The Period Products (Free Provision) (Scotland) Bill was introduced in the Scottish Parliament on 23 April 2019 by Monica Lennon MSP. The accompanying Policy Memorandum explains that the Bill -

ensures that all who menstruate are able to access period products, at no cost, as and when they are required.

In summary, the Bill will:

• place a duty on Scottish Ministers to ensure that period products are made available free of charge on a universal basis;

• require education providers to make period products available free of charge in on-site toilets; and

• enable Scottish Ministers to place a duty on other specified public service bodies to provide free period products.

Section 1 of the Bill gives everyone in Scotland the right to obtain period products free of charge. Section 2 requires Scottish Ministers to establish a "period products scheme" to set out that right and how it may be facilitated. Section 5 places a duty on primary and secondary schools, colleges and universities to make period products free in all appropriate toilets and Section 6 enables Ministers to place a similar duty on other specified public facing bodies and specified persons. Section 4 provides that the scheme must ensure those using it to obtain period products can do so reasonably easily and with reasonable privacy and they can choose whether to have products delivered or collected. It also provides that there is a reasonable choice of different types of period product available. Section 7 obliges Scottish Ministers to publicise the scheme and and how, where and when products can be obtained.

During the same period that Monica Lennon was preparing for the introduction of her Bill the Scottish Government announced a number of funding streams aimed at tackling "period poverty".

On 30 May 2018, the Scottish Government announced that £0.5 million would be awarded to the charity FareShare to provide free period products to low income households. FareShare operates by redistributing surplus food to front line charities and community groups.

On August 2018 the Scottish Government pledged a £5.2 million fund to provide students at schools, colleges and universities with period products during the 2018/19 academic year. This funding was increased to £5.5 million to continue the policy for 2019/20. On 17 January 2019, Aileen Campbell, Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Local Government, committed to additional funding of £4 million starting immediately for local authorities to expand work undertaken with FareShare to roll out free provision of period products beyond schools, colleges and universities.

On 4 October 2019, the Scottish Government announced an additional £50,000 funding for free provision of period products for members and supporters of local sports clubs. Up to 500 sports clubs affiliated with sportscotland,https://sportscotland.org.uk/ the national agency for sports in Scotland, were provided with £100 grants to allow them to provide free period products to their members, participants and visitors. The Scottish Government also confirmed in a Parliamentary Written Question on free provision in NHS Hospitals that-

The Scottish Government is clear that access to free sanitary products for patients in hospitals supports equality, dignity and rights for those who menstruate. Executive Nurse directors are therefore expected to ensure appropriate stocks of sanitary products are held either on wards or close by and that are made available to patients when required. ⁱⁱQuestion S5W-17737 (2018, July 2017)

There is currently no legislation in Scotland which makes provision for free period products. The only legislation in Scotland dealing explicitly with the provision of period products is the Prisons and Young Offenders Institutions (Scotland) Rules 2011 Rule 34(2) which provides that suitable towels and toiletries necessary to a prisoner's health and hygiene are made available which for female prisoners includes sanitary protection.The Prisons and Young Offenders Institutions (Scotland) Rules 2011 Legislation also exists in relation to the disposal of period products in schoolsⁱⁱThe School Premises (General Requirement and Standards) (Scotland) Regulations 1967 and in work places.ⁱⁱThe Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992

Scotland is the first country in the world to provide free period products in educational institutions under a government scheme. Internationally, a number of other countries including Kenya, Canada, Australia and India have made provision to lower or remove the cost of period products. In the majority of cases, the focus has been on taxation with other countries lowering or abolishing VAT on products, a measure which is unavailable to Scotland as a result of EU law on VAT.

In the United States, a few states have passed legislation obligating schools to provide period products. They have been provided free in federal prisons since 2018. A number of other states have also removed sales tax from period products or allocated funds to provide free products in low income areas.

