cardano goes to $10. Who knows, it's a crypto, right? So does that mean that I am tax exempt from $9.50? Until you sell. I mean, unless if you were to sell at $10, then you will have to pay taxes on that capital gain, which is the difference. But if you don't sell, you only have to pay taxes on that 50 cents. Oh, so you still got to pay taxes. It's an unrealized gain, correct? Gain, the difference, yes, yeah. Man, sounds about right. Okay, and then airdrops, I guess would be the same thing. There's a lot of different things with it. With the Dexes, Jupiter just had a big one. Let's say you get $10,000 worth of an airdrop. Do you owe taxes on $10,000? And would that be short-term capital gains or long-term capital gains? Do you owe taxes? Yes, I know it sucks, but the answer is yes. You pay, that's considered ordering income. So you pay taxes based on your tax bracket. Ah, okay, okay. So it's progressive tax. So depending on what you're at, 25%, 32%, 33, whatever it is. Okay. Hajami says, US Embassy sends a reminder each year for taxes overseas. And I've also heard this, too. We have people living abroad and they get, doesn't matter where you go as an American citizen, you're still getting a tax. They even want to help you do your tax at the Embassy, Southeast Asian country. How does that work? I mean, it's just whatever your income is outside the country, you still have to pay your tax bracket in the United States, even though you may live in, like, Spain or England. Yeah, so the US has a system called a worldwide tax system. So it doesn't matter where you live, as long as you're a US citizen or a US person, you had to pay taxes in the US for the income that you earn from worldwide, you know, global sources. The way to not do that is renouncing the citizenship. But obviously, you had to weigh in the pros and cons. Yeah, that's true. I'm not gonna even delve into that subject. Gemma's got a question. Sorry if I already covered this. What if you are paid with crypto by your employer via 1099 that you claim with your taxes? I would assume this is just whatever your tax bracket is you get paid? Correct. So the 1099 is gonna show you your annual income in US dollars. And that goes in your tax return and that's gonna get taxed at your tax bracket. Awesome. How about this one? Question for Xi'an, my nephew is studying accounting. Would you advise any undergrad to specialize in crypto accounting now? Do you think that's a good wise move or to just be jack of all trades do everything? I don't think our education system has caught up yet to kind of have crypto as a specialty. That's, I mean, based on my knowledge, but if you can get exposure to crypto as a specialty as a minor or something like that, yeah, I would encourage anybody to do that, yeah. I gotta agree. All right, let's see. Omaris again, how would you report crypto if you use non-US exchanges and do not use your US driver's license, US password, but you use your dual citizenship details? That's a tricky question because let's say you have two citizens or yeah, you have dual citizenship. Let's say you're an American and also you have it's in the UK or Mexico and you use that one from, let's say, the UK. So would it be the taxes in the UK then? I don't know the exact answer without knowing the details but generally speaking, US has a very aggressive tax system so they probably want you to report that income in the US tax return but if that income is getting taxed by another jurisdiction, they could give you a credit depending on what's called treaties between the US and that specific country that you're a citizen of. So without knowing the details, it's hard to say how it's gonna get taxed. That is tough. Hey, this one, I wanna have you, if you know anything like this, can you tell me how to send crypto to my grandson who's 12, do his parents need to create an account or can he have his own? How does that work with a centralized exchange? For a few reasons. Yeah, so I think the nature of this send, I think it's more like a gift, right? So you wanna gift crypto to a miner. I think for stock brokers, like parents can have accounts on behalf of their miners and then that miner becomes like an adult then it kind of goes to that adult. I don't know if centralized exchanges have this option today but you could probably care like a trust for your miner and create an exchange account under that trust name as kind of like a business entity and then transfer your coin to that trust which owns the coin base account or whatever. Yeah, you can do that. Here's what I'll tell you, that's a good idea to do a trust. I think everybody should do a trust. We have it lined up for us, for our kids and grandkids.  