We had just started talking about the Fokker Planck equation associated with the stochastic differential equation. So let us do this systematically and let us proceed as follows. So first we have an equation which is like the Langevin equation, kind of generalization of it and let us continue to call it the Langevin equation for a random variable xi which is the first order differential equation of the form xi dot equal to some function of xi. Let us look at stationary or non-stationary processes but no explicit time dependency. We could include it if necessary but let us look at the case without it because all the cases we are going to look at will be without it. Plus a term g of xi times of a white noise, a Gaussian white noise which has got zero mean and a delta function correlation. So xi of t equal to 0, zeta of t, zeta of t, zeta of t prime equal to delta function of t minus t prime with unit strength and any strength in the noise is subsumed in this quantity g of xi which could be a constant for instance. Now technically this noise is a Markov process, assumed to be a Markov process. It is Gaussian in the sense that all its probability distributions, joint distributions and so on are all Gaussian functions and it is a stationary noise as you can see here at the level of the auto correlation and it is a delta correlated noise so that the power spectrum is flat in this case. Then this implies and in turn is implied by an equation for the conditional probability density of this variable xi. So for this quantity p of xi t, xi not 0 for this quantity here which is also guaranteed to be a Markov process in the sense that this two point, this conditional density determines all joint densities. This quantity p satisfies an equation called the Fokker Planck equation and the equation reads as follows. So this is the stochastic differential equation for which I will use the abbreviation SBE and that implies for this p a Fokker Planck equation or FPE for short for this quantity which is as follows. Delta p over delta t equal to on this side a term which is minus delta over delta xi f of xi times p itself that is the deterministic part the drift part without this you have an ordinary differential equation it is deterministic plus a term called the diffusion term which is one half g square times p, g square is the square of this function that is the Fokker Planck equation for this quantity. Of course it is got to be in this case since the initial conditions are at xi not at t equal to 0 the value of xi not the initial condition on this is simply a delta function this p at t equal to 0 is delta of xi minus xi not so p of xi 0 equal to delta of xi not. So very often I am going to suppress this initial condition just call it p of xi, t and p of xi, 0 is some prescribed initial condition and this is what you have to solve this equation with. We are not going to derive this it is not very hard to derive it is actually quite straightforward I have to introduce moments of something called a transition rate or probability per unit time and then using that make an expansion etc etc and show that this is what is obtained in the case where this is a Gaussian white noise pardon me I do not have to discretize time but it is convenient to do so when you are deriving the equation if I am going to start from what is called the chain equation for Markov processes go to what is called a master equation and then the Kramers-Moyal expansion and so on and finally you show that for Gaussian white noise it reduces to this equation okay and there is also the question of the interpretation of this equation because there is this noise here multiply this deterministic term multiplies this noise so this is called multiplicative noise whose amplitude depends on the value of the variable at that instant of time through this function here and for multiplicative noise you have different ways of interpreting this equation and we are using what is called the Ito interpretation there is a Stratanovich interpretation there are several other ways of interpreting this equation which gets us into stochastic calculus which I do not want to do. So we will take this equation for granted because we are going to actually look at it in the simplest of instances in the simplest cases and our focus is on very physical processes like the motion of a Brownian particle or 3-dimensional motion in a potential etc etc okay. So this equation is not very simple to start with because it is a second order equation in the random variable in the variable xi and it is a first order equation in time so it is a complicated partial differential equation the solution is also very complicated. Now the cases we have already looked at falls squarely in this you can see what is going to happen immediately for instance we considered the velocity process we said one Cartesian component of the velocity of Brownian particle was satisfied in equation minus gamma v plus square root of gamma over m times eta of t I call square root of gamma zeta of t is what I had called eta of t earlier the noise because I said the correlation function is gamma times the delta function I want now a unit strength delta function here for the 2 point correlation so therefore I could put the gamma outside in this form. So in this problem xi is v f of xi is a linear function it is minus gamma v and g of xi is a constant and that is called additive noise because it just says to the deterministic part you are adding noise whose strength is independent of the value of the variable of the random variable this thing is a pure constant. Now look at what is going to happen immediately here this will imply as we have seen if you apply the general theorem out here this implies that delta p over delta t equal to gamma times delta over delta v v times p it is a minus f of xi which is minus gamma v is minus sign cancels plus one half and then a g square which comes out as a constant so it is just gamma over 2 m square d 2 p over dv so without proof using this general correspondence I am asserting that given this Langevin equation this is the equation satisfied by the conditional density of the velocity. Now of course we know from the Langevin equation we already proved the fluctuation dissipation theorem we know that gamma is 2 m gamma k Boltzmann t we already know that for consistency saying that the system remains in equilibrium thermal equilibrium when you take the full average over all realizations of the noise and then over all initial velocities we know that you should get the Maxwellian distribution finding equilibrium distribution should remain Maxwellian that happens only if this is equal to that and that is what we argued was the fluctuation dissipation theorem in this instance I said the strength of the dissipation and the strength of the noise must be related to each other in this consistent fashion but that follows from here too immediately you can see that if you ask what happens as t tends to infinity because what we are doing is starting with a p of v t v not because I know this is a stationary process so I do not write the 0 there it does not matter in this case or just a side remark the fact that this equation has a noise which is a stationary random process does not guarantee that the driven process Xi is stationary it guarantees it is Markov but it does not guarantee that it is either stationary or Gaussian because this could be all kinds of functions out here what is guaranteed is that it remains Markov and in general we will have a finite correlation time not 0 as the noise so what is carried over is a Markov property neither the stationarity nor the Gaussianity is carried over to the driven process in general but we know we have already computed the velocity correlation function in this case and we know it is e to the minus gamma t apart from k t over m and we know that it is a stationary random process so I do not bother to write the 0 there whenever it is a stationary process I will not write the initial time explicitly this can always shift it out this quantity here we know that it should become as t tends to infinity it should go to the equilibrium distribution the Maxwellian distribution right so this should tend to p equilibrium of v because it should forget the memory of the initial velocity and go to the final velocity and be an equilibrium distribution as t tends to infinity it should be the stationary distribution but we know what this is we know this is m over 2 pi k Boltzmann t to the power of half it is a single component we are talking about e to the minus mb square over 2 k Boltzmann t we know that is what it should become right on the other hand if I examine the equation itself and ask what happens to this as t tends to infinity if there is a stationary equilibrium distribution this must become 0 because it cannot depend on time and then as we have already seen before this will imply that the equilibrium distribution will satisfy an ordinary differential equation no time dependence there which will look like this this will look like gamma it will look like d over dv of gamma over 2 m squared dp equilibrium over dv that is this term here plus gamma v times p equilibrium is equal to 0 because this side is 0 no therefore the bracket is a constant therefore that implies that this fellow is equal to a constant independent of v but we also want an equilibrium distribution which is normalizable so this means p equilibrium as v tends to infinity must go to 0 it must have finite moments mean velocity mean square and so on which means that these fellows should also go to 0 all derivatives should also go to 0 as v tends to plus or minus infinity which implies that the constant must be 0 because this thing is equal to constant and we say that at v equal to infinity this constant is 0 so it is since it is a constant it is 0 for all v but then that is a first order equation and we know what the solution of it is it is trivial so this thing here will imply that p equilibrium is equal to is proportional to apart from constant of proportionality e to the power minus 2 m squared gamma and multiply through by this guy you should be careful with all the 2s and so on yes 2 m squared gamma over capital gamma yes v squared over 2 because I integrate v dv and that gives me v squared over 2 and that is this so cancelling out these two fellows you get this so this matches this thing here if and only if m over 2 k Boltzmann t equal to m squared gamma over gamma so you are back to this you are back to this so that is one more way of seeing that this must be the fluctuation dissipation theorem if and only if gamma equal to 2 m gamma so it is just saying it in the in terms of the probability distribution or then probability density function rather than the stochastic equation itself it is the