Further information on international provision can be found in the Scottish Parliament Information Service (SPICe) briefing on the Bill.SPICe Briefing Period Products (Free Provision) Scotland Bill 30 October 2019

Following a preliminary consultation,ⁱMonica Lennon MSP (2017 August 11) Ending Period Poverty. Consultation document the draft proposal for a Member's Bill, Sanitary Products (Free Provision) Scotland Bill was lodged by Monica Lennon on 11 August 2017. An additional consultation exercise was undertaken between 12 August 2017 and 8 December 2017 with 96% of respondents supporting the general principles of the proposal. The final proposal gained support from 51 MSPs across all political parties. A summary of consultation responses, produced by the Parliament's Non-Government Bills Unit (NGBU), was published on 7 March 2018.ⁱSummary of Consultation Responses

As lead Committee for the Bill, the Local Government and Communities Committee issued a call for written evidence on the Bill on 16 September 2019. We received a total of 50 written submissions comprising 12 submissions from third sector organisations, 10 submissions from local authorities (including one councillor and COSLA), 9 submissions from individuals, 8 submissions from trade unions and other representative bodies, 3 submissions from other public bodies including the Scottish Government, 3 submissions from educational institutions, 3 anonymous submissions and 2 submissions from community planning partnerships.Written submissions on the Period Products (Free Provision) Scotland Bill

The Committee took oral evidence on the Bill during three evidence sessions. On 18 December 2019,Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 we heard from Plan International UK, Engender, The Scottish Youth Parliament, Unite the Union, On the Ball and then from Universities Scotland, COSLA, Hey Girls, The Orkney Partnership and North Ayrshire Council. On 8 January 2020,Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 we heard from Aileen Campbell MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Local Government and on 15 January 2020,Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 15 January 2020 we heard from Monica Lennon MSP.

The Committee also undertook two outreach visits, the first attending the Scottish Youth Parliament's (SYP) consultation workshophttps://syp.org.uk/ on period poverty held at its 7th sitting in DunfermlineSummary Note of Scottish Youth Parliament workshop and the second hosted by Perth and Kinross Association of Voluntary Services (PKAVS)https://www.pkavs.org.uk/ in Perth where local individuals and organisations shared their experiences of period poverty.Summary Note of visit to Perth

More detailed analysis of the oral and written evidence and information gathered from the outreach visits is set out below.

The term "period poverty" is not referred to in the Bill but used within the policy memorandum, more generally by the press and in a number of written submissions answering the call for views. The term is understood broadly to be an inability to afford period products. The policy memorandum suggests that period poverty can have a detrimental effect on the health and well being of women, girls and trans people and has an impact on educational and vocational attendance, participation in leisure and sporting activities, as well as raising general hygiene concerns resulting from the use of unsuitable substitutes like toilet paper or socks. It also places women at the increased risk of toxic shock syndrome from using products for too long.ⁱPeriod Products (Free Provision) (Scotland Bill Policy Memorandum

Our scrutiny, however, uncovered that period poverty not only encompasses those who are unable to afford to buy period products but those for whom access to products is difficult for a range of other reasons which may or may not be financial ones. These include stigma, health conditions, young people who are caught short or feel unable to seek help, disability, trans and non-binary people and women and girls in coercive relationships. Those citing financial concerns have raised benefit sanctions, universal credit, low pay, lack of financial independence, increasing living costs, insecure work, zero hours contracts and the cost of the products themselves as barriers to access.

The Committee explored the extent to which period poverty is an issue in Scotland. Plan International UK referred to their survey undertaken in 2017 of 1000 young women from which they concluded that one in 10 had struggled to afford period products.https://plan-uk.org/media-centre/plan-international-uks-research-on-period-poverty-and-stigma They said anecdotal evidence also suggested young men were accessing the current provision in schools to take home to their families.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 4 Engender said they had a "wealth of knowledge" about women's poverty generally and that "20% of women experience poverty". They said they "know that one parent in 10 has sent a child to school knowing that they do not have with them the period products that they need".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 3

