Winston Welch, Cynthia Sinclair. Welcome to the show you guys. Let's talk about let's talk about Coronaville today. There's a lot happening on Coronaville and some of it you know would would make you happy but other other things would not. So Tim there was an issue that was raised recently and I wrote to you about it what was that? Well I think one of them was that well there was tax breaks for hate groups. We have a lot of different emails going back and forth. Okay so I'm talking about Coronaville. I'm going to prompt you the state is not going to do contract tracing. How about that one? Yeah that was quite remarkable. Well it just goes to show you that when Fed funds go away the the earnest efforts to curtail COVID-19 in the state go away. So it's a it's a tit for tat. If I have the Fed dollars then we'll work on it. If we don't have Fed dollars then it's not that important. Contact tracing is extremely important especially where our numbers are at. I mean our numbers are low enough where contract tracing actually will work. Yeah if you have say hundreds of people coming down with the infection contact tracing may be futile in this state but if you have less than a hundred which is what we've been having lately then contract tracing is really important and it can it can really flatten the curve. So they you know I forget the name of the new epidemiologist. Her first name is Sarah. She says you're going to cut them cut them back now. I'm not sure that's for saving money or that she said there wasn't enough work for them. They were not they were not fully engaged. Is it really that's interesting. Who are they working for? If they're working for the state government and they're not fully engaged it means the state government is not using them is not instructing them and spending their time. Quite remarkable. At the same time there have been articles about the mainland where there aren't enough contact tracers and they have hundreds of cases and they can't keep up with it and they need to bring in contract tracers but they can't and there's no national policy to equalize either on contact tracers or on healthcare in general.  I think what happens is you get the numbers get so high that contract tracing is almost impossible. I just listened to Governor Newsom from California his his announcement about the lockdowns and an interesting tact that he's taking is he's looking at the percentage of ICU beds available and if they hit 15 percent then that particular region of California will go into a lockdown scenario and so I've never seen it look looking at ICU beds as a as a barometer. Yeah well speaking of which Stephanie you've been following the Supreme Court on COVID it's really distinguished itself lately. If you were wondering whether they were you know trying to help the country or not I don't think you have to wonder anymore at least not on COVID. You know they ruled they ruled a couple of times in favor of religion over COVID said you know you can conduct a big religious experience and not and and you don't have to don't have to comply with state requirements on gathering but you know Kevin Newsom in California is probably a good example of where the Supreme Court's going. They ruled recently you know last day or so about his his order to what is it I think it's to wear masks or gathering and there was a there was a district court order that enforced that and they turned that over so the Supreme Court is ruling against agencies in the states who would try to stop COVID. You've been following this? Well a little bit yeah I have I mean I'm just so perplexed by it but on the on the obviously you know the conservatives are ruling in favor of religion and against any restrictions on liberty. So even in the face of Fauci's on right now saying the US has now hit the record numbers for all all things the cases the hospitalizations and the deaths we're over the top now and this doesn't seem to have any impact on the principles that are guiding that these people are ruling by because if it's to default to individuals then making the right decisions to not go into the packed church then then we're lost I mean they're lost so we're going to lose those people and I know that to California and other places that are running out of ICU room so now they're converting the recovery rooms where into COVID areas too but eventually we're going to run out of doctors and nurses and the only reasonable suggestion recommendation that I've heard that evidently was mentioned earlier is to please bring in Chinese doctors we need to bring in medical people from other parts of the world to come in and service and take care of all these patients because if it's okay to go get yourself infected and we're obligated to the problem with these Chinese doctors is they're all communist pinkos who cares they need work to bed that's it who cares Tim is shaking his head on you what did you want to add to that Tim well you know when the pandemic first came out we were taking in airplane shipments of PPEs from Russia yeah you know this goes to the the point that are how did you know the UK get this vaccine before the United States we're falling behind in so many areas in the world and we're almost becoming a second-rate nation versus a first a first-rate world nation and here we are talking about bringing in doctors from a foreign country and here we are talking about the lack of PPEs and getting them from of all places Russia uh just listen to the you know listen to that news line story I mean you know what you don't hear is that doctors are retiring they had enough already in six or seven months of this kind of high high pressure but the press is not reporting that because they don't want to everybody racing for the door well they really good they really have the resources and also they should be facilities or the doctors right but also that the downside of getting COVID because one of the things that's keeping people moving and just being also fatigued by this and tired of it but the young people that get it have tremendous after effects so there's still not enough information out there about who gets what and what happens to you as a result of this vicious bug so it's not just dying let all the people old people die so we can go to the bars and have our fun the point is that once you get it you've got complications and um underlying conditions for the rest of your life it looks like well let me go to you about a big thing that happened this week and that was that the UK upstaged us you know this is the greatest cut my mother always told me that this is the greatest country in the world um and the UK um you know for whatever reasons whatever process they're delivering either today or next couple of days and maybe next Monday as I they're delivering um the uh Pfizer which is at least half of an American company and half the German company and by the way the the two scientists that developed the vaccine that that Pfizer is selling are Turkish German they're from Turkey I just love that story they're immigrants and there are people in Germany that oppose them because they're Turkish and they're immigrants in any event okay we have this we have this um Pfizer um half American vaccine but we're not distributing distributing that yet how do you feel about that Cynthia I mean is there a good reason foul she had a reason maybe you can articulate it well I don't think it's a big deal just because UK came out and you know put theirs forward and gave their approval before we did it's this isn't a race we're gonna say against other countries this is a race against a virus that is attacking everyone in every country so who cares if UK came up with it first I don't care I still don't really trust any of it because it happened so fast but you know I I believe about you when he says that no corners were cut and you know it was all just fast tracked but no corners were cut but the press has reported that they were not looking at the raw data they were taking the word of Pfizer and what's it bio bio N tech without looking at the raw data but the CDC looks at the raw data and that means our process takes a little longer so some people have said that in defense of the CDC and Trump has been chasing the CDC around about it I'm not sure that's gonna have any effect but you know it all sounds like more chaos to me uh so you know Winston what you know what is going on with this all these um these vaccines and and you know at the same time the the back the back side of this is we have plenty of coverage about anti-vaxxers and the chaos sort of results in an increased number of people stepping forward and saying you first I'm not going to do this right now um and of course then you hear from you know the experts and they say well no you've got to have what is it 60 of the people in a given community or country or the world you know vaccinated before it would be effective as a you know herd immunity um so where are we on this how comfortable are you are you going to step forward you're going to wait for Fauci to go on national tv or Joe Biden to go on nationally be tv and take take the vaccine well we're down to 49 days in the sahara maybe 48 at this point so i remember you know the reality is that you're seeing a little bit of in the absolute complete absence of anything from the white house that the i mean we had some positive news is that scott atlas who was a what was he a chiropractor or a pediatrician designed as uh trump's coronavirus advisor he was a do is doctor of osteopathy is what and i love osteopaths but he had no experience in infectious disease or managing this so the fact that that even the pretense is gone with that we're not hearing wasn't jared in charge of the coronavirus task force and then wasn't uh mike tense the czar or something all that's just all that pretense is gone so you have deba birks and the cdc basically just uh i think they've been given free reign now and you had her come out and say did you travel over Thanksgiving you have coronavirus you have to assume you do do not go to your grandma's or your auntie's house without a mask and you need to be tested so we there was no um no filter on that no one telling us that we have to inject our veins with bleach and you know that was just from her in the meantime we had 31 over 3100 people die yesterday of covid i mean this is i think about 3100 people dying if they were if this was a school or a plane or um you know any any number of these things this is a real virus it's actually going on as far as the safety and efficacy of the drugs goes we'll see about the efficacy over time but for safety these pharmaceutical companies have a very strong vested interest in making sure that they are safe and effective because if they don't no one's going to be taken any other kind of vaccines coming down the pike whether it's from polio or meningitis or all the other things that we've been protected from with vaccines so personally yes i will get a vaccine i'll probably get two i'll get i'll get a Pfizer and a moderna i don't know or whatever the the the companies are i'm not an anti that may not be advisable but i do not well you know what i got you gotta think about it like i got the two shingle shots i got the first one and then i got the shingrix when it came out so i would rather be over vaccinated than not but let's just say for right now every person gets one and uh each each one person gets two shots out of that so you know and they're rolling this out slowly the fact that the british got it first good for them you know the and and the fact that our our system is is a little slower or needs to um you know check things this whole process has been extremely fast tracked we can't know for certain there are going to be some side effects it's it's inevitable but is that