same fluctuation here dissipation theorem you are going to get now what is the general solution of it well now we need to examine this a little more carefully this equation is not too hard to solve it is not trivial though because this differential operator is not self adjoint this is first order term here it is a bit of a mess there are several ways of solving this it turns out that the solution is precisely the Onstein Lundbeck distribution this turns out to continue to be a Gaussian process in this case and it is the Onstein Lundbeck distribution so we know what that is we know that p of v v naught equal to an exponential apart from normalization minus m v minus v naught e to the minus gamma t whole square that is the mean value the peak shifts to the left divided by 2 m 2 k t and then the variance and then a normalization factor which is essentially m over 2 pi k t times this time square root of the total so the mean is this value which goes to 0 as t tends to infinity starting at v naught and the variance is a delta function at t equal to 0 variance vanishes at t equal to 0 and then broadens out till it hits the value given by the Maxwellian distribution depends on the temperature and this is the O u Onstein Lundbeck distribution next question what about the phase space distribution what about the distribution of x v and t you need to know is a joint distribution is it possible to get an answer for that and the answer is yes we can see how that is going to come about because I should really augment this equation with another equation which says x dot equal to v we are talking about one Cartesian component so it is just an x and a v so x dot is v and v dot is this okay in this case there is no external force and therefore there is no f of x which you might get from a potential may be but you do have this systematic part and then you have a random force here so one should be able to join to write down a distribution of p of x comma v comma t given x naught v naught and zero and an equation for it a corresponding equation for that you need a generalization of this to higher dimensions to more to two dimensions we will come to that in a minute but before that let us settle this other question we know there is a diffusion limit and in the diffusion regime we know that the mean square displacement goes like 2 dt and we know that d is kt over m gamma can we get that from this does it follow from this thing at all does it follow from this equation for instance and the answer is yes it indeed does because what we need is an equation which says that the velocity is delta correlated because when you are in the diffusion regime the velocity correlation time is gamma inverse and now you are saying you are a t much much greater than gamma inverse so one way of implementing that is to say I take gamma to be so large that gamma inverse is negligible and then at all t practically you are in the diffusion regime so one could look at the high friction limit of this equation and ask whether that is going to work several ways of implementing this but let us do it that way and see what we get so the high friction limit of this system is going to be gamma tends to infinite gamma high friction high compared to what well the statement is that gamma is so large that all times that you look at are such that t is much much greater than gamma inverse so I drop the inertia term this came from m times v dot mass times acceleration I drop that term I retain this term and look at it as a stochastic equation so now my stochastic equation says x dot that is v is equal to root gamma over just one second before I do that there is one thing I want you to bear in mind which is since we need this we have imposed this fluctuation dissipation theorem for consistency we can rewrite this equation a little bit and it is going to be useful to do so pardon me so that I can take the large gamma limit but it is also going to be needed in another context we will see in a minute so this is really gamma delta over delta v vp plus for this I substitute 2m kt gamma then the 2 cancels the so this is gamma k Boltzmann t over m d2p over delta so the diffusion coefficient if you like in velocity space is gamma kt over m in position space it is already what we know it is kt over m gamma but in velocity space it is turning out to be gamma kt over m we will keep that aside for a moment so let us look at the high friction limit of this and that reads so I drop the v dot term this term and retain this and bring it to the left so it says v equal to root gamma over m gamma zeta of t so you are really saying sorry v which is x dot which is what it is in the diffusion regime because it says the velocity is uncorrelated for all practical purposes it is a delta function correlation but we can simplify this right so this is equal to square root of I will put that inside so 2m gamma k Boltzmann t over m squared gamma squared zeta of t equal to the m cancels one of them gamma cancels twice kt over m gamma but remember we had set d equal to k Boltzmann t over m gamma we discovered that the mean square displacement in the diffusion limit was actually 2dt where capital D was given to be kt over m gamma that is what we found so let us put that in this says this is square root of 2d zeta of t and now I go back and appeal to this general Fokker Planck correspondence between the stochastic differential equation and the corresponding Fokker Planck equation I stare at this and I say look x is xi now xi is x now there is no f of xi of zeta or xi that term is missing there is only a noise term and g is square root of 2d it is a constant so this tells us that delta over delta t p of x comma t for some given x not which I will impose as an initial condition is equal to one half g squared but g squared is 2d and half of that gives me d so this becomes d d 2 p over d x that is the diffusion equation that is precisely the diffusion equation. So you see the origin of the diffusion equation from this language from this point of view it is precisely the fact that you are working in a regime where the velocity correlation time is essentially 0 and therefore the velocity is a white noise and when you integrate it you get an equation for take this equation and write it for as a density in x position you have this diffusion equation so this emerges from that correspondence it is part of that correspondence there is no drift term in this equation it would be there if I put an external force if I said I am looking at diffusion in a potential even gravity there be an extra term there be that first the f of xi term would be present but that is completely missing here in the velocity case there was a friction term which was proportional to the velocity it was linear in the velocity that made life a little easy in the diffusion case that is even that is missing now if I look at sedimentation namely diffusion of molecule in a vertical column under gravity for instance then there would be a constant force and a constant force would lead to just p there be no v here just p on this side so you would have a first order term plus a second order term on this side and that would lead to an extra contribution it would change the solution here considerably it would lead for instance if you asked in a finite column if you asked or even a infinite semi infinite column under gravity if you asked is there a steady distribution the answer is yes but is there a steady distribution for this on the infinite line is there an equilibrium distribution for this if there were then this should be 0 and then you get d2p equilibrium over dx2 equal to 0 and the solution to that is p equilibrium is ax plus b but that is not normalizable it is not normalizable therefore there is no such equation there is no such distribution and you know that in this case what happens is that if you start at delta function at x0 equal to impose a condition p of x0 equal to delta of x minus x0 if you start at this delta function distribution and you look at this p as t changes does this etc whatever it does not even drift it does not drift because there is no drift at all what it does is to start at x0 it broadens out and broadens further in the case to 0 such that the total area under the curve remains 1 it is normalized you know no material is going away so this thing does not have an equilibrium distribution if you put gravity we will do that later on we will do the sedimentation problem later on you will discover it tends to the bottom everything goes to the bottom so there is an equilibrium distribution under certain cases but in general there is in confers so this is how you get the diffusion equation but now you could ask what about the phase space distribution what does that look like so now we have to be a little more careful or stochastic equation is a pair of equations so we have x dot plus v equal to 0 sorry minus v equal to 0 and you have v dot plus gamma v equal to whatever this fellow was yeah root gamma over m let us let us change this thing here this is equal to root gamma over m equal to root 2 m gamma k Boltzmann t over m square so 2 gamma k t over m let us just put it that way this fellow here times z dot so it is a pair of coupled equations now let me introduce a vector x which is x put that the matrix column matrix here I am going to write this as a single equation in a vector form and let us introduce a matrix k a drift matrix which is equal to the minus 1 here so it is 0 minus 1 the plus gamma here so it is 0 gamma introduce that matrix then the left hand side for these two together becomes x dot plus k x this is the left hand side equal to on the right hand side a noise which is essentially this fellow here 0 root 2 gamma k t over m times zeta I can give it a symbol some vector noise it does not matter now the question is what is the corresponding Fokker-Plank equation corresponding to this and it turns out that what you have is a special case of a much more general case in a case where the noise is additive this is an additive noise because there is no x or v dependence here there is no g there is only constants moreover the drift is linear so this is a linear drift so you have additive noise and linear drift this makes life easier the general case is also something we are going to write down but the expression for the Fokker-Plank equation for the linear case with linear drift and additive noise is very straightforward and it is very natural let me write it down it says so now we are going to look at the density rho of x v given x naught v naught etc x naught v naught oh by the way when we looked at the high friction limit of the original Langevin equation and got to the diffusion equation for the positional probability distribution function was x of t a stationary process or not so we had this quantity p