All written submissions recognised that period poverty is an issue in Scotland. Some of these noted that the issue does not affect all areas and social groups and that there may be hidden "pockets" of poverty or lack of access. Girlguiding Scotland referred to its "Girls in Scotland 2018" surveyhttps://www.girlguidingscotland.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Girls-in-Scotland-survey-2018-compressed.pdf that 13% of girls aged 13-25 knew another girl their age who had experienced period poverty. Almost a quarter of their survey respondents highlighted that, regardless of financial or other barriers, they had been "caught out" "every or most months" and for 99% of respondents this had happened occasionally. A 2018 survey conducted by Young Scot found that 26% of those in education and 24% of those not had struggled to access period products over the previous year.Young Scot report access to Sanitary Products March 2018

In a letter to the Committee, dated 11 December 2019, Ms Lennon stated that "The principle behind the Bill is that access to free period products to all who need them should be a right". She said "The Bill sets a minimum framework for what the universal scheme must contain and purposely gives the Scottish Ministers as much freedom as possible in terms of what the scheme will look like and what arrangements would be set up for the scheme delivery".Letter from Monica Lennon to the Local Government and Communities Committee 11 December 2019

In oral evidence, Ms Lennon was clear that she considered universality to be at the core of the bill. This is set out in Section 1(1). She said the Scottish Government's targeted approach which prioritises those on low incomes "risks missing out some of the people who struggle to access products but do not fall easily into the low income bracket". Within this group, she listed those with health conditions, women with disabilities, women who have experienced miscarriage and baby loss, children and young people who do not have access to their own money, trans men and non-binary people, women and girls affected by gender based violence and people in insecure work and on zero hours contracts. In Ms Lennon's view, those who were able to afford products were likely to continue to buy them. Ms Lennon referred to support amongst grass roots campaigners as well as to an open letter signed by 30 leading organisations supporting the general principles of the Bill. She said

A universal approach is the right one because it means that no one gets left behind. I am confident that the system would not be abused and that people would use it on the basis of need. The scheme can be devised in a way that facilitates that." Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 15 January 2020 Col 22

Ms Lennon described her Bill as a framework bill because it "is right to give ministers the freedom to devise a scheme". She spoke of changing the culture with an aspiration of seeing more period friendly workplaces so day to day access to products would improve and that there was also a "real opportunity" in driving change in relation to sustainability and access to different types of reusable products. Ms Lennon told the Committee that she was seeking support for the general principles of the Bill and that it could be amended at Stage 2 if there were ways in which it could be improved.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 15 January 2020 Col 12 Those amendments could relate to a number of provisions within the Bill including mechanisms of delivery such as the voucher scheme.

Section 2 of the Bill obligates Ministers to set up a "period products scheme" and gives flexibility as to how this could be implemented. The Committee were, accordingly, keen to hear views on what such a scheme might look like should the Bill proceed. They explored with witnesses whether it was important to have a universal scheme which Ms Lennon is seeking to achieve or, alternatively, whether the focus should be on those in relative poverty with provision made in certain specified places.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 7

Unite said that universal access would give a dignified choice to those caught short or who need to access products because they are struggling. Their experience was that most women still go out and buy their own products.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 8 SYP also supported universal access and availability in men's and gender neutral toilets to promote inclusivity for transgender and non-binary people. Engender suggested that men may choose to access products on behalf of somebody else.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 9 The Scottish Funding Council in written evidence said "it is important that there is clarity and consistency of messaging around whether access to free sanitary products is for those experiencing period poverty or if it is universal access"Written submission by the Scottish Funding Council

Unite, Engender, Plan International UK and SYP agreed that a universal scheme that provides for everyone by right was the best way to meet any gaps in provision.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 22 Unite said

"We need one scheme that works that takes account of the various regional and geographical issues across Scotland and that runs without a hugely administrative or overly complex process".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 22

On the Ball said unmet need was currently being addressed by community groups and that providing products in other public places would alleviate financial pressures on smaller groups.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 22

Section 3 of the Bill provides a mechanism for Ministers to introduce a voucher or registration scheme in order to access products and allows flexibility in the operation of any scheme. The policy memorandum suggests that one model the Scottish Government could consider would be one similar to the "C-Card" scheme C-Card scheme accessed at http://www.ccard.org.uk/about-us/ which operates as a confidential service funded and administered by Health Boards for the distribution of free condoms in areas across Scotland. The scheme requires minimal personal details to be provided such as a name and date of birth before a card is issued which allows a person to obtain free condoms. The Committee asked witnesses about their views on the introduction of a similar voucher or registration scheme.