is that the main thing we need to focus on no that we need to focus on that this vaccine will hopefully uh protect us from the virus and we do need 70 so we need to buy in so it needs to be right and the and the pharmaceutical companies have a really strong interest in making sure that's true regardless of what our government says you know tim we we we did have a very interesting exchange of email on one one thing that winston raised and that is um you know we don't really know how this is going to work when it's when it's out there in the in the community and one possibility is you if you have if you are you writing this down stephanie if you have covid if you have covid and you take the vaccine what happens does that make it worse or better or the same um you know remember that none of them are more than 95 percent you know effective could it be the missing five percent are the people who already have covid uh any any discussion of that what is what is happening on that issue well i think they don't know for sure if now think of all the americans that have recovered from covid think of all the americans that had covid that didn't know they had covid and you know um think about to what degree do they have antibodies in their system and then compare that to the vaccine and so they think that there will be no you know no adverse effects but they really don't know and they didn't study that specifically so that's a little disconcerting just a bit it's certainly not enough to raise any red flags to say this is a reason not to take the vaccine but uh you would think that um they had thought of that and and actually explored it maybe they have and i just i'm not aware of it i haven't seen in a new story but um yeah it makes you kind of scratch your head knowing well what does happen you know yeah okay well you know one of the thing for you tim is so we have Pfizer uh which i i'm just dazzled with the fact that two turkish immigrants designed that vaccine and it's going to change probably change the world or save the world moderna out of out of massachusetts somewhere and astrazeneca which i think is a european company also with um i'm saying again i thought it was swiss swiss sounds right um so here we have the three and um you know like like winston you'd be inclined to take take the the vaccine but which one and suppose you're opposed you know you watch tv because there's so little else to do these days it's stink tech and watching movies on tv we can talk about that but in between the movies they have all these ads right for every single drug you never heard of you know but by the carload i mean sometimes you have a five minute you know a five minute segment with nothing but drug ads that you never heard of well you know i i guess you could predict that when these things all you know hit maturity fiser moderna and astrazeneca they'll all be in the ads so you're going to see the ads with all the warnings along with all the other medicines which ones are you going to take and and suppose some of them will suppose all of them are available what do you do what do you do in terms of choosing because they're not necessarily all the same in their effect well that's a great fully loaded question jay and i guess if you're a healthcare worker the answer is it's what the hospital will buy for you to take for free um you know if you want to pay out of pocket for some other alternative vaccine i'm sure that that option's available i would think that moderna might be a little bit easier to administer because it doesn't have to be kept at such cold temperatures than the fiser product uh it's interesting to see how how those uh these vaccines are kind of going to compete with one another in the open marketplace um at some point hospitals will be the same price will that they won't be the same price of course not of course not so um it's a great question and you know i guess i'll pick the one that hopefully you'll go have side effects on the label and you'll read the one with all the side effects and which ones are the the minimalist side effects versus ones that are going to cause you you know uh you know an arm drawn out of your head or something so i don't know you know you know at home we don't we like the uh the subscript you know we we turn the titles on so you watch a movie even if it's in english and you can see it you can see the words they got to do that for these these ads where they give you the warnings i want to see the titles i want to see the language hey you know i just want to say one thing about the developers of the fiser vaccine the um the two doctors from turkey they're billionaires and they still live in their same apartment in istanbul and they have no reason or or any desire to uh move it on up so to speak so i think that's pretty amazing that they you know they're dedicated to their mission and money really doesn't have all that allure to them and they're still living in their original apartment yeah they're really they're global heroes they should get an award or a Nobel prize or something uh so uh stefanie you know the uh cdc with its uh what do you want to call it struggling credibility it's still struggling as far as i'm concerned they reduced the quarantine period um and and i still haven't figured out maybe you guys know the answer whether it's uh two seven days or ten days or seven yes that's right yeah so can you talk about that what why did they do that and how does it affect us well i think well i mean as far as i understand the directions are you can go to a week if you've got a test that shows your uh negative and otherwise you go to tan so i guess it has to do with when it is that the symptoms show because that's the trend is that the symptoms people can be exposed and not show any symptoms until the 10th day uh although other show on the second day but i think they've nailed down the curve for where it is that the extent the extent of the time period for expressing these symptoms so um but most people do it at four if you don't usually most the 64 of the population do it at the at the fourth day anyway so i think that that is brilliant and i think it's late because i think that they knew a lot about this before i've heard a lot about it over months and that that has been a huge stumbling block especially for hawaii i mean that 14 day quarantine is a hardship out here for anybody i mean you can't i mean people don't even go on vacation for 14 days i mean they come here and they face a quarantine and i don't have an effect in hawaii won't it it's a huge effect i think people are going to want to come now because they can maneuver around that and uh i know i was in a hotel in waikiki a couple a month or so two months ago i mean they were really harassing everybody like oh are you here on quarantine are you quarantine it was constantly all the service people were reminded so that was a good thing that they were participating in making sure people were in the quarantine but anyway i believe it's a little late but it is going to benefit hawaii because people could face uh the week with a test and we got to make sure that demi here's about this i hope you're going to write him a short note about let him let him know that he can reduce the quarantine well i think Cynthia i want to talk to you um about redfield and about others who have said this is going to be a bleak winter um the worst winter imaginable uh tautchi has said that also so what i don't understand is so you have the vaccine coming out and okay it's not here yet but it should be here what in early december maybe at least in small doses and and still they say it's going to be a really tough winter uh how do you reconcile those things how do you feel about the winter and by the way let me add footnote is that your friend Pompeo is having a christmas party with 400 people and of course they're not they're not as to wear masks he's a really special guy um people are going to do that sort of thing so how do you feel about this being a tough winter well i think that tautchi's exactly right i think redfield is right on the money because we added a million cases okay in six days six days in the beginning it took us you know six weeks to add a million cases i think it was even more than that right it's so the further we go the the more we add in shorter period of time so it's just expanding exponentially so fast three that like like winston said three thousand people died yesterday alone in a hospital that just and we're breaking records every single day i hear we broke another record we broke another record and so it's not just what fautchi and redfield are saying the data bears out to that too and people that aren't paying attention i mean you you have to be shocked unless you're not paying attention at all and in regards to the the vaccines there's actually two different kinds of vaccines one has that mrsa or mrna excuse me that um memory stuff it's it's supposed to teach the cells in your body to remember what that virus is so that you can go out and fight it in a stronger way whereas the other some of the other vaccines are just straight old school vaccine um technology so there's only i think it's just moderna and visor on biotech that that have this mrna vaccine so that'll be a choice not so much who the manufacturer is or even the price or even the the side effects but actually that the technology of the of the vaccine itself yeah we're gonna find we're gonna find out more about that and i i i would i would predict that one of them will emerge as the one everybody wants you know but you may not have your choice about that so Winston um you know let's talk about um the republicans in congress let's talk about uh getting relief from covid let's talk about um some kind of new cares bill let's talk about what you know what's happened here since may when the democrats uh try to do something over two trillion dollars and nothing has happened since what are the prospects for the nine hundred million dollar bill that the house recently passed what are the prospects in the in the senate are we going to see anything before the end of this administration didn't uh oh who's the awful one mitch mcconnell the worst one didn't he say that that was job number one was passing some corona virus relief bill after the elections so this is you know under a trillion dollars nine hundred and sixty billion or something nine hundred and eight nine hundred and eight i won't give or take a hundred billion after a while that's just after a while exactly billion year billion and the stock market hit new record highs so you know we're obviously not worried about that on some level the people that think about all this stuff in the meantime we're having janet yeltsin appointed because you're going to be our new lady-in-chief of the the dough which is uh you know the the world's moving on and it's it's accounting for corona virus it's accounting for vaccines coming out uh it'll pass because the republicans want to get something out if nothing else just to save georgia or to try and save georgia although i don't know if that strategy is going to work and they realize that their constituents are actually hurting what did i think uh joe biden said it was a down payment on um relief that we needed to have or something akin to that so obviously when he takes over the the the pipes are going to open up as much as possible and i don't know how he's going to accomplish that but it'll be in a some bipartisan fashion i actually the um you know i mean i think he's he's being very cautious in who he's picking so i i um i'm interested to see how this is going to roll out but he he we're going to find out on january third after the georgia elections how much how much leeway he gets in things because otherwise he's going to face a really obstruction