of x t delta over delta t equal to d d to p of x comma t over d x 2 with initial condition x naught etc so we had p of x 0 equal to delta function of x minus x naught and we know how to solve this equation you do Fourier transform with respect to space and the class with respect to time etc many ways of solving this there is a fundamental Gaussian solution with natural boundary conditions namely p 0 as x tends to plus minus infinity then the solution of this equation is worth remembering it is a fundamental property it is equal to 1 over square root of 4 pi d t e to the power minus x minus x naught whole square over 4 d t that is the fundamental Gaussian solution to the diffusion equation. The peak remains at x naught and the peak actually goes to the width of this peak goes to infinity linearly with time that is why you have diffusion so in this case the average value of x minus x naught squared it actually diverges while the probability density itself decreases at all points there is a 1 over root t it is normalized to unity the integral from minus infinity to infinity in the x for all time is finite is 1. Is this a stationary process no eminently no because the variance changes with time so it is not stationary it is Gaussian it is Markov but non stationary earlier the velocity process alone the noise is Gaussian stationary Markov and Delta correlated the velocity process is stationary Gaussian Markov but not Delta correlated exponentially correlated the position in the friction limit is not stationary it continues to be Gaussian Markov exactly so this is not yes I emphasize once again this is not the exact equation for the positional density at all how would you get that well that would get you would get from here you would get from this quantity so if you did this if you integrated minus infinity to infinity d v rho of x v t if you did this with those initial conditions of course x naught v naught 0 so you integrate over the other variable velocity you would then get a distribution in x the conditional density for x the exact conditional density for x that is not this because as he points out this is true only in the region where gamma t much much greater than 1 only there is this true you really have to go back here and do this similarly if you got the exact answer here and you did this minus infinity to infinity dx rho of x v t x naught v naught 0 you would expect to get what would you expect to get here you would expect to get this should be equal to p of v t v naught you would expect to get this because you would get the conditional density in the velocity now and you do and you do in this case the x naught dependence must somehow disappear and you should get this but what happens and I am anticipating myself a bit what happens if you did this you integrate over the velocity is that you get an answer for p of x v t which involves both x naught and v naught which immediately tells you that it is not a stationary process x alone is not a stationary process even worse we know that this quantity satisfies a Fokker Planck equation in the velocity variable alone this quantity does not satisfy anything of that kind it does not satisfy any simple master equation so that is the problem it is a highly non stationary process even in the diffusion limit there is not there is v naught dependence of course we saw that there is v naught dependence certainly there is v naught dependence but the point is when you integrate here this quantity there should be no v naught dependence there should be x naught yes but this v naught dependence as well so you cannot decouple the velocity completely showing that this is retaining the calculations memory etc we will see we will see what the solution looks like and then be able to examine this so that is a good point that this quantity is equal to this only in the limit so this as gamma t much greater than 1 goes to this p of x this p of x but not for all t okay so the question is what is the Fokker Planck equation here and the answer is the following you have delta rho over delta t equal to in such a case let me call momentarily let us call this equal to x 1 x 2 in index notation first component second component then this is equal to delta over delta x i sorry it is equal to k i j delta over delta x i x j rho where a summation over repeated indices is implied plus a term which is the diffusion term it will look like some generalized diffusion matrix here d i j times d 2 rho over d x i we already know this we already know what this k i j is it is this I have to write down what is d i j the diffusion matrix let me use another symbol for it let us use d so this d in this case is 0 0 0 that is not surprising because this is essentially root twice the diffusion constant in velocity space that is what this so that is the Fokker Planck equation in phase space all we have to do is to substitute for this case substitute for this d and we are done so let us write it out so this becomes equal to the first term that is going to come to contribute is k 1 2 okay and that is going to have a minus sign delta over delta x 1 that is x 2 is v rho and then k 2 2 is going to contribute so that is going to be plus gamma delta over delta v v rho that is it plus this fellow the only term that contributes is d 2 2 so plus gamma k Boltzmann t over m d 2 rho over delta v 2 pardon me well x 2 is v x 2 is v and we are looking at only d 2 2 because all the other terms are 0 but this is precisely we what we got in the Fokker Planck equation for the velocity and this 2 but we have an extra term here but you see this term can be simplified a bit because x and we are independent variables in phase space so this is equal to minus v delta rho over delta x plus gamma delta over delta v v rho plus gamma k Boltzmann t over m d 2 rho over d v 2 this is the phase space Fokker Planck equation for the phase space conditional density rho remember this is in equation for rho of x v t given x naught v naught at t equal to 0 we essentially have delta of v minus v naught delta of x minus x naught and with those boundary initial conditions you have to solve this does this remind you of something well if you bring it to this side what is going to happen yeah it looks like total derivative this looks like the convective derivative it is indeed that indeed that it is just the convective derivative just sitting here no external force present no velocity dependent force no magnetic field none of those things then this is looks like convective derivative it even has a right sign you bring it to this side it is convective precisely the convective derivative which is what you kind of expect physically so can we write the 3 dimensional generalization of this that will be horrible thing but anyway before we do that I should tell you what the solution to this equation is you can again solve it with delta function initial conditions you can give an exact solution it is a 2 dimensional Gaussian it is a joint Gaussian in both x or x minus x naught and v minus v naught e to the minus gamma t it is a joint Gaussian so it will have an exponential which will involve minus x squared minus v squared it will also involve an x v term in between such that asymptotically so the solution to this asymptotically what would you expect it to do for t tending to infinite well the solution will actually vanish because if you look at the ordinary diffusion equation the probability density vanishes but but we are not asking as mathematically t becoming infinite we are not saying that you are saying when t becomes much larger than all the time scales in the problem gamma t much much greater than 1 for instance what would happen so let us write that that is much more reasonable right what would you expect it to become the velocity thermalizes in other words it loses type track of its initial value and gets into the Maxwell indistribution so you would certainly expect that to happen the position in the diffusion limit will have a diffusion equation solution Gaussian so I expect that this is going to become e to the minus m v squared over 2 k Boltzmann t times e to the minus x minus x naught squared over 4 dt times a normalization factors so this fellow is divided by root 4 pi dt and this fellow is divided by m over 2 k Boltzmann 2 pi k Boltzmann t times square root so I expect that to happen and it that is what that is that should be a check that indeed does so but as I said if you integrate this exact expression over v alone you get a very complicated thing for x which will involve v naught and x naught but you integrate over x from minus infinity to infinity you will get the once you know in back distribution with initial value v naught with no reference to x naught for the velocity distribution alone what would you expect the would happen this three dimensional case so we could write a generalization of this you could make these things vectors here in three dimensions so what would happen to this quantity everything else remains the same but of course different Cartesian components of the noise would be uncorrelated to each other you have to assume that so you would certainly have to assume that you have a zeta i of t zeta j of t prime average value is equal to delta ij delta of t minus t prime you have to assume that that is certainly true and then what this quantity does row of r v t given r naught v naught at 0 we can write down a Fokker Planck equation for this for this row phase space density in three dimensions we can read it off from here just the vector form of it so we would again get delta row over delta t is equal to what would happen to the first term minus v naught grad row grad with respect to r with respect to the components of the coordinate plus what is the next term going to be so gamma times grad with respect to v dot v row plus gamma k Boltzmann t over m grad with respect to v squared this is the exact Fokker Planck equation for the phase space density in three dimensions just a straight forward extension of this and the solution is a generalized Gaussian in all six variables with the same sort of properties once again so once you have this correspondence between the stochastic differential equation and the Fokker Planck equation then the matters writing down the Fokker Planck equation is very straight forward now we have to go to the next stage where we look at cases where you have multiplicative noise and then the question is what happens if you have a higher dimensional case you should be able to write generalization there too and we will do that and we will apply it at least in the simplest instances we will apply a couple of examples so that you see what the use of this working but this is a fairly intricate problem at the same time it is amenable to exact solution in this case let me stop here let me take it up.