SYP told the Committee that they held a recent workshop attended by 24 MSYPs from across Scotland. Participants were overwhelmingly opposed to a voucher scheme and said it would create additional barriers and make it more difficult for young people to access products.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 18 Plan International said that the stigma that exists around both menstruation and poverty can prevent those who are in need from accessing products and that it was important that "people should not be further stigmatised by their own need"Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 18. Unite said

"In my experience those who most need the free products are the ones who are almost guaranteed not to ask for them. They are so embarrassed and depressed about their situation that they are the least likely to register. The Bill is about changing society and culture and expectations. A registration scheme risks those who most need the products missing out, because they simply do not register". Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 18

Engender considered registration ran the risk of excluding refugees, women for whom English is not their first language, women who are homeless and women who experience control within their relationships. "As far as possible we should avoid putting barriers in place".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 18

COSLA did not support the voucher scheme and considered it would create administrative costs but also "would not be the best way of delivering what we want the Bill to deliver".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 47 Participants from Perth did not support a voucher scheme and saw this as stigmatising for those most in need.

In written evidence, there was some support for a voucher scheme but the majority of submissions were not supportive. The Orkney Partnership said in their written submission that "we believe that a card scheme does not adhere to the guiding principle of protecting people's dignity, avoiding anxiety, embarrassment and stigma".Written submission from The Orkney Partnership

The Cabinet Secretary considered the C-card model would create a barrier and would be opt in and as a result would not be universal. ^viiiLocal Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 Col 16 She did not agree that a universal scheme could be delivered through an opt in scheme. Ms Lennon said that the Bill does not require Ministers to establish the universal scheme in such a way that a voucher would be required. Section 3 provides, however, that if a voucher scheme was the preferred mode of delivery then it could not require more than a person's name and first half of their postcode to establish their entitlement under the scheme.

Section 4 of the Bill concentrates on the use and operation of the scheme and states that it "must be such that persons using it to obtain period products can do so reasonably easily and with reasonable privacy" and, in particular, "must enable those persons to choose (as an alternative to collection in person) to have them delivered or have them collected". The Committee sought to explore witnesses' views on postal delivery and, particularly, how this may be balanced with the lack of support we had heard for a registration or voucher scheme, insofar as postal provision would, invariably, require some form of registration or sharing of information. We also sought views on their concerns that the administration involved in providing a postal service would increase overall costs of any scheme.

Engender supported a delivery model arguing that there may be a number of reasons that those who menstruate may be prevented from collecting products in person.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 19 Unite highlighted the needs of rural communities which could create a barrier to access.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 19 SYP also favoured a delivery scheme in order to make the service as universal and inclusive as possible.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 19

COSLA recognised that there were issues with access to products within rural areas but expressed reservations about whether a postal service was possible. They said "Many local authorities do not post anything at the moment, so doing so would require the setting up of a whole new administration system from scratch which would involve huge costs". Instead, their suggestion to widen access in rural areas and islands was for councils to work locally through pharmacies, pubs or other places to provide the service.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 45

The Cabinet Secretary also expressed concerns about postage costs which she said would be a recurring cost and likely to increase over time as free provision became embedded. She highlighted that a business impact assessment would be needed to establish the effect on retailers.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 Col 8

In addition to the obligation set out in Section 5 of the Bill that education providers must provide free products, Section 6 provides that specified public service bodies are to "make period products available free of charge for persons in its premises who need to use these products". The choice of which public bodies would be obligated, however, is for Ministers to decide. Section 8 of the Bill provides that "The Scottish Ministers may make such payment as they think appropriate" to those bodies. Written submissions suggested a range of public service bodies where provision could best be made including public toilets, airports, train and bus stations, hospitals and GP surgeries, libraries and community centres as well as suggesting a number of public facing organisations, who would not be obligated to make provision in terms of the Bill but may choose to do so, including cinemas, restaurants, bars, pubs, shopping centres, supermarkets and workplaces.