as congress the other thing is that you know astrazeneca they had the accidental release of their vaccine that showed when they gave it in two equal doses it was only effective 60 of the time but when they gave a much uh a smaller dose a half dose for the first injection they reached 90 uh efficacy so they should i don't believe it was accidental i think that they really need to be experimenting with a lot of different types like do we give twice as much for the second one or the first one or whatever we're going to get 20 million doses in america from moderna this year and 50 million by the end of the year this year so that's going to cover a lot of health care workers nursing home folks but it's they're spaced out by a month too now that's not going to count for and that has been a lot of the health care desk is is is older people especially in homes but it's not all of them it's just a lot of them we're going to see a huge number literally of probably hundreds of thousands dying before the end of january so we have to buckle our seat belts and no i think probably this next week is just going to produce horrific numbers as thanksgiving starts to spread and before christmas it's just going to be it's going to be awful so these vaccines johnson johnson's coming out with a one-shot vaccine they're they're looking by february so there's different things coming down the pike but also you you mentioned about which shot do you take we don't get a choice when you go to the doctor to get your flu shot i don't think he has it or she has a choice i think they just give you the shot that they have in the pharmacy the same for for shingricks you know there's one shingrik shot um and you mentioned about if people have covid right now should they get it it looks like all of their antibodies disappear within six or eight months anyway so i would say they probably should get it to train the body like uh synthia was saying with the mrna that that maybe this um you know all of us of a certain age did have chicken pox but we're still supposed to get the shingricks because of that so even though we have the virus in our bodies we need the the protective one of the reasons that it takes you know 10 years customarily well yeah that's right and you need to re-vaccinate scenarios and i suggest to you that we go into this now with actually deploying the the various vaccines um that's really phase four that's phase four trials involving millions of people and and we're gonna have to learn about all of these questions and Moderna Moderna and Pfizer have not released their phase three test results yet we have to remember that so we're all guinea pigs in this together but um well Pfizer gave their test results to the cdc for the phase three because usa today yesterday said they hadn't given out their their face maybe not to the public yeah maybe not to the public but they may request on November 20th for emergency approval they would have had to give everything including the raw data yeah and like i said they have a vested interest in this and as i said months ago you know this is not an american effort this is a worldwide effort a million chinese people have already received their sino sinovac uh shots russians have been getting theirs so it's it's out there you agree that uh you agree with stefanie we ought to bring chinese doctors in if we did not have foreigners staffing our healthcare system it would absolutely collapse open the doors bring in the qualified people pay them well they are working under unbelievable conditions right now and wherever they're from they are welcome in my nation okay all right so tim i want to turn to something that winston um just mentioned in passing and that is the political side of this this is a kind of trump mini me uh person who has blonde hair and wears ball caps who was talking yesterday and he was he was telling the republicans in georgia uh not not to come down not to vote uh in the runoffs in georgia on january fifth i thought that was fairly bizarre but how do you think that's all going to go what what are the chances that those runoffs will you know turn control of the senate to the democrats would be a wonderful thing but remember everybody's in there spending money and pulling strings well there's now four days of registration left in georgia and i know that the effort to get more and more people even beyond the november third election to register is going to make a huge impact and i think the counterpoint is the the trump mini me i forget his name he's not doing anyone any favors and by the fact that he's um saying don't trust don't trust the election and therefore don't don't vote for these two senators it's because um the the governor and the secretary of state aren't agreeing with donald trump so it's a scorched earth policy working against the republicans i can't figure it out i really can't one more question before we you know go for last words here um is this um you know trump is a wall right now all he's doing is grumbling and making 46 minutes uh diatribes in the white house you know of no consequence to anybody that the media is not even reporting it really they're not showing you any of the tapes of it um so my question is uh you know what wouldn't we be better off if he were doing something um he's a wall he's he's completely he's better than it is well jay i i get i get your question before you even uh finish it and here's my here's my evidence when george bush barack obama and bill clinton have to come out and say we're going to be the poster child for taking this vaccine to counteract the anti-vaxxers the anti-trump disbelievers of covid 19 uh there's no other way to say this that's one hell of a statement that's one hell of a public relations um maneuver to address our covid 19 problems i mean i find it absolutely ridiculous that they have to step in and fill the void because donald trump is m i a missing in action okay let's go for last words stephanie what do you want to leave people with what's the i want to say that the military say he ought to be he ought to be charged with dereliction of duty it's dereliction of duty right now he's doing nothing second of all the point i think made by synthia the rRNA in europe the the moderna it's not moderna it's m and then there's a slash rna because it's ribonucleic acid and that is a part of dna which is de oxy ribonucleic acid so that's the new way of doing vaccines so all of the vaccines are going that's different from polio and smallpox and all of this now there's not not any of those kinds of dangers with this particular vaccine but i did hear about that and i thought that was interesting and important to understand that we are taking on something new in our bodies and it's supposed to be effective and actually safer so hopefully we're going to study that going forward yeah what do you want to leave with people i oh gosh i have two things and they're short i promise the first is i don't know is i think that doctors and nurses should be the first ones to get this if there is a problem those are the last people we need to be out there and having a problem that worries me a lot okay i don't think trump is m i a just because we don't see him does not mean he's not doing anything he is a busy boy running around the white house destroying all you know incriminating evidence just very scorch-earth policy plan to leave biden with a bunch of excuse my language crap a big pile of nothing so that he doesn't even get to hit the ground running he has to hit the ground and undo all of the nonsense that trump is trying to pull right now so with just because we don't see him doesn't mean he's not doing anything good point winston well going back just yeah the next 48 days we we just need to keep a mind over there at the tantrum happening but there's nothing we can do about it at the end of the day biden's going to come in he's going to have to just throw everything off the table find a clean surface to work on and go from there because that's what he's getting anyway but as i've said for many many months rely on yourself help your neighbors see who needs you to go to cosco or safeway wash your hands wear your mask exercise individual personal responsibility because that's all we got right now our state has stepped up a little bit our city has had great testing but at the end of the day it's up to you to do the best that you can individually and that will bleed out into society because we're not going to get a lot of help from other areas as far as control of this virus that i'm seeing nationally um and you know okay in in in other ways thank you winston tim um close for me will you what should we i'll keep this really sure because i'm sure time is an issue make haste january 20th but then trump's going to be running around just trying to make everything as miserable as he can as you stephanie thank you synthia thank you winston aloha you guys next week or rediscovering america on wednesday aloha


This is the time for testimony. So let's give up for Brian. Come on now. He takes some courage to be here and Brian wants to share some things that God has been doing in his life. And there's a lot of things that he's going to share actually few testimonies, not just one. So God's been doing a lot of great things in his life. So we're going to take a step at a time and we're going to ask him, first of all, I already said Brian, but say your name and where you're from. Brian Pascoe, Washington. Well, nice, nice. So Brian, can you share with us just in a few words how you came to our church? We know that you're recent. How long ago you came and how it came about that you came to our church and kind of got plugged in? Well, it's been about maybe a good five months from now. I discovered you guys as a church through YouTube, watching Vladimir's videos on YouTube. That's nice. So it's about five months ago that you've been coming now. And as you see, Brian has been here every Sunday, every Wednesday, and he's been faithful coming. And so you find out through YouTube. And so you remember what sermon you were watching?  Nice, nice. So yeah, YouTube, as you guys know, we have a YouTube channel and we have a website. We have a lot of incredible resources. If you have people outside of the town or family members, if you got blessed with something, don't be afraid to share it. Post it on your Facebook and your Twitter. Call your friend, your family member. Hey, check it out. You never know. God can do amazing, great things. And as you hear Brian, that's how he came about the church and God changed his life. So kind of share a little bit. What were you experiencing before you came to church? And how did, how come into church helped you overcome certain problems and issues in life? One, I guess the main concern that I had or the main issue that I really had is really bad anxiety, like really bad anxiety. That's what really brought me closer or back into, into church. You know, actually, that's what kind of prompted me to start seeking God initially. And that's when I found Vlad and Hungry Generation Church online. So can you tell us a little bit more about this issue of anxiety? How, how does this issue affected you, affected your family, your work? How did it affect your mind, your sleep? All these, all these things. So we want to just know the extent of the problem. He was really overwhelming. He was almost paralyzing like mentally and physically. I remember not being able to sleep for a numerous amount of nights, you know, and that kind of spun out of control and made even worse. I wasn't really able to really be there for my family. You know, I was really emotional. Like I said, I really wasn't able to sleep. It was almost like a bad dream. Like when you have a really bad dream, you wake up and you have that feeling over you, you have heaviness over you. That's kind of paralyzing. It was like that, but like times three. So it was like that, you know, periodically as I was going to fall asleep, it would hit me, you know, it was like just like a wave of ice. Like it was just bad throughout the day. I couldn't, I couldn't really work. I'd, I'd be in my own cubicle there, you know, holding tears in, you know, crying for myself. It was, it was really weird. What about your, your health? I know you mentioned that it was, it was starting affecting and taking a toll on your health. Yeah, it got really to the point where I couldn't breathe. I ended up going to the hospital like numerous times, three or four times. That caused a lot of havoc financially, you know, I was under a lot of stress. And so how did you, what happened then? How, how did God come through for you? Uh, really it came through mentorship between Vlad and yourself, Elia.  