Hi everybody it's Sam at Mixed Up Craft, thank you for watching my tutorial today. I'm going to be showing you the Retterform technique. I'm actually revisiting this technique because I have already done a tutorial but I'm doing a technique segment in the social papercraft and magazine and I thought I would share this technique. I love it, loads of you guys love it and if you haven't already seen it or know about it I'm sure you will love it as well. So this is what it is, so this is the effect you get and basically it's you can see you've got all these different kind of shapes and different stamped images on them but none of them overlap, none of the colors bleed and it gives you this really fun technique. I will put in the video of the one I done last year here so you can obviously look at that one as well. This one again is using just some different colors so what I've done is I've used the stamping up in colors for, I'm not a stamping up demo so apologies if I get this wrong but I think these are 2018 to 2020 colors anyway. I'm using fresh fig, tranquil tide, powder pink, berry burst and lemon lime twist so that's what I've used on that one, that's all of those colors. Probably looking back now I would have moved that one maybe down here or here because I've got quite you know two really dark colors in the top left there but it still works and it still looks really good. With this I've used the stamp sets here and this is the Tropical Chic stamp set. Now when I done the other Retivorm tutorial I used a stamp set from one of the creative stamping magazines. One thing I would always say that I find easier when I do this technique is using a stamp set set so you know you can use all different stamps by your means you know have a play around but I just find it's much easier when you've got a theme all put together for you so I know that all of these sit well together with the sentiment which I finished off there on top so kind of all that thinking is kind of done for you so if you've got any stamp sets and you've got some with you know patterns and you know different sizes you know I've got shapes I've got quite a lot going on with this one so each kind of section looks you know very different but still all works well together. I wish I had the one from last year with me but that's been now given to somebody but I'll share those pictures in my blog as well just so you can get more inspiration so those are the two main things really so get a stamp set that's maybe already a theme or something that's put together for you my focus is disappearing there there we go it's trying to find itself and then when it comes to colors it's really anything goes but I would say don't go too dark you can see here you know any darker really and you're going to lose it because I always stamp in black on top that's completely optional as well use whatever you want but I just like the the real kind of you know contrast between the lighter colors and then that real deep black that you stamp with so what you need to do is grab yourself a card base now I'm using this is a five by seven card base I like five by seven cards I'm I just I think they're a good size so I've got my mat here which is four and three quarters by six and three quarters um and it's entirely up to you how you want to go now I tend to stick and do six sections but you could do four and just do kind of through the middle like that you could do um you know five you can do odd numbers it's entirely up to you but I'm just going to stick with the six um but once you get to see how you do it um it is very very easy now I have done in the last tutorial used post-it notes um you need something that's sticky that you can lift off easily because you are going to be moving it around however I've searched high and low for these post-it notes I can't find them anywhere so I'm going to show you how you can also do it with washi tape now you can also use like copy paper you want something very very thin that's got no kind of um bulk to it um but the problem with the copy paper is you need to make sure you keep it in place and do not move it from when you've blended your color to then when you've got a stamp over it so it is easy if you've got either post-it notes or washi tape so I'm just I've got my washi tape on a little roll in front of me here so I'm just going to tear some off so this is just standard half inch washi tape if you've got thicker then that's good as well um so what I'm going to do is go a little bit different with this one here so I'm going to literally do my first section there okay so this section here is what I'm now going to color in so I'm going to start off here because I've got these already laid out so um I'm just going to stick with what I've got you can see I'm covered wear some gloves if you if you don't want to get this one um all over you because it is a bit messy so I'm just inking up this one is lemon line twist and I'm just going to start off my paper and then work my way in and just blend all the way around so around the edge bit you want to get that nice dark kind of you know edge showing there just so you can really see it and then when I map this on top of my white card base you'll really see that edge and then again I'm just coming in very carefully now if you're using a post-it note you will have more room to be able to blend start blending off and then come into your area I've only got this little half inch so I'm just carefully coming in there um so just bear that in mind but it does work either way so don't worry if you don't have the post-it notes so there you go I've got a nice blended area there now if you don't want to blend the whole area you can leave it white in the middle it's again entirely up to you so excuse me now I'm going to select some of my stamps so I'm going to use this one here which is this big big leaf and I'm actually just going to do one big stamp of it so I'm just going to ink this up I'm using the VersaFine just because it stays wet for longer so you've got a bit of time to kind of work out where you want it to go now the the the kind of point of the retter form is to overlap things you want them to have that so you can see here where the leaf is gone off that side you know you've got it stamped there but it's not going on to that side so you want to make sure like I could just stamp that there so it doesn't actually go over this washi tape but that isn't really the the effect you're going for so I'm going to come down over my washi tape and stamp just make sure you get it just wiggle it a little bit over the washi tape if it doesn't take you can use a black pen which I'll show you in a minute because there's always a little bit that doesn't quite grab on so there we go so if I bring this one up I'll just peel that off here I'll just bring it up there you see there's just tiny little bits there where it's gone over that washi tape those bits there you can just use a little black marker pen with or leave them it doesn't really matter especially if you're covering them with sentiments now I said I was only going to do one but actually now I'm going to do some more because I changed my mind so I'm going to then come in from the corner here like so and then I'm going to do another one coming up there so you can see I've gone over that washi tape again like so and then what you can do is peel that washi back and you get that nice corner on your card so that's that piece done there then you want to now start your next section so I'm finished with that one I'm just going to pop that one to that side there just so I know where I am with everything so now you just want to grab another piece of washi tape or a fresh um every time you want a fresh piece so either it's a fresh piece of um uh post-it note or washi tape and you don't have to but I always find I want to start from the corner you could come in up there if you wanted to um I think I did do it differently last year on the other card but now I'm going to go from the very tip here this very corner and then down like so okay so now I'm going to do this corner here so I am going to choose let's take this one off and I'm going to go for fresh fig so just going to ink that one up and then again just come in from the outside and just work your way and that's covered pretty quickly I'm not going to spend too much time on that I don't want to go too deep with these darker colors because I do want you to really be able to see the black so now I'm going to go in with this one here so I'm using that's this one on the the pat on the box so again just ink that one up and I'm going to do my first one coming in from the corner again like so and then I'm going to do another bit there and then this one I'm going to come right up into the whole area and then that's probably it so there we go and then again get your washi tape and just take that off so you can see now I've got that section okay so it's really starting to look good I like I said I love this and I always get nice results with it so next you want to now I'm going to section off I'm going to join these corners and have this as a whole section so this is when you now need to kind of seal the three sides so at the moment we just had to do one bit of washi tape because we've gone in on those sides but now we need to seal it all off so you're going to stick on the image you want to get right up to the edge and maybe just have a tiny tiniest bit that isn't covered just so that it all kind of blends in together and you don't run the risk of getting a white line now you can have a white line in between each one so if you want to do it that way you can but personally I like it when it's literally all butted up together and they all meet so I'm just doing it like so and then the last piece is going to go from corner to corner that's so okay so now I'm going to use the what's this one powder pink so I'm going to go for something quite light in the middle so I'm just inking that up and then again I'm just going to go all the way around the edges first okay so now that's that one and then the middle I want to do this lovely hibiscus flower so I'm going to ink that up and because I want to get a really nice full image I'm going to do one right in the middle first and then work my way out and then you don't really run the risk of having any any gaps sometimes if you start your way around all the edges and then you've got a bit in the middle and it's not quite big enough for the stamp you're using you end up with that kind of space whereas this way I kind of stop that happening and then I'm going to do one there I'm going to keep these quite close together it's such a nice stamp this one I really really like it let's bring this one quite far in because it's going to be quite a full one as well and then I'll do a tiny bit down there and again there and then one more we'll pop that one there I should have a nice yeah okay and then it's the reveal this is the bit I love I love you do it and then you you know you get to see what it's really like when you're peeing each one off actually before I do that I'm just going to grab like I said with the marker if you've got any parts and you think oh I want that to be a bit more deeper or joined better just with my pen there I'm just going along just the edges it's not too bad really just a little bit it just gives you that sharper finish so that's why it's also good to use black because it's easy to match up a marker pen whereas if you're using colors the likelihood unless you are using all stamping out products you won't have that exactly you know matching pen okay let's just do those ones I think that's about right that bit there there we go so now we can just pull that across and that one there so now can you see I just bring that one up how cool is that effect really really like it okay so now we've done so I've used those three now I've got to be careful I'm getting black I've got a little bit there so I need to cover that