South Lanarkshire College said in their submission "we provide toilet tissue and hand towels so why wouldn't we provide sanitary products".Written submission from South Lanarkshire College The Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations suggested that many workplaces already outline their commitments to the health and well being of their employees through the provision of schemes such as cycle to work and suggested that the provision of free period products should be seen alongside these initiatives.Written submission from Scottish Council of Voluntary Organisations

When asked if organisations other than schools and colleges should provide free period products, there was overwhelming support from participants at the SYP workshop who said the Scottish Government should be responsible for meeting costs. They also considered that reusable products such as washable sanitary pads, period pants, menstrual cups and sustainable products such as plastic free disposables should be available in addition to, rather than as an alternative to, existing provision.

The Cabinet Secretary was asked if she knew of any other Bill where Ministers set regulations that meant that public sector bodies including councils and schools would have to operate a scheme which would have a cost to them to be met by the Scottish Government. Ms Campbell confirmed she did not and that the "question of proportionality needs to be considered". She said "If we increase the cost and do not deliver the outcomes that we currently deliver, is legislation the right approach? At this point in time, I do not think so".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 Col 10

The Committee also explored with Ms Lennon which public facing bodies she envisaged would provide products under Section 6. Ms Lennon told the Committee that Ministers were already working with some public bodies and gave examples of Scottish Natural Heritage and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency. She said that her research had found that no NHS health board had a policy and there was a huge variation in access. She said "If something is not in formal policy or in legislation, it drifts. The Bill is designed to be future proofed and give maximum flexibility".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 15 January 2020 Col 14

The Committee were interested in hearing witnesses' experiences of the effectiveness of non-statutory measures currently being undertaken by the Scottish Government. Current measures have a targeted approach with the aim of tackling period poverty and providing wider access to products. Witnesses were extremely positive about current measures and it was clear that these have been well received and are having a positive impact. The Committee also heard of ways in which witnesses considered measures are in some respects falling short and could be improved.

COSLA, the umbrella body representing all 32 local authorities and who have been supporting them to deliver Scottish Government measures, told the Committee that each authority was taking a different approach dependent on their particular local needs, and that in some areas measures have been very effective and made a huge difference. They stressed the importance of talking about the issues and seeing how current provision of period products could be rolled out from educational establishments to include other organisations, and perhaps workplaces, to meet wider need. They spoke about the work currently being undertaken to analyse the data to evaluate effectiveness and how to move forward.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 26 They told the Committee that initially their work was to ensure women and girls did not miss out on educational opportunities, but they had extended provision so products were now available in their own buildings.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 37

North Ayrshire Council told the Committee that, in recognition of need in their area, they started delivery in August 2017 ahead of Scottish Government funding. Government funding enabled them to expand provision and this was welcomed. They had trialled a variety of distribution methods in their schools including free vending machines in the toilets. Initially, these had been placed in the communal area but it became clear that students were embarrassed to use them so they were moved inside the cubicles. They also used baskets with the aim of normalising visibility of products and reducing stigma. They said delivery to the wider community had been well received by the 29 community centres and 12 libraries they were now supplying and highlighted feedback from school pupils which had been "excellent" and was having a huge impact on pupils attending school.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 27 They advocated further work with education partners about having open conversations with boys and girls at school.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 35

Universities Scotland were positive about the scheme and told the Committee that during the first six months the 19 Higher Education Institutes had purchased 2.3 million products of which 64% had been distributed across campuses and 85% of those taken by students.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 28 The Orkney partnership said that products were now available across the islands.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 28 Hey Girls who supply 26 of 32 local authorities were very positive about measures but spoke about some inconsistency in delivery and promotion across schools.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 28 They gave a best practice example of Pedro the period panda who wanders around distributing menstrual products in one local authority school to promote access and reduce stigma but also told the Committee that, in other schools, students still have to ask a teacher to access a locked cupboard for products. This, they said, had an impact on access.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 32

