As you probably all know, SAS is a member of the DPEA Stkeholders’ Forum.
They are asking for our views on virtual meetings; what has worked well, what has worked less well and how you would like to see this service developing in the future. Comments should cover pre-examination meetings, hearings and inquiries.
If anyone has anything they would like us to include in our response, please let us know by 15 April.
1. In relation to virtual meetings what do you think has worked well?
2. In relation to virtual meetings what do you think has not worked well?
3. What do you see as the advantages of virtual meetings?
4. What do you see as the disadvantages of virtual meetings?
5. What aspects of these meetings work better virtually and what aspects work better in-person?
6. Did you find participating in a virtual meeting more or less demanding than in-person meetings?
7. Are in-person meetings, subject to satisfactory broadband connection, considered to be more or less daunting for unrepresented parties?
8. What obstacles are there to you participating in-person meetings?
9. What obstacles are there to you participating in virtual meetings?
10. What steps could be taken to improve your participation in-person meetings?
11. What steps could be taken to improve your participation in virtual meetings?
12. Are there certain types of case that lend themselves to in-person meetings?
13. Are there certain types of case that lend themselves to virtual meetings?
14. Is there a justification for having meetings with professional advocates and witnesses held virtually rather than in-person?
15. What would be the advantages/ disadvantages of more meetings being held in well-equipped regional locations and/ or the DPEA offices in Falkirk?
16. Should DPEA aim to provide for hybrid meetings, where participants can participate in-person or virtually as they choose?
17. Any other comments you may wish to make?
DPEA will consider all comments submitted and take these, together with a proposed way forward, to the next available meeting of the Stakeholders Group.
0 Comments