with the next stamp I use so um grab another bit another bit of washi tape and we're kind of going to mirror that image really now I've seen what I'm going for so I'm going to do that one there like so so now I just need to do that whole area and then I'll do the next one from that corner down to there and then I know I've got that triangle left in the middle so with this one I'm going to use tranquil side and really should have put gloves on um I have got other um what you call it blending tools and I've got one for every color but not for these ones so never mind right so again kind of start from the outside and then work your way in and again I don't want to go too dark in the middle so I'm just going to keep it like so and then for this one um what do I want to use I'm going to use this pattern here so it's just this kind of I don't know what it is but it looks good so I'm going to ink that one up and just go over this one's quite easy really you can just kind of put it wherever you want okay so that one's done there's a few bits there I'm not completely happy with or where my pad's kind of like hit the surface so I can just go in with this and just kind of add in more again it's a really easy pattern so it's quite easy to add in extras and you wouldn't actually think I'd done it myself so um let's do one there there we go and then again just peel that piece off so again just take it away from that white it's just so you can see it a bit better there um and then the next one again another bit of washi tape so it's going to be that corner to that corner so now I'm going to fill in this area here and I think I'm going to mirror this color here I do really like the lemon line twist so let's pop that one down and I'm going to again stuff in the outside and just work my way to take this off there we go okay and then I'm going to use the same stamp again so you can repeat again there's no rule you could do every single one with the same same stamp if you wanted to so I'm going to do this one here um there we go and again if there's any bits just kind of we'll enter in with your pen you can see there but I'm going to cover it now with my ink but see you've got to be careful if you um if you've got too much ink on your fingers you can just see the little dots there so I'm just going to wash my hands quickly okay so now we're down to this last section so you now need to seal off all three sides so you're going to stick on the patterned side not the white side so again just leaving a tiny the tiniest amount it's not even a millimeter so that's that one but also the good thing about using the washie is it will stretch sometimes with post-it notes they're only that size so you'd have to double them up so I guess with the washi tape you can just do it all in one go okay I'm going to use a berry burst so I'm just going to ink that one up and again I'm going to try not to go too dark in the middle so just start from the edge and work your way in okay like so and then the last one I've got is this really nice big thick leaf to go in the middle so again just get that inked up nice and I'm going to start down the corner here okay and just finish off do that one there see now I want to do that there but can you see if I stamp it it's going to cover that bit so that's when a post-it notes handy because it gives you that you know that kind of more of a surface area to stamp on um but the easiest way to do that is just add two more strips of washi so across two both of my videos I think I'm showing you you know ways to do it um you know with either both so if you don't have one or the other then you can still do this but I just wanted that little bit there so that's that done and again just because this is a thicker image I can just see just a few bits there I just want to make it more crisp on that join okay so that's that one and then now you just need to take off all three of those sides okay so let's just flip over this paper just so you can see this better and what I can notice so what I did notice even is there where I took the washi off it's kind of taken a little bit off of my um ink color so I'm just going to just there was a slightly in fact it wasn't a lemon line twist it was a fresh fig just going to carefully work back over that and you wouldn't even know it happened there we go so that is that all done okay so now what I need to do is add my sentiment and pop this onto my card base okay I've just stamped the um with much love and thanks because I am going to be giving these all as thank you cards so I'm going to pop this one and just die cut this one out okay I'm just going to pop this on some foam squares just to give it some dimension because obviously at the minute it's quite flat and you can now add sequins to this you could add nuvo drops any of your pearl drops any other kind of bits and pieces to it but I'm going to sit this I'm doing it in the middle of the card not the middle of the that kind of diamond shape so let's see about there I think make sure it's nice and straight there we go and I'll just get that stuck on my card okay just get that lined up you should have a nice little border and you can see that just bring up and there's my card all finished so I've done one two three and you can just see the different that one I still need to pop on a card base I think that was just another mat there yeah so that is the retiform technique so I have just focused on these colors um you will see the other ones I done in that tutorial that I shared earlier but yeah there are endless results with this like I said you can do I've just stuck to the six kind of sections you can do eight 10 20 you could have so many tiny ones so really do go and have a play around with it because it's just really really fun and I think it makes really beautiful cards so that is today's tutorial that's today's technique um like I said this will all be in our social papercraft and magazine all the links and everything for that will be out and will be down below in the video description it's out every other month and um yeah I hope you enjoy reading it so as always if you enjoyed today's tutorial please give me a thumbs up and subscribe to my channel to see more thanks for watching bye


Iuno-22 fre, of the criminal justice committee. There are no apologies this morning. Please can I ask members to ensure that mobile phones are switched to silent and wait for sound engineers to switch on your microphone before speaking? Our first agenda item today is consideration of the prisons and young offenders' institutions' Scotland Amendment rules of for 2021, and I refer members to paper one. We took evidence on this last week from the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans and from the Scottish Prison Service. We all recognise the balance that needs to be struck between a desire to prevent drugs entering our prisons while at the same time protecting the rights of prisoners. Before I ask whether the committee wishes to report any conclusions to the Parliament, I invite comments from members. If anybody would like to make a comment, please raise your hand or put an R in the chat function. Yes, hello. It's worth just revisiting very quickly some of what brought us to this situation. We had multiple ambulances getting called out to prisons at a time when the NHS was under severe strain, in particular in Lanarkshire. It was at this level black and those prisoners who had overdosed were being treated in intensive care beds in a hospital that was under severe pressure due to Covid. The ambulance service at this point was subject to assistance from the military and the prison officers who have been talking about this drug problem for many months and years were many of them saying that the level of drugs were the highest that they had ever seen in decades. I think that it's just worth reiterating that the need to do something with the mail, given that the main source of drugs into prisons was absolutely vital and necessary and should be welcomed. For all the issues around prisoners' rights, we also need to bear in mind the rights of prison officers and the working environment that they are in. Indeed, the majority of prisoners who want to be in an environment that is not a wash with drugs and that they are not susceptible to falling victim to that culture. All in, it's very important and positive development. I'll hand over to Pauline McNeill. I think that you'd like to come in. Thank you very much, convener. I largely agree with the comment of Russell Findlay that we need to take proportion to the action to roll back the scourge of drugs in our prisons so that we are content that the regulations are necessary. I did raise concerns with the cabinet secretary and the chief executive of the prison service, Theresa Medway, just to give some reassurances around prisoners who might get caught up in the process and questioned what I felt satisfied about was that prisoners would be present if any suspect meal was to go through the process. That gave me some assurances. I always thought that it would be useful to put on the record, convener, that miscarriages of justice organisations module have written to the committee expressing concerns in the act on behalf of convictive prisoners where they feel that there is a credible case. I think that it is important to note that correspondence. I, for one, will be listening out and monitoring the impact of the regulations to make sure that they are proportionate. One of the concerns raised by families outside was that families might stop writing to prisoners because they fear that something would happen to their correspondence for the cards or whatever and where they innocently sent them. I think that, for those reasons, I think that the committee just wants to keep an eye on this going forward, but thank you very much, convener. Thank you very much, Pauline. I will bring in Jamie Greene, followed by Katie Clark. Jamie, over to you. Thank you, convener. Good morning, committee members. I had three brief points to make. The first is in relation to the evidence that we took last week. I did feel at the end of it that we were perhaps none the wiser as to the scale and volume of mail that is being intercepted. There were a number of points raised, which might merit and follow-up writing from either the Scottish Prison Service or the Cabinet Secretary, primarily on the process of mail being intercepted. I think that there might be some miscommunication or confusion in the wider public sphere around what mail is being stopped, what mail is not being passed to prisoners, what mail has been photocopied and what mail is not being read and the process around that where it takes place. I think that that transparency might help to offer some reassurance to the families of those in prison and those who are not quite aware of what the SSI actually means and does in real life. I do appreciate the operational reasons why some information might be sensitive to the sharing public. That was hinted at last week by the Cabinet Secretary. I am fine and content with that and I understand the reasons for that. In that respect, perhaps that might be something that could be shared confidentially with members of the committee, as is the norm with such information. The second point was around the issue that I raised that it is not just physical paper, mail or paper and cards that is soaked in illicit substances. We know that other items are brought in. The question is whether serious organised criminal gangs are no longer to rely on traditional forms of smuggling drugs into paper. How else will the drugs get into prison? I think that we would be naive to think that it is simply going to stop altogether. We know, for example, that in the past, items of clothing that are sent to prisoners or other parcels are pre-soaked in drugs. We also know that over-the-border perimeter methods—the old-fashioned ways, if you like—are starting to see a resurgence. I would be keen if