The Committee explored differences in uptake between rural and urban areas. North Lanarkshire Council told the Committee that there was a wide range of uptake within their schools but the Orkney Partnership said that the situation seemed to be equal across their communities stressing, however, that they are still in the process of evaluating the service.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 45

Participants at the SYP workshop welcomed current measures saying it meant they had one less thing to worry about. They had concerns that products in sports clubs were often of poor quality and hard to find so more promotion on where products are available was needed.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 23 On the Ball's view was the aim was to ensure people could access products and a scheme should not be overcomplicated.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 11

Written submissions were positive about current measures. Suggested improvements included providing products in men's toilets and holiday packs for non-term time, promoting reusable products, and using promotion to address stigma.

COSLA told the Committee that stigma remains a huge issue and that overcoming it is part of the solution. They referred to figures which showed that 41.8 per cent of young people do not feel comfortable buying sanitary products.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 34

Hey Girls highlighted the need for education to tackle the stigma around menstruation to enable women to talk about periods and access products without shame.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 28 They stressed the importance of campaigns that raise awareness and cited their Pads4Dads campaign with actor Michael Sheen.Hey Girls #Pads4Dads campaign They said "To get him talking about periods during an England v Scotland rugby match broke down some pretty big taboos right there".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 41

The SYP also highlighted the existence of stigma and embarrassment around periods.

"Having free sanitary products in public buildings, particularly in schools, would normalise menstruation. If it was normal to be able to nip out and get period products a lot of people would be much less embarrassed by it". Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 3

Plan International referred to their survey which found that one in five girls were being teased or bullied at school about their period. They considered that universal access and exposure to products would go a long way to solving some of the bigger issues. Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 6 The Orkney Partnership said the Scottish Government's current work was helping to raise awareness and reduce stigma and Engender considered the Bill as an important first stage in addressing stigma and normalising periods.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 17

Unite said that as a union they dealt with women who are working in heavily male dominated industries such as construction and the issue was much more about employers providing dignity for female workers and raising awareness in workplaces where women are not traditionally employed.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 5

The period poverty tag resonates with people and it starts a dialogue about the much wider issue of poverty. That is really helpful but the union is focused on dignity. We want to improve access and reduce stigma. For us, it is a dual approach.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 6

Participants in our Perth visit also spoke about stigma and the need for consistent and earlier education in schools, particularly in primary schools, as some girls start their periods very young. In one school, products were only supplied to S5 and S6 with others having to ask for them from teachers. Students did not favour this approach. There was also a lack of information about where products could be accessed and it was not spoken about in personal and social education (PSE) class or promoted through posters. The Committee heard views that sex education in schools did not include specific teaching on periods and that increasing awareness for both girls and boys would go some way to addressing the stigma.

Both PCS and Unite urged a move away from the term "period poverty" which they saw as stigmatising in itself and recommended the use of "period dignity" instead.Written submission from Unite the Union Scotland In their written evidence, they highlighted campaigns to promote this language. A number of other written and oral submissions also used and supported this terminology.

The Committee explored areas of unmet need (i.e. particular demographics with particular access problems) and how these could effectively be addressed. North Ayrshire Council highlighted disabled people and those with care responsibilitiesLocal Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 29 and On the Ball said that the focus on higher education meant that those not in higher education were missing out.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 12 SYP highlighted the need to provide products over holiday breaks.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 13 Engender told the Committee that food banks were increasingly supplying products but the referral mechanism meant that groups of vulnerable women such as refugees were being missed referring to the Bloody Good Period Project ^ivBloody Good Period Project which found that 75% of the refugee women to whom the organisation had spoken had been unable to access products.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 23 During our visit to Perth, a representative from Endometriosis Dundee told us that women with Endometriosis and similar conditions such as polycystic ovary syndrome often had heavy and irregular periods and that the cost to them for products could be up to £50 a month. We learned that these women could not be supported by their GPs in meeting those costs as conditions like endometriosis are not covered by prescription.