His grace reached me. Come on, let's put our hands together. On many occasions, on many occasions we would meet up with, with Brian and he would stop by my house, his, his work is really close to my house. We would stop by and after work we would pray and just trust God. Is it true? That's, that's right. That's right. We would actually meet every almost every other day after work, say a quick prayer, you know, encouraging words that you'd share with me, really, really hit home for me. You know, it really made me build a stable relationship with God and really opened my eyes spiritually. So thank you for that. Okay. So wonderful. And now, how do you, how do you feel now? We know how, how, how severe the problem is. What's now, how, how's the anxiety, how that fear, do you experience it? How do you sleep? No more fear. I'm able to sleep fine now. You know, I'm not, I'm not taking any medication. It's all for glory to God. Wonderful. Come on, let's put our hands together for Jesus. God can do the impossible.  Not necessarily that God creates him or, or sends it to our life, but like the Bible says, he takes the bad and he turns into good. And so he can use sometimes these things to encourage us and to show us, look, I am the way I am your source. I am everything that you need. If you come to me, I will help you.  I will show you my grace. And like Brian said, where pills couldn't reach him, God's grace was able to reach and help him. Amen. Let's put our hands together for Jesus. Now, Brian is just loaded with testimonies today. So now it's actually sort of ties into this testimony because of his medical issues with fear and anxiety. He's had to go to the doctors all the time, to the hospitals all the time. And he wrecked up some, you know, of course, you have to pay for everything. He wrecked up some debt or some money that he owed. And so I want him to share a testimony of what God did in this area. Well, due to my numerous visits to the doctor and different doctors and numerous doctors, I racked up about $3,500 worth of bills. And I remember one time Myra gave me all the bills and told me, hey, you need to pay these today. I wasn't paying attention to them. I was actually ignoring them to be quite honest, sorry. But she gave me them and she's like, she said, you need to pay them today. So I went on a quick break and I was calling them individually because it's not just from one doctor. There's actually like three different doctors for the one visit that you take. So I was getting frustrated. I had filled out an application for financial assistance. I think it's what they call it through Cadillac. And I was frustrated in the fact that I couldn't email it to them directly.  There's really no way around it. So I got upset, actually almost to the point where I was almost angry. And I remember in that private booth that they have there at GISA, I was almost talking to myself and saying, God, you better show up. I need you right now. I can't pay these bills. I barely have enough to cover what I owe. I can't do this. And I was actually kind of angry at God in a way. And I remember moments after I actually was telling my coworker there that I was about to take a break and maybe go in and turn this application in when he actually had told me that his relative worked for Cadillac and was able to maybe help process my application into my surprise. About $1300 right now, we're written off and I'm actually in the process of working on getting the other half to complete the $3,500. Okay, come on, Charles. Let's put our hands together for Jesus. Sometimes even in our weakest moments and the most frustrating moments, God comes through in very unique ways, through through co-worker, through a friend, through, and sometimes it's through a very random thing. In his case, through a worker and God, you know, helped cover the first half of the bill, God canceled. And they said if the first half is going to God cancel, most likely the second half will get canceled, right? That's right.  So let's put our hands together for Jesus. So Brian, I want you to share one last thing. You kind of already mentioned it, but about home groups. Church, we have those of you that may be new. We have things called home groups. This is where we get together on a smaller scale, maybe three, four, five of us, six of us, girls with girls, guys with guys now. Also, we have a Vladimir and Lana, they're leading a married home groups where married couples come together. But we have these home groups where we get together and we kind of just connect on a personal level. We discuss the word of God. We learn things in person. And if we have any questions, we address that. And so this is the home groups that we have.  And I just want to, Brian, if you could just share briefly for 30 seconds of what home group did for you and your spiritual walking in general, just in your life. How did it benefit you? Well, it really woke me up spiritually before, you know, actually I had grown up in a church and had walked away for, you know, numerous reasons. But besides that, it kind of woke me up in a way where before I was in a kind of a routine mundane relationship with God, you know, and in where coming to home group, I was able to come back to the fundamentals, you know, and being in an environment that I feel comfortable in. You definitely feel the love amongst us guys.  Even when you're in service, you're able to connect different pieces and put them together. So that's definitely a big help to me. How did your relationship with God improve since you started coming?  And then where you're able to apply certain things that you learn in home group to your own life. That's right. Come on, let's put it together for Brian for sharing this assessment. He can go ahead and take a seat.


Rwy'r gymryd, ac rydyn ni'n mwyntio'n gwiaeth y lluniau'r oedl Aberkirifol ddim yn gydych chi. Yr eitem gwych gan gyfnod 1 o 6 pan lluniau 5 october 2021. Rydyn ni'n mwyntio'n gwiaeth y mynd i wedi gwypo am hynny i'r gymryd, ac rydyn ni'n mwyntio Tom, Ian a John Sinclair, gan gy円ig i ni'n wneud hynny i gyda'r chyf urgellol. Ymgylchau oherwydd yr ydyntig iawn o'r cyfnod, ac mae'n ynch yn ôl i gynnwys ar â'i gweitharau oedl. Felly, maen nhw ymwlad yw'r hyn o blwg, rydyn ni'n rhaid o'r cyflamwch ar y ddenedig, neu o gwmwlad pan gen i newidol ar y cwestiynau gweld. Yr ystafell yma yn gweithio y gendro dros gyflau'r grefnig sy'n ddim gweithio'r grefnig y cyflau, ac mewn gweld sy'n ddod i chi'n cymdeithasを adeithio. Marwch eich gweld y ddysgolol i ni'n eu gennymau newid yma. Mae'n ctynnu am hynny'n myneddol i'n gweld chwarae o'i berthynas a'r ddysgol. Ieiddiwch chi gael ymddangas am ymddangas a Dwy Alexander i ddechrau'r cyd-dodd i Caesif Hyrwyngiannol ac rwyf wedi'i gweithio i gyd i wneud o gweithio'r cyd-dodd i'r cyddodd, ac wedi'u gwybod i gynhychiad bod o fewn gwybod i'r cyd-dodd, am cettec ddaethol yn ei gweithio ar ymd ещё? Rwy'n bod yn aggrifennu gyd? Rwyf wedi'u gweithio gyd? Nid yw? Ysgol. Item 2 is the matters that we are going to take in private. Oh, please, Paul. Just regarding declarations of interest, just to refer members and public to my register of interests I am an existing councillor on these building council at the moment. Thank you very much for that, Paul, and the record is so noted. Item 2, I'm seeking the committee's agreement to take agenda items 7, 8, 9 and 10 in private. Agenda item 7 is an update to the guidance on the code of conduct. Item 8 is consideration of the committee's work programme. Item 9 is an item in relation to cross-party groups. Item 10 is for the committee to consider an approach to the UK elections bill legislative consent motion, which falls to this committee. Are we in agreement to take those items in private? Yes. We are. We are now on to agenda item 3, the subordinate legislation. I would like to welcome Tom Arthur, Minister for Parliamentary Business, and the officials John Sinclair and Ian Thompson, who are joining us online. Tom, would you like to make an opening statement in relation to this item? Thank you very much, convener. Good morning. It is a pleasure to appear before the committee. I have many fond memories of being a member of this session. I congratulate all members on their appointment, and I congratulate you, convener, belatedly, on your appointment as a convener. At the outset, I want to put on recognising your facts to all who have contributed in the process of devising this revised model code, in particular key stakeholders, including board chairs, commissioners or the Standards Commission, for their input in this process and continuing engagement. I want to put on recognising your facts to your Scottish Government officials. Finally, I want to offer my sincere thanks to all those who participated in the consultation who ran over the autumn and winter of last year and early into this year. The Scottish Parliament demonstrated its commitment to the promotion of high standards in public life. By passing the ethical standards in public life Scotland Act 2000, it is one of the earliest statutes. The act introduced a new ethical framework under which Scottish ministers were required to issue a code of conduct for councillors and a model code of conduct for members of devolved public bodies listed in schedule 3 of the act as amended. Each listed public body is required to develop an individual code based on the model code. Both codes of conduct are based on nine key principles, duty, selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability and stewardship, openness, honesty, leadership and respect. Responsibility for ethical standards policy including the model codes and councillors codes rests with the Scottish Government. However, the independent offices of the Standards Commission and the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland have responsibility for the day-to-day operation of the codes. The initial councillors and members codes were approved by the Scottish Parliament in December 2001 and brought into effect on 1 May 2003. The current version of the members code was amended in 2014. The Scottish Government recognised that a number of new developments have occurred since the model code was last reviewed in 2014 and that it is important to take account of such changes and also provide users with an opportunity to contribute to the revised model code. A public consultation on the revised model code of conduct was carried out by the Scottish Government in October 2020, running for 16 weeks through to the beginning of February 2021. An analysis report of the sponsors has been published and is available on the Scottish Government website. The consultation sought views on the amendments to the existing model code with the aim of establishing whether the proposed revisions made it clearer, easier to understand, raised awareness of the use of social media, changed