So these cards right here, here's Tangem. They come in a pack of three. And when I did this Christmas was, I gave these Tangem cards I bought them for my sons and my grandson. And what I did is I loaded up, I mean, the kids, they know how to deal with this stuff. I just got my new one of this. I just asked them for their wallets. I needed their Bitcoin, their Salon and their Dogecoin wallets, which they found out. One didn't know how to do any of that stuff and we did it pretty just fine. Gabe was here and he actually photo bombed me from one of my live streams. And I gave him one of these cards. I go, this is your card. And I want you to have the app on your phone. These kids have apps now. And so I'm gonna give you some crypto, not that much. But what I'm gonna do is I'm gonna keep these other two as a backup. And also I'm gonna keep the seed phrase.  And that's how you can do it. And then they can look in the app and just see like, oh, this is how this is where it's going, this is how it's appreciating, this is, oh, look at this, the price, everything else. It's just a way to teach your kids and grandkids how to deal with stuff. So that's what I did and you can take it as a go from there. Or you can get a ledger. I haven't tried to figure out that nonsense, but sure. Let's see, ancient synonymous is trader Joe. Trader Joe, that's a dex for avalanche, I believe. It works out pretty well. Let's see, taxation destroys money, state spending creates money. I guess so. Oh, I guess so.  Who to thunk it? Let's see. I didn't notice you pay on all swaps in Canada, seeing this conversion to fiat then back again. But that does make sense because if you're, let's say I have, I buy Bitcoin yesterday at 40, well, let's say I buy today at 44,000. It goes to the 50,000 tomorrow and I transfer it into stable coins. That's a taxable then as far as I understand. Correct. Let's see. Add your child as a beneficiary to crypto accounts. That way it can be theirs in spirit. Here's a good question. You wanna take this one? Would IRS audit someone with under like 50,000 net worth?  You know, there's no car routes. I mean, yeah, anybody's subject to an audit based on how they pick you, you know. Yeah. Oh, Mark says it's wrong. I'm an American citizen with work permit. I pay local taxes in my new country of residence, stopping misinformed by YouTubers. So Mark is saying that he doesn't pay anything, I guess, for to America. I believe that's incorrect, but I could be wrong. Maybe. I don't know. I need to have like more information. It's hard to say. Yeah. But I talked to, it's different though, because like Mark, I see like, you might be in the Air Force. I could see the picture. A lot of the people that I've dealt with, even if they're in the military or they're a civilian contractor, when they go over for the military itself, they're not paying, they're paying taxes. Actually, no, they actually have a reduction in tax of what they actually pay. But again, we'll see. This says if you make under 70K a year in a foreign country, you don't have to file. I wonder if that's for all different country that you go to, and how it is. So, all right. What's about this? What's Cheehan's prediction about the Bitcoin this cycle? I mean, hopefully the ETF goes through. I just do it at this like yesterday. I think the magic number everybody's waiting for is 50K. So once it reached 50K, I don't know where it's gonna end this cycle. Yeah, come on. So this is the same thing. Hold on, let me see here. Mark is wrong, you're still gonna file with the US. You can use the foreign or in tax credit, it's still a pain which you need to get taxed on what you were taxed on in your, again. So, and I just took a real quick search of it. If a US citizen resident living, and this is from the IRS.gov. If you're a US citizen resident living or traveling outside the US, living or traveling, you generally are required to file income tax returns to state tax returns and gift tax returns to past mid tax in the same way as those residing in the United States. Now again, there might be stipulations for different ones but this is what I'm pulling right from the IRS website. So, I would definitely recommend everybody take a look at the, not just the laws because you're not gonna do it, get a CPA. It's a lot easier and it saves you a lot of headache. All right, Cheehan, it's 540. I don't wanna keep you. I know you got another meeting. Everybody, I'm gonna stick around. We're gonna talk about this dump today that happens in the market and go from there. Everybody, if you wanna find Cheehan, there's a link in the description for his Twitter account and of course his link tree and everything's there. Cheehan, thanks for stopping by. We appreciate it. Thanks for having me. See you guys. All right, see ya. All right everybody, that was good stuff. Let's talk, everybody's been talking about this. Let's just go over this real quick. And everybody knows why there's a dump today. I'm assuming because