Plan International referred to their "Let's Talk Period" projectPlan International "Let's Talk Period" which showed that although the scheme in education settings was successful, some of the areas of biggest need were in places such as mother and baby units and sheltered accommodation where there were drop in sessions to inform people about products.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 13

"It was found that before sessions there was just a box in the cupboard and no one had any education or support so no one was using the products. However, when people were given the skills and knowledge to use menstrual cups, for example, they did so. There is now a whole group of young mums who only use menstrual cups as a result of those sessions and support each other to do so. There is a bigger issue there relating to long term savings from using such products rather than disposables."

COSLA highlighted that access for those in rural communities, those suffering financial and domestic abuse, and those for whom there is cultural stigma is problematic. They considered locally designed services by people who understand the needs of the local area to be key in improving access.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 30 Partnership with local pharmacies was also suggested. Universities Scotland echoed this and pointed out that students too are not a homogeneous group and comprise distance learners and those on placement for extended periods so universities have been developing a flexible approach.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 31

The Orkney Partnership highlighted the importance of third sector and community partnerships in addressing issues with access and said that by working in this way they have reached those experiencing mental health problems, poverty and domestic abuse. They also placed products in men's toilets. Hey Girls referred to their "Hey boys" and "pads4dads" initiatives to normalise the process for men of shopping for their partners or daughtersLocal Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 35 and told the Committee that, in partnership with the Scottish Government and COSLA, they are developing an app which will show where products can be found.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 28

The Committee were keen to explore whether present measures provided by the Scottish Government are adequately funded.

Unite estimated the average cost for good quality products to be between £10 and £20 for the monthly shop and commented that this was a lot of money for unwaged or those on low incomes.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 4 COSLA told the Committee that their cost per unit for current measures was 17.6p but this figure was based on evaluation after the first six months and "there are ways to bring the figure down over time so they would not necessarily be that high in future as the scheme develops and as we learn we will change what we do". They said that their second stage of analysis was about to start.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 50 Universities Scotland stated their average cost per unit after 12 months as 19p but for the provision to be rolled out to every toilet would see that cost increase.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 48 They said they would have a better sense of the adequacy of funding and level of funding required to sustain the system when they undertake their evaluation at the end of the two year period.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 40

North Ayrshire Council told the Committee that they spent approximately £55,000 over the past year to deliver the service across nine secondary schools. This was based on an average uptake of 45% of pupils but also comprised initial set up costs for renting vending machines which they were now moving away from. They saw huge fluctuations in uptake across schools and considered more evaluation was needed of why that was the case. They planned to work with education and conduct some working groups to share best practice.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 43 In the second year, they said they saw costs reduce and believed they would reduce further over time as result of promotion of reusable products. They told the Committee it would be difficult to estimate at this stage what future costs will be as they may increase or change provision and are continually adapting it. They were confident, however, that costs would reduce.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 50

Hey Girls advocated not taking a vending machine approach which put people off due to the "stigma and the noise" and is expensive. Rejecting the vending machine approach they said would enable organisations to make a wider range of products available and have the result of increasing usage and reducing costs.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 44 They told the Committee that they won the Scottish Excel washroom solutions contract which was won on price and then on environmental impact and service. They stated their unit price is 7.5p per pad and between 9p and 13p per tampon and therefore if local authorities used the washroom solutions framework that would instantly reduce the cost of products.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 50 They also highlighted the potential cost savings of providing students with reusable products and that "a greater focus on the environment and cost-saving benefits of reusable products would be very positive".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 41 The Orkney Partnership had not yet had the opportunity to analyse their data.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 50