the rules on gifts and hospitality, highlighted that bullying would not be tolerated and, importantly, whether the proposals were proportionate and appropriate to be included in the model code. We also welcome comments on any aspect of the model code. A total of 45 responses to the consultation were received from a wide range of stakeholders. The overall view from respondents was very positive, agreeing that the model code required updating and that the proposed changes achieved the aim of making it clearer and took account of issues such as the use of social media and highlighted that bullying and harassment would not be tolerated. We have carefully considered the responses to the consultation and the proposed changes have been made to strengthen the model code and provide clearer information for its users. It is important to emphasise that the ethical basis of the revised model code remains unchanged from the original model code. While we want to make the model code easier to understand, we also want to take the opportunity to take account of developments in our society, such as the role of social media. We also want to strengthen it by reinforcing the importance of behaving in a respectful manner and to make it clear that bullying and harassment is completely unacceptable and should not be tolerated. There is greater emphasis on the requirement for individual board members to take personal ownership of their behaviour by ensuring that they comply with their postcode conduct and that they personally take steps to understand their role and compliance. We feel that the proposed changes to the model code will help to make it more practical and easier for users to apply in their everyday roles. In concluding, I would also like to highlight that we are appropriately at both the council's code, which is currently being considered by Parliament, and the model code has been aligned. I would now welcome the opportunity to answer any questions that the committee may have on the revised model code of conduct for members of the devolved public bodies. Thank you very much for that contribution, Tom. Just before I come to my first set of questions, can I just remind everyone that the actual microphones are operated by broadcasts, so we don't need to press buttons or ensure that it is on.  I will indicate who is going to speak so that broadcasts know who that is. Once again, Tom, I thank you for that short introduction. There are a couple of questions that arise from it, and I suppose to take them in reverse order from the way I was originally going to give them to you. The model code has been around for a while. Why was it felt, or why was the need felt, to make the amendments at this stage, and indeed not earlier or later? Or does it form part of a rolling programme where the codes will be reviewed regularly? Thank you very much, convener. That's an important question. As I touched on in my introductory remarks, the original code was revised in 2014. I think that the two points I want to highlight, was formed a decision to progress with a revision at this particular juncture, which was firstly the amount of time that has passed since 2014. Indeed, I think that I touched it several times on the issues of social media and bullying and harassment, and I know that there have been significant reflections across the public sector and private sector and world society around codes of conducts with whether they are fit for purpose. Indeed, there was something at this committee that was considered in great detail during the last session of Parliament. We are reflecting the changes that have happened in society over the past seven years. That was an appropriate juncture in which to consider the code and to revise it. The other point that I want to touch on in my opening remarks is that the councillor's code is also being revised at this moment, and as I made clear, re-introduced at a similar time at the beginning of the day, very close to the beginning of the devolution era. If the cause of councillor's code itself has been considered for revision, it was deemed appropriate that there should be a alignment between the two codes, where appropriate. It is to summarise the two factors that have informed the decision to carry out the revision. Of course, going forward into the future, we will always take account of developments and changes and will inform future decisions on when it would be appropriate to revise code in the future. It is not a case where the code should be revisited every five years, but there needs to be a sensitivity to the changes in social understanding of behaviour, social understanding of attitude to feed into the code when it is appropriate. That would be fair. That is a very good definition, convener. I think that the point that you raised about whether or not we should get the process set in advance is an automatic review given the elapsing of a particular number of years of fix and interest and the point that I want to be happy to reflect on. I suppose that flowing from that, this code is specifically in relation to members of public bodies and you have talked about the councillor's code of conduct. I suppose that I will express it as a concern. Surely there is no need to have identical codes for both because both those institutions and responsibilities are different. Are you confident that the code for members of public bodies reflects the unique areas that members of public bodies serve on an answer to rather than just repeating the code and retitling it? That is an important point. What I would draw members' attention to and commit his attention to is that this is a model code and it will be up to the individual bodies listed and scheduled free of the act to apply that code as appropriate to their own organisations. Obviously, the codes that they seek to apply will have to be agreed to by Scottish ministers but the point that we make about the need for a flexibility to recognise not just the distinction between public bodies and local authorities but the variety of public bodies that exist is why we have a model code as opposed to prescribing one overarching code for each public body. I hope that reassures you on the point that you raised. It also reassures the fact that each individual public body needs to look at this specifically based on the model code and I assume that if there is a drift away from the model code you would expect an explanation of why that item had been omitted. Yes, there is obviously the established commission will provide your support and guidance as well. It will be for individual codes to respond to the model codes should Parliament agree to it and there will be a process that individual boards will both submit their revised codes to ministers for consideration. Ultimately, the organisations that are best placed to interpret the model code as applicable to their organisation are those respective organisations. Thank you, Tom. I am going to pass over to Tess White who has a few questions which, if Tom, if it is not for you to answer please call on John Sinclair or indeed Ian Thompson as necessary. Tess. Thank you, convener. The Scottish Government conducted a consultation on revising the model code. Do you say to what extent respondents supported your proposed changes and how were their views taken into account in the revised code? Thank you very much, Ms White. Yes, we conducted a consultation as I said from October to February this year and we had 45 respondents. There was a variety of views expressed within the consultation as one would imagine but overall there was broad support for what we were trying to achieve with the revised model code and as I touched on in my awkward remarks removal of part of information that was not necessarily applicable or required and as I also touched on reflecting the changing mores of the past seven years strength and guidance on, for example, social media, bullying and harassment and indeed collective responsibility another key area where there is broad support to emerge from the consultation was in the adoption of a first person narrative throughout the code as well and this is really to effectively strengthen the sense of responsibility that individual members of boards have for taking ownership of their responsibilities to understand the code and to adhere to it. I'm happy to bring in Ian Thompson if there's any further points that he thinks would be worth sharing with the committee to ensure that I'm giving you a useful next slide. Minister, you haven't really answered my question so I can go back again is to what extent did the respondents support your proposed changes and how were their views taken into account in the revised code? Apologise Ms White if you thought and ask the question. The revised code as it was received broad support and of course the particular issues that were raised which were available in the document were considered and incorporated in our technical language but as I don't know if you hear me it would be possible if I could bring in Ian Thompson who perhaps can expand on that and give me more detail to address the points that you raised. Please do Tom, Ian. Just to explain there was strong sense that the revised code was queer, simple, easy to understand and particular was so compared to the current model code moreover many also felt that the changes made to the model code had helped to make it more helpful, practical and easy to apply to respondents every day rules. We also published the consultation responses as well so there's that on the public record as well. Thank you convenie we'll look at those offline. My second question minister is in section 6 talks about inappropriate behaviour so inappropriate behaviour can be subjective and opinion, who actually decides what appropriate and inappropriate behaviour is? Of course that I think with regards to so did you refer to section 6 member? Treatment of others yes, it's treatment of others. Treatment of others sorry it's just I want to make sure that I'm referring to the appropriate part of the model code and when I'm responding to you that's in section 3 you refer to section 3 under the use of social media conduct in the chamber in the committee and treatment of others. I think you might be looking at the wrong part of the wrong document. My second question is then why has the model code been written in the first person and what impact do you expect this will have? I apologise for the confusion I heard you saying section 6 the general conduct in section is section 3 of the revised model code that is before the committee today and what it touches and it gives definitions about bullying and harassment in the nature of it and ultimately regards to the point we make about being subjective it is about what the individual feels in a particular situation and set of circumstances and that is a definition that I think is more widely across the range of institutions with regards to the point relating to the first person narrative it is a touch on my answer to the point this is about strengthening the narrative that it is for individual board members to take responsibility no one to familiarise with the code but to ensure that they understand the code and adhere to it and indeed we appropriate to seek further guidance from their board or their chair to ensure that they are complying with the code so it is about taking ownership and personal responsibility so that is why the decision is taken to move to the first person narrative which was touched upon in the consultation and I think we received broad support not for many individuals who created it but there was broad support for the move to the first person narrative and as I said it is really just about strengthening that ownership that board members would expect to take for their conduct