everybody and their mother was talking about this. It was just from one report from a matrix port where they said this is their belief is why the SEC will direct the Bitcoin ETFs. And basically it came down to politics and why Gary wouldn't approve it. And one of the things they said was, one of the actual things I said, which was political divide. And they're right in this one instance or as far as like the commissioners, it's Gary, Caroline and Jaime. And those are the three Democrats and Mark and Hester Pierce, Crypto, Mom. They're both the Republicans and it looks like they mostly side with Gary. So we'll see how it actually works out. But that was the reason for this dump today. I don't really care about dumps or pullbacks and things like that. What I do concern myself with is how this, I have never heard of matrix port, ever. It's just amazing to me how one article can drop Bitcoin. I think it was by 10%, 45, it's quite a bit, 45 to 40. No, it wasn't 10%, it's 7% roughly. So that's the thing that concerns me. And of course, people say, ah, Rob, every market's manipulated. I know that's true. I mean, gold and precious metals, JP Morgan did that as well and they got busted for spoofing the markets.  So it's just a good lesson, I think, that as we move forward, that stuff like that's gonna happen.  Did you see that coming? Did these leverage plays see it coming? No, the one they saw coming was an ETF potentially getting passed. I'm still on the fence about that one, but that's why I have the rules on the side. But of course everybody can do what they wanna do. Let's see. And Wick says it perfectly. Everyone tries to generalize tax advice, but you actually need individualized advice. It's very true. Before I had a CPA, I was doing the individual filing on TurboTax. And it works out pretty well, but you're leaving a lot of things on the table when you don't have it individualized and you're taking deductions and you're taking itemized deductions and you're really putting into place a plan. And that's the big thing. That's the difference between like the rich and the super rich and the people who are just kind of barely making it. There's just a lot of things that you can take advantage of and it's not tax evasion. It's not tax evasion. It's minimizing your taxes. There's a big difference in there. So I would definitely urge everybody to get a CPA and also use a tax software like Coin Ledger. I use those for, this would be my third year straight and it works out pretty well. Also, if you sign up for Coin Ledger's link description, there is a free portfolio tracking software that they're rolling out right now. So it's great. You can show you what's your, how much you're in profit. If it's short-term or long-term capital gains where all your crypto is actually stored if you've got multiple different accounts and where everything is and kind of add everything up, it's pretty nice. So, okay. Mark's still going. I'm 100% not wrong. I've never filed as a permanent resident and your manager should have been like, all right, man. So look, it's individualized as expected. I paid 170 last year. All right, there you go. Let's see. Elizabeth Warren is cackling today in her mansion which she flew to on her private jet and she wants you to be careful of what you do because you're destroying the environment as well. How much is a tax advisor? CPAs are different and they're different in different locations. So, I know like, here, I'll show you this.  You just can't generate a report but you get to put everything in. And then up here, portfolio tracking, I already had access to it. It's in beta, they're getting out the kinks but it's doing pretty good. But if you scroll down here to where it says, find a crypto tax expert. Everybody that specializes in crypto itself, either law groups or CPAs, they're all right here. So I would look through that list. Again, links in the description. Take a look at that. Cause it's coming up. I mean, it's April 15th is a, wait, wait, wait. Hey gents, good show today. I checked it out. It wasn't, Bolshunis was the other guy for the ETF filing. So good information. Everybody, if you Google Sin City Crypto on YouTube, they've got a great channel. They have a great, they have a really great studio. A lot of effort put into that. Very nice, very professional.  So, yeah, Tom says, hey Rob, I think there was a huge leverage lungs out out there and they were liquidated. That's true. I'm not sorry for anybody that does it.  