the Government and the SPS would keep us posted on that. The third and final point was about an issue that I tried to raise but ran out of time around digital communication and what alternatives are being offered in email systems. I do not mean mobile telephony but perhaps fixed devices or other forms of electronic communication that will allow families to privately, directly, confidentially, quickly and easily communicate with their loved ones who are in prison. We did not get a chance to really talk about that in great detail, so I would perhaps appreciate an update on those as well. Thank you very much, Jamie. That is helpful. I will move on to Katie Clark and then bring in Fulton MacGregor. It is, however, very important that they are implemented in a sympathetic way, particularly in relation to items of sentimental value. That is something that the committee would want to keep being advised on and would need to satisfy itself that the regulations are being implemented in a way that is sympathetic to individuals who are incarcerated, who are cut off from their families and, obviously, the contact from families and the contact from children in particular is incredibly important to that individual. The committee is very concerned about that aspect and we would want to be kept closely advised on how that is being implemented, particularly to be informed if there were problems and if it was not working in the way that we had understood that it was. It is something that the committee will be monitoring. We had a very full discussion and, privately, all the committee members expressed concerns that that would be the way that we would expect it to be implemented. More generally, I think that the committee feels that it needs more information in terms of the scale of drugs in prisons. I hope that, over the coming period, that will be shared with us, along with the information about how those regulations will be implemented. As has been said, that is only one route that is being used to bring drugs into prison. It is a far larger problem than simply mail. That is something that the committee would want to hear more on and would expect the Scottish Government and the Scottish Prison Service to provide information to us on in the coming period. Finally, I will hand over to Fulton and then I will make a few comments. Thanks, convener. I probably agree with what others have said today. Last week's evidence session on this was really quite useful. It is good to hear that measures came in. There does seem to be some evidence of initial early success with it. Obviously, we all want to make sure that drugs are not getting into prisons. I think that the Russell family articulated it at the start. Often, the consequences of that impact on the individuals and on the health service at this time. If a measure is even seen to be making progress in that area, it is incumbent on us to support it. As others have said as well, I did have concerns. I probably had more concerns before the evidence session last week, but I felt quite reassured listening to the cabinet secretary and how some of the mail would be used. I think that there was quite a clear indication from the prison service that the private mail cannot be read as such and that there are safeguards in place. Nonetheless, all that said, I think that it is something that is very early. It is probably a broad enough measure that it is potential to be implemented in different ways across the sector. For that reason, I would quite like to review it as well, but I am very happy to support it at this point, as it seems to be making an initial difference. I thank all the members for their comments. I think that they are very balanced, measured and set out our thoughts on the evidence that we heard and some of the aspects of the SSI that we would like to monitor and follow-up. It is important that Russell Finlay mentioned or alluded to the issue around looking at this in the context of both prisoners and prison staff. Based on the evidence that we heard last week, I was fairly reassured by what we heard, given that the process had been introduced in relatively quick time. I also feel that we perhaps would benefit from some more information on the practicalities of the process of monitoring mail and testing it. This comes down to ensuring that there is proportionality in the practice that prison officers will be involved in monitoring mail. We have written to the Scottish Prison Service Police Scotland on its response when psychoactive substances are found and the cabinet secretary with some additional questions that we identified during last week's session. I completely agree with Katie's comment on the sentimental value of correspondence and the need for careful consideration of how that is handled and managed. Jamie Greene made a very relevant point about other options around correspondence and communication. I think that we included some questioning around that in some of our follow-up letters. We are more than happy for us to publish our responses, and we will monitor and review the matter. On the basis of members' comments, are we content that we have no further recommendations to make on the SSI and the evidence that we heard? I agree. Just before we move on, I thank all the witnesses who contributed to our evidence session with written submissions, the Scottish Centre for Criminal Justice Research, Families Outside and, as Pauline McNeill alluded to, the miscarriage of justice organisation for their submissions. They were very helpful for us, so we very much appreciate your support in that. Thank you for that. Our next agenda item is consideration of the Scottish Government response to the committee's pre-budget scrutiny report. I refer members to paper 2, and I thank the cabinet secretary for justice and veterans for his detailed response. I invite members to share their views or follow-up action that they would like the committee to take forward in response to the cabinet secretary's reply. I will open it up at this point. I am not seeing any hands or anybody wanting to speak. Kate, I will bring in, I think that we have Russell and then I will bring in Pauline McNeill, and I think that I saw Fulton McGregor's hand go up. Russell, over to you. Yes, thank you. There is quite a lot to go at, so I will not talk about everything that has jumped out at me. I am sure that others will come in and perhaps at the end, if I have missed anything, I could revisit first time. The cabinet secretary makes a reference to the drug's death task force. It is not clear from the papers whether his reply to the committee predates the resignation of the task force chair and deputy chair, which happened over Christmas new year period. The Scottish Government's approach is counterproductive and driven by meeting targets rather than sustainable change. That is clearly of significant concern to anyone who has an interest in our record drug's death levels. It is important that we pay some attention to what they are saying and work out what has gone wrong, because clearly something has gone wrong here. I will make one other point if it is okay. It is in relation to fatal accident inquiries. The response from the cabinet secretary on the one hand says that we are not complacent, but it seems to simultaneously suggest that the system works. This is point 177 on the papers. Again, it clearly is not working. There is huge and growing backlog. Some of that is to do with Covid, but not all of it. Many of those cases are lasting for years and the pain that is causing to families who have lost someone is just horrific. I do not see how the not being complacent comment sits with the apparent position of everything being okay. I will leave those two points just now and then let someone else come in. I will move on to Pauline McNeill and then I will bring in Rona Mackay. Pauline, over to you. I will follow on from the point that Finlay McNeill made earlier about the report on reference to fatal accident inquiries. There is a lot to welcome, let me say that, but there are just a few points that I do think need further investigation or amplification. I am surprised that the cabinet secretary thinks that the current system related to death and custody represents the right model for the future. Given the extraordinary length of time that families are waiting, there seems to be a big piece of work to be needed here by the Scottish Government and some investment. I also do not fully understand what the relationship between that is and the recent statement of where death and custody would be investigated independently, where we heard that powers would be given to ensure that those tasks could get on with the job. It says that there is no barriers or unfettered access to get to the bottom of death and custody. Given that, we have heard an extraordinary number of death and custody and what a family is really concerned about the length of time. I do not expose a share in Russell's comments in relation to the seem to be a bit of complacency there. I would have thought that Paul Hatton needs to be some investment attention to that. Secondly, in relation to the question of victims' implementation of specific measures in victims in witness in Scotland 2014, such as victims being offered support when making a statement, it seems to be a theme for this committee in exploring whether there should be more formal support for victims in the system, either to be legally represented or more supported. That is, for me, further investigation on that one. The Government's excellent work on violence against women and girls is a comprehensive programme. I suppose that what I would like to see is the investment going forward and how to ensure that the action plan is sustainable with achievements along the way. I have made the Parliament a number of times. I think that there are some cross-cutting issues with justice and my imaginary qualities. In relation to attitudes and violence against women and girls, where we have seen high levels of sexual harassment towards girls at a very young age, and we have discussed in some of the private sessions some concerns about issues such as rape culture and social issues. I would like to see some cross-cutting investment between justice and the other departments that have an obvious interest in that. Thanks very much, Pauline. I will bring in Rona Mackay and then collect Stevenson. Thanks, convener. I will go backwards and agree with Pauline on the violence against women and girls issue. I would like to see more cross-cutting between committees taking place. It is a huge subject, and it is one that we need to keep pursuing and tackling ahead on. I agree with Pauline's comments. I would not repeat them all, but I agree with all of that. On the FAI question, I think that clearly there have been serious issues and there are issues in families that have concerns. However, the cabinet secretary's response was that they are taking note of the recent death and custody report that he has made about an extensive statement in the chamber. To acknowledge the seriousness, it may be up to you, convener, but it may be a letter to drill in a wee bit further on that issue. The fact that the death and custody report, which was excellent and all-encompassing, is being considered is a good thing, but we probably need a bit more reassurance on that one. On the drug's death task force that Russell talked about, I completely disagree with him that there is any point in us going over that again. The two members who left have all been made public. I see no merit in us drilling back into that. Certainly acknowledging the work that they have been involved in is fine, but I do not see that that would move us forward in any way. I am not sure that there is a great deal of public interest. I think that what the public want now is just to move on and get things done. That is my opinion on that one. Thanks very much, Rona. I will bring in Collette and Jamie