and understanding of the code thank you minister thank you Tess I'm going to call Edward Mountain now who I understand has some very specific questions about the code so again Tom if someone else is better placed to answer it on your team we'll find to hear evidence from them Edward can I pass to you please thank you convener good morning minister Edward Mountain relates to category 5 has land and buildings I wonder if you think that section 4.1h specifically about rich, dribble interests in houses, land and buildings is compatible or at the same standard that is for MSPs are the two the same I'm not convinced they are and do you think that could lead to confusion that's a very specific question I think it would be more appropriate if I invited Ian Thompson to address that point thank you Tom can I pass to you Ian minister I'm excited as to the terms of the MSPs code so I can't comment on that what we've done is clearly we've worked with the standards commission and the ethical standards commissioner to develop this code so I can give all evidence at the moment to the enemy thank you very much sorry Tom I was just going to invite Edward if he had a comment on that now I'm unmuted what my concern is minister if I can articulate it a bit more clearly it says in that paragraph I have a register of interests where I am right or interest in houses land and buildings you'll be aware I believe that MSPs for example do not have to register their private houses or record them on their register of interests and I wonder if this specific question may cause confusion to those people on public bodies that they may feel they have to register their private houses which goes in excess of what MSPs are requested to do minister minister I take the point that you're making and I will reflect on it and as I said the document itself will be complemented by guidance produced by the standards commission so there may be an opportunity to address any confusion that may emerge certainly this is not something that is immersed through the consultation so in any to any great extent but I appreciate the point you're making it's one of a happy to reflect on it and indeed if there is a case where the standards commission is an independent body and it's for them to determine what guidance they produce certainly it's something that we can engage with if it is felt and if there is an emerging need to address the point but to say this is not something that has emerged in a great extent through the consultation process but I do appreciate the point you're making on a happy to reflect on it Can I ask you Tom, was there the intention to include the dwelling house? I think with regards to that I would like to reiterate the point about how this language was formulated and developed I understand how it's developed and I understand it reflects indeed the council's conduct I just wonder whether or not the question of whether a dwelling house would be covered was considered or whether it was not thought about at the time and I don't mean that in any disrespect or absent way I'm sorry I was just wondering whether my apologies Ian I was just wondering whether or not a dwelling house was intended to be caught by that or it was thought about and the answer was no and it's not caught by the drafting No, I mean it comes down to the actual board member and their requirement to declare a register of one interest if they're required to register an interest under category 5 in terms of paragraph 4.18 they're required to provide the public body standards or for some of the full address of the house, land or buildings what's published on the public body's website and made public available is not necessarily required to be detailed to be as detailed that part 4.18 has not changed in terms of from the last code so that's the position of that So actually it's placing the onus individual and hence the reason that it's written in the first party to comply with the second aspect of that where it is significant and relevant or bear upon the work and operation of the public body That's good Edward, would you like to come back so no other members of the committee have comments I think Bob Doris does My any concern is I think it puts an emphasis on declaring your private residence which is MSPs we don't have to do and I think it'd be useful to remove private residence from this requirement to bring them in line to what we're doing which I think would be equitable and fair That point's noted Edward Bob, can I bring you in? Yeah, thank you I think you may have moped up what I was hoping to clarify with your comments Minister, I'm just checking this is not a general obligation to declare your dwelling house there has to be significant and relevant and bear upon your interest and operation of the public body so just to put that on the record that it's not a general obligation to declare that but I suppose that the wider issue that Mr Mountain is raising is that this mirrors the obligations on councillors and not the obligations on MSPs Perhaps the question we should be asking perhaps not today but at another time is the difference between the obligations on councillors and the obligations on MSPs rather than the obligations on members of these boards so I would welcome your thoughts on that but just for clarity that there's no general obligation to register your dwelling house Thank you, Bob Minister Just on that particular technical point specifically for the implications of the language on that Minister, there will be no general there will be no general requirement to register a dwelling house and this again it's reflected in 4.18 and 4.19 it's an illness on the board members themselves to make that judgment Thank you for that Edward, I know you have a second more specific point can I return to you Thank you convener Just going to ask a question now on section 4.20b which is where at the relevant day the market value of any shares and securities in one specific company or body that I own have an interest of greater than £25,000 Minister, please explain where the figure of £25,000 came from Minister Yes this reflects an alignment to the MSP code in this area but I'll ask Ian Thompson just to get a bit more detail on it for you Mr Mountain That's a reflection on the MSP code as well so it's aligned with that it's also aligned in the councillor's code I've got no further comments to make on that So can I just press Ian, you don't know where the figure came from what was originally calculated that it is a figure that's represented in other codes as you said both councillor and MSP Yes, it's an existing figure from the 2014 code as well I'm excited as to the nature of that value certainly where the origin of it comes from Sorry, you may not be able to answer this Do you feel that the figures mean increased since the original code or was it £25,000 It's remained the same The figures remain the same it's remained £25,000 from the previous code Thank you, Edward Would you like to come back on that point? Yes I'm not totally confused because what the suggestion is that it's aligned to the MSP code but the previous question I asked to 4.18 isn't aligned to the MSP code so one seems to be one way and then the other way £25,000 seems a fairly arbitrary figure I mean, I don't fully understand that because £25,000 is a lot of money £10,000 is a lot of money £1,000 is a lot of money I don't understand where that figure's been plucked from It's not as if £25,000 investments in the Royal Bank of Scotland for example would give you a controlling interest I don't understand where that figure's come from, it seems to be arbitrary and I would like some clarity please on how that figure has been selected because just rolling it forward doesn't make it acceptable Thank you Edward so the clarification is not so much in relation to that figure appearing in here but why £25,000 seems to have been adopted for a figure for the MSP code councillor's code and indeed has been reflected in this Tom, I'm not sure with anyone who's with you can answer that would you undertake to identify for us where it came from? No, I have to take that away and clearly this is a figure that has been reached previously and hence it's reflected across a number of course including this has been touched on the MSP code which is of course a matter for Parliament to decide so I'm happy to take away and to seek to provide the committee with further information at later day as to how that particular figure was arrived at in the previous code but clearly it's something where there's been a general acceptance of hence it's against across multiple course That would be very helpful Tom and indeed if you and those that answer to your question why it's been identified it would be interesting to hear that as well Bob, I think you would like to come in Yes, I suppose my thanks to Edward Mountain because he's indicating various issues that I perhaps may not have picked up on that might require a little bit more scrutiny so I think that that's helpful to my colleague but can I just check with the minister during your consultation did individuals and groups broadly support the figure of 25,000 to be a figure and then you seek views on that so were people generally content with that but second, this is a model code so if a body thought that that value should be more or higher could they seek to vary that and seek the approval of ministers Thank you very much on the two points that you raised Mr Doris can you turn to Ian Thompson for further into that you don't mind Ian Sorry Mr Doris, can you repeat your question at a minister's point here Yes, so this model code was consulted upon I'm assuming the figure 25,000 was within that model code were there any particular objections to that value being placed within the model code and if not individual felt relatively content in relation to that don't want to get some information on that but also secondly ministers made reference to the fact that it could be adapted by various bodies and then seek Government approval so could that figure technically vary from different codes or has this one baked into whatever code is applied by each body that must be 25,000 pounds On the first point Mr Doris I can't recall the responses covering this section there so I'll need to provide further evidence on that from recollection nothing stood out on that part or that subject there as well in terms of the 25,000 figure you're right to point out that BORS must align with the model code I must admit that that's not being tested out in terms of the 25,000 pounds and I would think that it would be fairly well I think that we need to be at a judgment call in terms of what our decision made as to where if there was going to be flexibility within that number but I would say it probably would be baked in Thank you Thank you Bob Paul, could I bring you in please Thank you, convener excuse me, good morning minister In your opening statement you obviously explained the reasons for bringing the revision off the code through and it just I suppose in your opinion does the revised code place new responsibilities or sanctions on board members or has the exercise been aimed at increasing clarity Thank you Mr McLean The new model code doesn't change the sanction regime what it does seek to do is to provide better clarity and as I mentioned earlier there were certain elements which in the 2014 revision have been removed to improve clarity and the first person narrative that spoke about and has updated and strengthened language concerning social media and bullying and harassment so this was not about introducing the sanctions it was about really taking an opportunity to bring the code up to date to reflect societal changes and also to make it more user friendly and I think that as reflected in the