They don't, most of them are, most of them are fine. Seth says, my CPA is super smart. She figured it out, get a better CPA. They did that, but the guy to perspective says, it's a US tax law to clear off foreign earned income. All US citizens are playing with this no matter where they reside. Again, talk to your CPA on this one. Sin City says, we're on the street is with the new crypto tax rules. We can get out of debt as a country. No, no way. What are we at, 34 trillion? Let's take a look. There's this website, US national debt clock. And if you just type debt clock in the Google, you'll see it. US national debt today is 34 trillion dollars. That's what the T, I didn't know that word exactly existed until I got in the crypto. Take a look at this. You know what trillion dollars looks like? Let me show you. This is at scale. So that's a million, that's 10 million. And then for scale, you're gonna see a person, animated person, that's a hundred million. Not too bad, if you think about it. And then this is just one billion. I don't know if they did this in ones. I don't know if they're going to the club or something. Oh, it's one billion, okay. Maybe they could have done 20s, I'm not for sure. Maybe a hundreds, who knows? There's 10 billion. And then this monolith, this behemoth, is a hundred billion, a hundred billion. And this, right here, ladies and gentlemen, is one trillion dollars. And we got 34 of those. I don't see us getting out of debt anytime soon. I know some of the politicians will say, well, you know, these crypto cheats are just dodging us and they gotta pay their tax. I'm telling you right now. First of all, in 2022, did anybody have massive gains in 2022 where we were dodging the taxman? I wasn't, it wasn't a great year for us. 2023, a little better. 2024, probably massive. So, I mean, let's hope so. But first of all, let's get the spending under control. Also, let's pass the law to where the politicians do not get privy to insider information or able to trade on that insider information and thereby make a boatload of money at the expense of the backs of their constituents. Just saying. That's just my, will be my goal. Now that's gonna happen. You're welcome. Guys, I'll be down there. I gotta go see my brother. So, we'll hook up, grab some beers. Oh, speaking of which, Thursday night, everybody meet up here at the San Juan Smokehouse. So, special guests will be arriving. So, if you guys are in the Puerto Rico area, we'll be doing ribs and beers. Could be worse. And first round's on me, every time. Let's see. Yes. Hey, Rob, have you heard of Clearview Tax on YouTube? Thoughts, thanks for your educational content and video. Now, that guy, if you guys don't know who Clearview Tax is, Clear Value Tax, I think it's what it is. That guy's got it down, locked down. He has no background, it's just a white wall. There's like, maybe some lights and he just tells you the news. And that's it.  It's amazing. Yeah, very well. Let's see. I should pray. What's a felony? Yeah, you'll know it when you get slapped with it. That's what I say. Yeah, so let's see. Steve says, thumbnail says 15 days are a felony. Yeah, I didn't make that thumbnail. That was chatGPT. ChatGPT makes all my thumbnails. That's why the spelling's awful. The visuals are great, but the spelling is just ridiculously bad. And that's it.  I was on this X Spaces today for this game, Farcana. And we talked about this. I'm gonna be talking about this game a lot. This game right here, web three game that's coming in, and it's got some backing by some of the big players in the space, Animoca Brands, Polygon Ventures, Fenbushi, EmuChain, Aussie Capital, Yatsu is also the founder of Animoca Brands. That's not what's important. What's important is, I took notes about this. Is that this game, first of all, it's gonna be free to play. Let me see if I can show you. Regardless, it's a third person shooter. It's gonna be free to play. They're rolling it out. I think it's already out in some parts. It's Windows based only, but the tokenomics are what is important. And the tokenomics is, the token can be used sparingly for different things within the game, but it's a play to earn. And it's not, you're not earning the token, you're gonna be able to earn Bitcoin. And when I heard that, I was like, Tommy Mora. So I'm gonna do a deep dive on this game. The TGE, I think is the eighth of January. So I gotta do this quick. And if you're looking into gaming, that's what I think is the next narrative. And the narrative coming up is, of course, Bitcoin ETF. DEX is AI and web through gaming, I think the next narrative. And I think with this game, Farqana, looking pretty good. It didn't pay me to say like that. I'm actually going to be heavily investing into it, like everything else I talk about. So if you think that I'm not biased, you're wrong. I'm super biased. And I only talk about the things that I actually invest into, and that's it for today. So look, everybody, thanks so much for stopping by. I appreciate it. If you liked today's video, give it a thumbs up. Consider subscribing. I really talk about is time-sensitive. That's it. And I will see you guys on the next one. Thanks so much. Adios.