Greene. Thanks, convener. Good morning, committee. I wanted to touch on the FAIs. One of the things that I had picked up on was that there had been issues in the past with the procurement contract with the pathology and toxicology. Audit Scotland raised that as well during their annual audit report. I took some comfort from the previous committee meeting that we had with the Lord Advocate. In that, they said that there was a new contract brought out, which might reduce the length of times that some of the FAIs are taking place. Just to note that it has obviously been a big issue during the pandemic, where we are staying on the NHS. I really just wanted to note that as well. Thanks, convener. Thank you very much, Collette. I will bring in Jamie Greene. I will bring in Russell Assie. He would like to come back in and then I will make some final comments. Jamie Greene Thank you, convener. I will try and rattle through those. It is helpful that I will identify them in relativity to the committee's conclusions by number. I will start with 139. That is in response to the overall budget. The cabinet secretary responds that there will be a 7 cent increase in the portfolio's resource budget, but it is unclear if or what any increase in capital budget will be from that response. That is important because it comes up later in some of our recommendations. In response to prisons and prisoner form, again, there is an increase of £15 million to the SPS's resource budget. It is unclear where that money is going or what it is for, staff or other forms of people-related expenditure rather than things. The £73 million capital funding is merely an extension of existing commitments. It will enable the conclusion of construction of female custodial estate and completion of other pieces of work, such as in Vanessa and Barlinny, which we know, for example, may already be going over budget. That does not seem to be new money. I mentioned that because point 162 says that there is no increase in the capital budgets for either Police Scotland or SFRS. It seems to me that the only capital money that is mentioned is money that we already knew about in that respect. That, for example, will not cover anything that goes towards investment in HMP green accord on freeze. That does not necessarily mean complete replacements, it could just be necessary infrastructure upgrades, as per the recommendations of the Prime Minister. I would say that, in relation to point 162 in the police capital budget, it was very clear from the evidence given to us, not just by the police but by other stakeholders, including the Federation, that there would be an absolute necessity for increased capital for essential modernisation, but not just cherry-picking upgrades but things that would be necessary to allow police to continue in their duties. It seems to me that there is nothing in there for digital ICT or fleet for police estate and, indeed, the greening or net zero targets of the police either, which is noted. We also heard, for example, from the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, at least from their union, if nothing else, that some of the fire estate is not fit for purpose. There is a £9.5 million mention of modernisation, but I am not quite sure where that £9.5 million is going. It certainly does not seem to scratch the surface of probably what is needed. Those are not necessarily criticisms, they are just observations of the responses. The point 173 was about the national community justice strategy. It just says in response that it is under development and it will launch this year, but it does not mention what budget will be allocated, because we have made a very specific ask that it should be adequately funded, and I note that no response was given to that. Probably the other major area of contention from my point of view was around legal aid. The committee took a lot of evidence on that issue, and I appreciate that some of it is a matter of disagreement between very stakeholders who do accept that. However, we made it very clear that the profession, if nothing else, was clear that the Government had failed to address issues around fees and negotiations around that. The one-line answer was that the Government did not accept that position. It then went on not to respond to points 182 or 184, which would also include a very helpful suggestion around public defence listers, which I thought came from other members as we went through the process. The Government simply replies by saying that no response was provided. In my view, that is just not good enough. It is the same for 182 as well. On the issue of tackling drug deaths, it is disappointing to read in points 189 and 191 that the Government has refused to respond. We made a specific recommendation for a modest injection of funds—or, for example, apologies—into recovery clinics and prisons, where we talked about that already in committee this morning. Residential rehab and community day centres and a bit of clarification as to how all the budgets work together, because we know that the drug deaths crisis is one that crosses many portfolios. The Government's response to both was simply that no response was provided, which, given the gravity of the situation, is disappointing. Those are, perhaps, issues that we may want to, at some point in reflection of the budget process, look back on or, indeed, push the Government further on. Thank you for your time, convener. Thank you very much, Jamie.  Yes, thank you. In respect of what Jamie said, I was going to raise a couple of these points, so that's good that you did. PDSOs—yes, indeed, we asked about that, but we didn't get any kind of response—but, going back to the drug's death task force, we all know that 1,339 people in Scotland died last year from drugs. That task force has given us a job of doing something about that. The head and the chairman and the deputy chair, both of whom are credible and eminent people, have quit. I don't think that we know enough about that, and I know that there's perhaps a tendency to want to move along, but I think that if we put our fingers in our ears and don't explore this further, it sends out a pretty bad signal. What we do know just by virtue of what's been in the media is that those two individuals believe that the direction of travel is counterproductive. That is pretty fundamental. It is counterproductive to do something about the drug's death toll, but I think that it would be a missive as not to explore that further. I thank members for their comments. There's a lot in there. Some of the issues that have been raised, I would agree with in particular around the question that Jamie raised about the capital budget in particular for policing. There's also a lot in there on the issues around FEIs and deaths in custody, which we all acknowledge and agree. There has been a lot of work and progress made around that, but that is an issue that we need to monitor and keep an eye on. What I would propose is, in response to the points that you have made, we can consolidate them. It would also be a question of whether we want to follow that up with some correspondence with the cabinet secretary or clarity on the points that have been made or whether we are content with the reply that he previously provided. I open that question up again if members want to agree some follow-up correspondence with the cabinet secretary. Jamie, I see you at your hand up. On the issue of legal aid, for example, where the Government simply responds and says, with respect, we disagree, that is fine. It is entirely within its rights to either disagree with stakeholders who have given evidence or the recommendations or the summary of the committee. It is entirely appropriate for the Government to disagree with committees and their findings. That is common, and I do not have a problem with that. However, where they have not answered a question at all on very important issues, I would push back, simply, uncontroversially and say that, with respect to the cabinet secretary, the committee made a recommendation. Just to say that no response has been provided simply is not good enough. If the responses come further back and say that it is not possible or that I disagree or whatever, that is fine. That is a response, but no response is not a response. I would be minded on those issues to push back. It is also worth noting, however, that this is just a draft budget. The budget will go through its iterative process. The political parties and their spokespeople are within their rights to press the Government for more money on whatever they want, and that will form part of those negotiations. There may be other opportunities in which we can do some of this as a committee and revisit it as it goes through the process. Certainly, by the time we get to the final stages of the budget, we will know what the final numbers are, because it is not necessarily given that what has been presented to us are the final numbers. I am sure that the cabinet secretary has the wherewithal to request for as much as he thinks is needed from his colleagues and Government off the back of the committee's recommendations. Perhaps we could ensure that we are scheduling some opportunity in the future for the committee to review later iterations of the numbers to see if it meets it in some way in some of our asks. Jamie, Katie Clark, I see that you would like to come in over to you. Yes, thank you very much. On the correspondence in response to the cabinet secretary, I think that it is important that we push on the deaths and custody issue. However, the other issue that I think that it would be useful to ask about is a lot of the evidence that we have taken and the discussion that we have had round about how sexual offences and domestic abuse are dealt with and how that relates to the budget, in particular the new budget strategy. It may well be that any financial implications of the implementation of any measures that are necessary would be dealt with in the new justice strategy. I am not sure, but it does seem to me that if they are talking about significant changes going forward in terms of how sexual offences and violence against women and girls are dealt with, there must be financial implications of that, so it might be quite useful to use the correspondence to see if we can get some more detail on that in terms of what the thinking is. Okay, thanks very much. Thank you for those follow-up comments. At the moment, my thought would be, and I will ask members for agreement on this, is at Jamie's point about the draft budget point at the moment. What I would propose is that we, obviously some of the issues that we feel quite strongly about are ones that I have no doubt we will come back to, certainly within our work programme going forward. In that regard, I propose that, as we work through our work programme, that gives us an opportunity to monitor budgetary issues and aspects of the work that we are looking at and where there are issues that come up around this particular topic. We can raise them at that point and in the appropriate way. Are members in agreement with that? Anybody not in agreement? Finally, I would just like to pick up on the point that, Russell Finlay, we are making in relation to the task force and the recent resignations. I do understand where you are coming from with that. I am not sure that that is necessarily directly a budgetary issue, but I am sure that we will have some further discussion about that in the context of the issue that you raised just a few moments ago. If we are content to not issue any further correspondence to the cabinet secretary in line with the budget response that he provided us with, I will bring this agenda item to a close. I thank you all for your comments and contributions. We will now move into private session. That concludes the public part of this meeting. Our next meeting will be on Wednesday, 26 January. We will now move into private session and move on to MS teams.