consultation responses that is to a large extent what we have been able to achieve Thank you minister and just moving on from that I mean if the code is approved what work will be involved in the roll-out and in publicity Thank you Mr Cymru there will be a significant amount of regards to it I suppose that the first point just to stress as it is a model code it is for individual boards to take account of the revised model code should it be agreed to by Parliament and to apply that to their own revised code now the legislation it's a window a minimum period of three months from parliamentary approval to a board plan to begin the process to have to submit to ministers a revised code what we're doing is we're giving a six month period to allow boards to consider the revised code should it be approved by Parliament and to redevelop their own codes and to submit that to ministers the idea about who board meeting will take place so the actual process of boards adopting code is for them and of course there will be direct communication from the relevant officials so that boards are aware of the needs to commence work should it be approved by Parliament to update their own codes to reflect on the revised model code beyond that it will be for individual boards to make sure that and individual members to make sure that they are fully nice with the details of their own codes which will of course have to reflect the revised model code for example in terms of the process of individual board members it is incumbent upon them to familiarise themselves with the terms of their boards particularly code we do in the Scottish Government Public Audition to provide induction workshops which the Standards Commission and the Commissioner will be in sessions on and the Standards Commission can also to an extent provide guidance and ad hoc sessions where the source allows a variety of support that is available but principally it will be for boards to reflect on the model code subject to Parliament's agreement and within six months to submit to ministers their revised codes taking account of the new model code and subject approval of ministers it will then be for individual board members to ensure that they are informed of the day and take ownership of their boards own revised codes the way of having to express that but I hope it can be as a point thank you minister just a couple of matters I suppose the one that's most relevant in respect to this code is the training that's going to be required both for new members and existing members how do you plan to meet that need? thank you convener I think I touched on some of these points in my previous answer to Mr Macbillan effectively as has been touched upon by committee members it's a personal ownership for board members if one is appointed as a member of a public board that is incumbent on that individual to familiarise themselves with the code and they will have that provided to them by their chair I mean the reference to the induction workshops from your appointees to public boards at the public board region in the Scottish Government that helps the facility and made reference as well that also includes presentations from the standards commission and the commissioner so there are these opportunities I think it's also incumbent upon individual board members to take opportunities to continually update their awareness and understanding about how the code is applicable to their conduct and the operation of their board I appreciate that placing a heavy emphasis on individual responsibility but I hope that that is balanced by the support that is provided for new members as they are appointed and of course there is the resource of the standards officer within each board the individual board members can turn to seek further clarity or guidance upon the code and its applicability and to complement the codes of individual boards that are guidance from the standards commission and that will be under development and should this model code be adopted by Parliament guidance by the standards commission will be published on the website I hope that while placing a heavy emphasis on individual responsibility there is a range of support available including with that point of induction and going forward on a continuous basis might I'm very grateful minister and just really in conclusion just to clarify some matters in this the evidence session it is for this committee to report by the 27th of October in relation to the motion that you've brought before us and there are a number of outstanding matters that have been highlighted in the evidence can you undertake that this committee will have your responses to those so that we can attach it to the report for the chamber for the 27th of October is that something that you can agree to Yes, I'm certainly happy to respond by then to the committee and more endeavour to provide the most of those responses possible I'm very grateful to the committee for their probing questions and scrutiny it has exposed some areas which perhaps haven't been considered before and particularly the line of question from Mr Mountain I'm sure a number of us will want to reflect upon that not just specific to the council's code of the model code but the DMSP code so I'm very grateful to the committee for their contribution this morning and I'll be happy to write back to the committee ahead of the date that you referred to I'm grateful for that confirmation, thank you at that point I'm going to finish agenda item 3 which is the evidence and can I formally before I do so thank the minister and the officials in particular Ian for attending today and giving evidence to this committee, thank you we're now going to move to agenda item 4 for which I will request that the minister stays as we move to a slightly more formal element of this I would now like to invite the minister to formally move and speak to motion S6M-01125 that the standards, procedures and public appointments committee recommends that the model code of conduct for members of devolved public bodies be approved minister I'll live in the remarks convener to simply saying formally moved I'm grateful it is now an opportunity for members of this committee to make submissions Edward can I move to you thank you convener sorry I was gazing happily at the microphone to make sure I was unmuted but my first comment convener is in the interest of all public bodies elected individuals to comply with the highest standards of behaviour and openness to the people that elected them or appointed them and I would never move from that position however I am concerned that paragraph 4.19 does not actually reflect what is in the paragraph 4 sorry what is required for MSPs in fact it is a more onerous declaration whereas the explanation for paragraph 4.20 d was put in there because it complied with exactly what MSPs were required to do so we have a slight mismatch I convener would not be in a position to want to hold this up but I do believe that it is important that members of public bodies do not have to declare their private residence as part or be made to think they have to declare their private residence as part of the declaration that they may wish to make because I think it should be out with the scope as it is for MSPs and as far as the £25,000 figure is concerned it appears extremely arbitrary to me and therefore that is why I seek clarity on it I mean I know you will be in our position because we have limited time for the matter has to be considered by the Parliament what I would say is that I do not wish to hold this up but should this matter come to the Parliament and I have had insufficient answers to my questions I reserve the opportunity to comment on the LCM when it comes to the Parliament because at the moment I don't feel that it is equitable and fair to members of public bodies and nor have we had a beautiful explanation of the figure of £25,000 thank you convener Thank you for that Edward and I note and on the record is the position with regard to the statutory instrument subject to the information that the minister has agreed to send to us from your position I would just and this is not a criticism it's merely a clarification that when Ian gave evidence with regard to the £25,000 he mentioned both the MSPs code of conduct but also the councillers code of conduct to draw it in a line to that so I just merely put that out there to be on the record is there any other member of the committee who would like to make a submission my apologies Bob I can't see the chat function is there anything that you would like to say maybe no but you know what I'm content because you're not like you I'm grateful and on the undertaking from the minister Tom can I just return to you if there's anything that you would like to say by way of closing remarks before I formally put this to the committee I would just wish to be here today convener I'm very grateful to the committee for the consideration of this model code and as I previously indicated to you I will speak to you as soon as possible certainly heard of the date indicated as required and we'll seek to address in specific of the points raised by Mr mountain and provide clarity for that as possible I'm grateful the question is that motion S6M-01125 be agreed are we all agreed excellent I understand Edward that you wish to withstand on that decision so can I move to a formal vote so that your position is preserved Edward I'm going to call a division and I will come to each member of the committee and ask for your vote Bob Doris for against or in abstention I'm agreeable to the motion to be asked for I'm grateful Paul MacLennan for Edward Mountain abstain I'm grateful Edward Tess White abstain and I'm going to vote for this motion subject to the assertions from the minister the results are therefore three votes for and two abstentions the matter will now the motion is now passed and will pass to the chamber could I confirm with members that they are content for me to sign off the committee's report to Parliament which will be an essential element of this convener yes Bob can I just ask in signing off the report will that be a formal written report that will just note the division in the committee this morning for some nuances around the reassurances that the committee may or may not wish to seek from the minister there may be a slight variance in nuances around that so I'd be quite happy to get that clarified thank you for that question on a clarification it's a formal report that not only shows the vote but also shows the evidence that we heard in the matters that are outstanding which is why I've invited the minister on time for that to be attached to the report so that it comes before the chamber when it makes its decision if the committee is taking a view on the additional information that we would like to have from the minister on the reasons for that I would be keen to have a look at that before that was issued absolutely Bob the response from the minister will be passed around all committee members we will have an ability to talk about it let me put it that way that we're satisfied it'll return to the committee for the committee to look at what we are reporting to parliament on this matter is that correct? my apologies Bob I didn't mean to interrupt you we can agree by correspondence the report that's going to go to the chamber it's just it requires a signature as well so the committee can agree by correspondence thank you as long as we can we can agree by correspondence excellent thank you 1, 2, 5 we now move we now move to gender item 5 the cross party groups it is for this committee to take evidence from Morris golden MSP who is attending in person on the proposed CPG on the circular economy and then we'll hear from Pauline McNeill MSP who will be joining us remotely on the proposed CPG on medicinal cannabis good morning Morris thank you for coming to the committee and you are our first cross party group in person so welcome to that can I hand over to you to give us an introduction about the intentions of the cross party group and how you see it going forward yeah thank you convener members will be aware the circular economy is an economic system which revolves around circulating materials in as high value state as possible for as long as we can in order to extract the maximum value from them and that means that it encompasses a whole variety of of areas and sectors which are relevant to the people of Scotland as well as decision makers in this Parliament and the purpose of the group is really to both explore and address many of these issues we had nine MSPs from the Conservatives, SNP and Labour attending the initial meeting of the group and we've elected or nominated four of those to serve as convener and deputy convener again cross party and we also have as part of our secretariat and treasury for environmental organisations which will help support the group's functions I think that perhaps the biggest challenge for the group will be deciding which topic to begin with but we're very much looking forward to being established if the committee approves and exploring and addressing many of these issues I'm very grateful I hope you're open to some questions from the committee I'll take convener's privilege by starting I think you hinted on it there in your last statement it is an enormous cross party group that covers many areas and indeed overlaps the significant other cross party groups and in the application you identified the unique concept that warrants very specific consideration for the circular economy would you like the opportunity just to go into that little bit more detail yeah I mean there's obviously a plethora of areas some which are very much distinct to the circular economy CPG for example waste recycling incineration the waste hierarchy is very much exclusive but I do see the opportunity for example in doing joint CPGs with for example on renewable energy where there is a synergy with an existing CPG and that's something I've done in the past with the Nordic countries CPG which I established last term so there is an opportunity to work across but there's other areas including textiles for example that hasn't seen a lot of sector focus in this Parliament to date and I see that CPG is really adding value to our political discussions but also to the people of Scotland thank you that's very helpful so really the position that the CPG is taking although it crosses a number of other areas is almost unique in your ability to bring those areas together and follow the process around the whole system I think so and another area which would perhaps overlap is in the area of housing but I think the CPG offers a distinct vantage point in which to approach how we build our houses, how we heat our homes and I think that's where we can add value to existing CPGs and complement their activities thank you is there any from the committee that has a question that they would like to put to Morris ah we have come to the end of the questions thank you very much for attending again with regard to the procedural matters we close this aspect of it and deal with the actual registration in a separate one you're more than welcome to stay Morris but we're going to hear evidence from another cross-party group and if you're not here then we will of course be in touch but thank you very much for your time this morning thank you so much I've got to go across the way to my other committee now so I appreciate that thank you very much indeed do we need to pause to get Pauline? Can we have a short suspension of this committee to allow Pauline to come on on to blue jeans call and enter the suspension and issue committees welcome to Pauline McNeill MSP who is here to talk about medicinal cannabis Pauline can I hand over to you good morning yes it's medicinal cannabis not medical cannabis medicinal cannabis I'll say why first convener thanks to Sam Currier Clark for the support she's giving us and trying to set the group up which I hope the standards committee will be satisfied with so it's probably the first group of its kind it doesn't overlap with anything else and I was running informal meetings with a really amazing group of people who believe that there are credible health benefits to the use of cannabis and I thought that probably there would be interest if I set up a formal cross party group so we've already done quite a bit of work so the group seeks to better understand the benefits of medicinal cannabis and recognise case studies indicating its positive impact on patients suffering from a variety of conditions and it also seeks to support patients' rights to get access to the medicine you might be familiar with some high profile cases of young coal for example who cannot currently get access to prescribed bed light and has to pay for it privately but coal being able to take this medicine has reduced his convulsions by an incredible in fact he's hardly had any episodes so for some patients it is absolutely like life changing and we've heard evidence in the informal sense when people who speak serious health conditions have simply been cleared up by the use of certain types of cannabis products so it's in the public interest that we would examine the evidence-based research and seek to investigate case studies for those with chronic illnesses who would benefit from medicinal cannabis so the topics that we would anticipate was access to bed light and other cannabis-based drugs which have a high cost to get into the country more difficult now because of Brexit a red card at the state of Colorado in the US runs called medcan which is a card for medical cannabis users to show that their need is for health benefits patients rights the human rights of patients to access this versus public health and I personally feel quite strongly that it will be prevented from the use of a cannabis product of which there are many because of any laws or judgment calls on people who use it I suppose why did I do this my own father who had very severe arthritis used to say to me that if he ever legalised cannabis would I be the first person to go and get him some so he could alleviate his pain and suffering which he believed would have been a law-abiding a person he died the past five years ago and didn't get the chance but for many people they believe it will alleviate conditions like arthritis so that's what drove me to do this work so reducing stigma using the evidence base and working with the NHS in which we have a good relationship with the NHS because there is some political resistance to this but there is also a bit of interest in it as well and lastly legislation for cannabis so we want to explore whether there should be legislation you probably noticed that a lot more people just take cannabis tablets or cannabis products for health reasons but it's becoming big business now so we want to make sure that it's not something that only big business can control so we're interested in cannabis growing so convener that's the main purpose maybe I should just say that Rona Mackay agreed to convene it Oliver Mindell Conservative member Miles Briggs who has done a huge amount of work in this as well Monica Lennon MSP who's been part of the informal grouping it pulls through the MSP and Pam Duncan Glancy have already signed up a number of individuals which are on your papers to Scottish patient subgroup called PLE Scottish Cannabis Consulting and the MS Society Scotland I would expect a lot more interest in this with standards to prove her application thank you very much thank you for that evidence Pauline and again I'll open up to questions for the committee but take my privilege as convener to go first the purpose as you stated is about primary purpose is to collect and recognise the value of case studies that is clearly a hugely important way of finding out the actuality of the use of medicinal cannabis in real life do you see there being a significant number of case studies on which the CPG can base further evidence and research going forward yes I do we will have to use international examples and examples which might be anecdotal but nonetheless are very compelling we have had the chief medical officer and chief pharmaceutical officer address us and some agreement that we do need to ensure that we are running proper trials so that it is legal for a GP to prescribe certain cannabis products just now but GPs perhaps don't have the confidence that they might have so trials are really important so we want to make sure that we are pushing that door and I feel that that door is actually open for us I think that there is a lot of interest in it but as you would expect any government and any medical system they want to try to test it and do you feel that the CPG will give groups and other individuals perhaps the confidence to share evidence with you that they don't feel able to share at the minute with other organisations or indeed Government? I'm absolutely in no doubt convener of that I think the platform that this would give people who have felt no connection to be able to influence decision makers would be absolutely invaluable which is why I think it's important now to formalise what we're doing and I think there will be a great deal of interest in it and hopefully we can work constructively with the medical profession and the Government to do something in the next few years Thank you. Are there any questions from other members of the committee? No? Excellent. Well Pauline, as you know after your little evidence session we'll move into another agenda item to actually take the decision and the committee clerks will be in touch with you the outcome of that decision in due course but can I thank you for coming along to the committee this morning and expressing the views of the committee Thank you Thank you very much We now move to agenda item 6 the cross-party group approvals so if I can deal with the cpg application for the circular economy first are there any comments or questions before I formally move to test? Just to support it I think it's a very good cpg convener Are there any objections to the cpg being formally founded? No? Established Thank you. Formally established, good. Can I move to the medicinal cannabis and I'll pronounce it correctly this time Are there any comments from the committee before we take a decision? Yes, Tess? I'd also like to say a very good cpg fully supported Excellent Are we agreed that the cpg for medicinal cannabis be formally recognised? Yes Grateful We're now going to move to item 7 which we will conduct in private Can I just call a short suspension?


String frequently asked question. What is the best confidence card off for my network? This is by far the most common question they get from users and the answer is there is no best card off It depends on what you want to do, but I can give you some rules of thumb When doing network visualization of some hundreds of genes Producing a human functional network I will typically use a confidence card off in the range of 0.8 to 0.9 and then do network clustering to simplify the visualization I will use a lower card off for a physical network because the network is sparser and I will use a lower card off for other Organisms because they're less studied. However in the end choose whatever looks good for your network When doing network analysis my recommendation is very different I recommend using no card off, but using a probabilistic framework that correctly accounts for the confidence scores in string Not treating all edges as equal. That way you make use of all available data in your analysis