Well, again, I'm glad to have this opportunity now with you all again, but there's some going on. We're going to Geneva as you know, and I have to tell you, I'm going to have sense of optimism, but not because I have any illusions about Soviet intentions and the fundamental differences between us, but one thing that over with your help and support, we're going there for the first time in a long time with strength, supportings, and I'm going to take advantage of that when we get there. We're bringing a broad agenda to Geneva, focusing on the full spectrum of our relations. It isn't just going to be there to argue about some proposal. There are the warrants cuts, although the warrants cuts are going to be very a part of it, but all the regional conflicts and the bilateral relationships that we're not going to make any artificial linkage of all these, human rights and everything else, it's all going to be there because I think the main purpose is that in some way we can begin to riddle away of distrust and suspicion of the existence of the Queen's, the other men will follow. The key objective of the meeting for which I have to be a charter realistic course for negotiations and negotiators after Geneva. But as you know, in Moscow earlier this weekend, we're going to be reporting their talks. We have to affirm that we face a difficult negotiating task. I'm sure you want to stress that Geneva has an in-minute talk but rather a Q-party ongoing process. We need to show the Soviets that we stand together in support of our democratic values and respect for human rights as a basis for our policies around the world. But now that's enough out of me. I'm going to call on George and maybe one of you wishes to keep going. Thank you. Please. I have a chance to read each one of them in the video. Before we leave here for today, but I understand right now that you might have about 30 seconds for them. What about having everybody sit down? They're in there. Thank you, gentlemen. We're just having this photo opportunity here in mind. Supposed to have been set by a sucker. If anyone wants to get in the picture, get on this side. Jim, I saw Bud turn, I saw Jim turn. Well, if I could just for a few moments here, I see our trip to Geneva as a potential starting point for better relations between our two countries and we're going to remain optimistic and believe it. It still happened. I'm realistic at the same time. We know our adversary will not grant us any favors and we know his record on protecting fundamental human rights. But you, the leaders of the United Nations of Christian Faith and Jewish leaders who are here, this is appropriate in our today Christian tradition and I don't have to educate any of you on the Soviet record on religious rights. In fact, I'm looking forward to hearing your suggestions on how we may be able to effect some problems. I'm back and I'm going to talk to Mr. Robert Chet about it. But let me assure you that when I meet with him, the issue of religious persecution and human rights in general will be very high on my list along with regional issues, bilateral matters and control and security. These two have important moral dimensions. Our Strategic Defense Initiative, for example, is intended to protect life rather than to destroy it or even threaten it. And if we can get the Soviet Union to recognize the merits of moving in this direction together, we will have made an important step on the path to a safer future. There's been a little confusion about what I mean with our Strategic Defense Initiative. It isn't a weapon, it is a shield, a space shield in which we hope that our research will lead us to a system that will enable us to intercept nuclear missiles before they reach their target. But if and when that research indicates something of that kind is possible. It is my dream that before we suddenly rush ahead, claim possession and deploy it, that we sit down with all the other nuclear powers in the world, including the Soviet Union, and tell them that now we have the answer to eliminating nuclear weapons. And that if all of us join in doing that, we'll make that weapons system that defensive system available to all. And I'd like a little bit to, like a Geneva when after World War I, we outlawed poison gas. Everybody kept their gas masks. Everyone would have this defense system in the event that someday a madman would re-institute those weapons we've done away with. We can't take away from men's minds the knowledge of how to make those weapons. So this would be our gas mask consists of year on item report. But I appreciate this opportunity to break bread with you and having given the profession in which we often tease each other about being invited to lunch or dinner but having to perform for a meal and not knowing which segment of our faiths that I could call upon for this is here to give me as a layman would you permit me to ask the Lord's blessing? Dear God, thank thee for this gathering. Thank for the opportunity that you have given each one of us to serve you. Bless this food to more use. Thank thee for it. Dear God, we thank thee for the beauty of this earth. May the Lord's name be upon you. May the Lord be true to both men's guidance. It's original. It's very keepsake for us. It is done. We have a presentation to make to you, Mr. President.  So we have to present this bell clock and the inscription is to President Ronald Reagan the gratitude for your timely encouragement by the Alzheimer's disease association. Thank you very much. That's very handsome. Thank you. That got stopped by Secret Service, of course. Well, of course it was ticking. Well, thank you very much. That's very handsome. I should take that upstairs. Well, we certainly have been encouraged by the public awareness. This kind of thing has given us great encouragement because the public awareness created as we go back into our home towns into our various districts and they know that your staff for approval is on our association. The research clearly has been improved. But it's still not enough. Government, it's 56 million and it should be 3.5 to 5 million hours. I know this is a budget deficit. I know. Dental research is 44 million. I don't have all the private resources. We have 4.5 million. Is that 365? Yes, tremendous. Could we give us 2 million dollars? 2 million. It started 40 years ago. We were in the first year out. With your help. When you helped us a lot. We went from one day to one week and now it's the month of November. Our small time is a way into this month. So that's quite a challenge. I wish you lots of luck. Yes, in the summit. Thank you. Congratulations. That was the greatest thing I could have done. There's one advantage about having my age now is that I'm looking forward to it. At some point in the negotiations I'm going to go into a hand-kicked look. Thank you for seeing me. I carried the flag in Brother Rat. So I took you down the field. See, you know we're still being seen. Yes, sir. I found out, now I have 2 movies that go on. I've noted Dane. They play the rock and fill for the incoming freshman class. And at the M.I. Cadets just yesterday told me that every year they show Brother Rat. The M.I. You and I had the right uniform and all that. The M.I. says that West Point is the Virginia Military Institute of the North. I have a question to see if you can. Thank you so much for saying it. Well, it was a pleasure. Thank you. God bless you for all that you're carrying on and doing. Thank you. Are you taking those billboards? That's the official bill. Official bill? It's in the records. I was there. I'll be glad about that. I hope you'll sign the H.R.T. session. I hope you didn't. I'm afraid they've got some things in there. Basically, I've seen some of the things in there. I'm trying to do a things for you. But I... They loaded it up with some things that don't properly belong there. And, yes... And it would find the... It would find the Congress, literally, as a plain doctor. They had to adjust the micromanagement over so many details that I think they're just... I mean, a message that I make no pain. But here's what we do agree with. What you try to do with it. How they... They loaded it up and loaded it up. Is it being sent back for a moment? Is it being sent back for a moment? Well, I can't do that. Well, I have to send it back. If it's sent back... It's the line item. Yes. Here's another sense of purpose. Just so there isn't what every governor adds, what an item, Victor, I could assign that bill and send it deeper. Line item down. These initiatives... And then they could overwrite it. Yes, they would overwrite it. If they feel strong enough, they can do it. In California, in eight years, I lined items 943 times without everyone's being hurt. They would put the things in. But if they had to face standing up for zero, would that just expose by itself? They didn't dare go for it. You know, if you get something that you've got to find a bill like that to get it passed by sneaking it in, then there must be something wrong with it. Yeah, I don't see any reason for avoiding that. We'll have to get back to you in an amended format. I hope you'll let us understand. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you. Oysters for being orange juice. Hearing difficulties that I had. Orange juice sounded to me like oysters. I told it. It's amazing the things I've heard. I've heard that. Thank you. Thank you.


ఒలధప ఱ్విరు ిట్ల లటిఔు చ్మ్ి uss చ్టా  Researchers told me that there had been many ಬು ವಲು ಪ�非常 ಮಾಷಿಲು ಪ ಮಿಮ ಸೀಗ ಪ ವಂರೆ Competition ಬೀಾವರಿhões off ಸೀಟರ್ನ ಸವರಂದಾgrass ಕತಂ Möglichkeiten ಅ ಸಿರಶ ಣಾ ಲಾರ್ತೆನಲ್ ಹಾರಲ್ ಹರತು ಇ Devi this OK  ಸು ಗದರರುನಿೆ ಸಿಮ ಬರ್ಳಾಚಿ Abby dipping meat meat meat meat salt margare aani ba. Anne топple mnd sohanati thi hale sa time sa pogare hani ba. We all happy during the Lava Paey Pariba sa save pae In this program from 1990 we had started and it increased in Muhammad. The University councilسö Sulat generation parkshgahan ..sise is per stagings software meow We check them all every time and make proposals. breaking every door down, there like so and many others PLACE FOR articulation 한번から  Nejayit alsa r Crew alsa Many of you have submitted material %,one who reyonded skills  Glen 因為  Phone 說了 いや 何 itä


It is so important that we all get our eyes tested. You know, some people wait up to two years before they seek any help at all. Catch your eyes tested today and don't leave it too late.


This programme contains strong language. How are you? Lovely to see you. Formal dinner parties are the height of society events, helping people to bond and get to know each other. Madame, you're very welcome. Always observing proper etiquette and decorum. Tuck in, tuck in. Of course, dinner parties are also the perfect time for some really good old-fashioned flirting. Has anyone ever come up to you in the chastise part?  No, wait, you've got to do it to me. Who does it? You do.  No, why? Because I fell from heaven. You want me to say, because I fell from heaven? Not me. What do you think, Zoe? Do you think, like, men should open doors for ladies?  See, what are you going to waste time for someone to come and open the door? I suspect Jessica might disagree with you a little bit. Etiquette is there for a reason, and of course, men should open doors for women. It's one of the basics. Jessica, if you want to say it was, like, third date and someone didn't eat at a restaurant and they cooked, is that cool? Is that chic or not chic? What? What? It depends how things work leading up to the third date. If he's being respectful and civilised, possibly. The reason why I think it's quite cool is you don't have that really awkward thing on a date where it's like, who's paying? I'd always pay unless the attitude isn't right. And then it's too, like, pro-feminist. I'm like, well, I'll teach you a lesson, darling. I'm walking out of here. We're paying 50. Oh, dear. Now things are getting royally awkward. Etiquette's supposed to make things easier, not more difficult. Women wanted rights. We're sharing and caring now, aren't we? But that's not right. People think my views are old-fashioned, but I want to keep history alive and it's worked for so many years. So why would you change it? So when does the gentleman not have to pay? If it's a woman who wants to pay for herself, that's fair enough. Otherwise, the gentleman should be taken care of as a woman. I don't agree with Jessica on this one. If you don't offer to pay the bill, you look like a cheap hoe. First impression of this guy. Come on. Uh, douchebag? No, no, no. I'm used to dickhead. I'm used to dickhead. Don't worry. It's cool.  I still haven't heard what she has to say about me. And I'm just like, she's keeping it quiet still. She's like, I don't want to break your heart already. I'd probably put it as opposites. And I like this guy.