The Financial Memorandum (FM) accompanying the Bill acknowledged that there would be financial implications in terms of setting up and administering a universal scheme. Costs based on a unit price of 9p, usage data, demographic and poverty data and potential uptake rates for both those in and outwith education are set out. It estimated that the costs of implementing the Bill and creating a statutory requirement for the free provision, however, would not exceed the £9.7 million already committed to by the Scottish Government. Detailed analysis of how this figure was reached can be found in the FM.Period Products (Free Provision) (Scotland) Bill Financial Memorandum

The written submission from the Scottish Government said that the FM's stated cost of £9.7 million for delivering the scheme is significantly underestimated. Its calculations show that estimated product and delivery costs on the same uptake levels could cost around £24.1 million. It suggested that the FM's estimate unit cost of 9p would allow only for the cheapest products and not a wider range that people may wish to have available. Scottish Government funding allocations are currently based on an average unit cost of 11.6p per product but it said, using recent data collected by local authorities and colleges/universities in their first six months of delivery, unit prices were found to be 17.6p and 16.1p respectively. The Cabinet Secretary also told the Committee that the Scottish Government's working estimates may be lower than the actual cost and believed a unit cost of 17p should be used instead.

When asked why there was such a discrepancy between the Scottish Government's figures and the FM, the Cabinet Secretary explained they had calculated their figures on a higher product cost which they considered was a truer reflection of actual cost, higher annual administrative costs and a wider age range, and included additional provision for holidays and days students were not attending school.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 Col 6 Ms Lennon was also asked to comment on the disparity on the costs and told the Committee she reached her 9p unit cost on the basis of information which was available at the time and "mostly drawn from Scottish Government documentation". She said "we have been transparent about that. It is unclear how we have reached that disparity" and reiiterated that Hey Girls were able to supply products at a similar level to those set out in the FM.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 15 January 2020 Col 33

In their written submission, the Scottish Government noted that annual set up and running costs of a universal scheme in the FM were based on an assumption that these would be similar to current measures (£0.54 million for set up and £0.866 million for annual running costs) regardless of uptake costs and delivery models. They considered this approach to be flawed. They also raised concerns about costs associated with the suggested C-card scheme which would require delivery through local pharmacies with associated payment for that service. Costs of delivery through NHS health boards they said would be even higher and these elements had not been costed. In a letter to the Committee in response to the Scottish Government's submission, Ms Lennon stated that there is nothing in the Bill which would require the Scottish Government to use pharmacies or GP practices as delivery partners. It would be up to Ministers to take cost implications into account in making that choice.Letter from Monica Lennon to the Local Government and Communities Committee 11 December 2019 The Scottish Government submission also noted that no cost elements had been added in the FM for postal delivery or promotion of a scheme.

The Cabinet Secretary told the Committee that if there was a 5% annual increase on uptake each year the estimated cost over the lifetime of the next Parliament could be up to £80 million. A further breakdown of this figure was provided to the Committee in a letter from the Cabinet Secretary dated 14 January 2020.Letter from the Cabinet Secretary to the Local Government and Communities Committee 14 January 2020 This would, the Cabinet Secretary said, represent a substantial proportion of her budget and could have a knock on effect on other areas of spending. She highlighted that, if Parliament passed the Bill at Stage 1, Scottish Ministers would also be expected to introduce a financial resolution that committed to meeting the cost of implementation and considered that

"the lack of clarity poses significant challenges to understanding the likely cost to the public purse and the level of future spend to which the Scottish Ministers would be committed by introducing such a resolution"Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 Col 22

Ms Lennon told the Committee that she believed the Scottish Government needed to be more transparent about how it had arrived at some of its figures. In a follow up letter to the Cabinet Secretary dated 10 January 2020, she also referred to the unit costs stated by Hey Girls which are very similar to the ones set out in the FM.Letter from Monica Lennon to the Cabinet Secretary 10 January 2020

The Cabinet Secretary wrote to Ms Lennon on 22 January 2020 setting out the reasons as to why she considered £24 million per annum was a more realistic estimate than £9.7 million. These are (1) that the unit price of 9p is too low and the Scottish Government estimates are based on "real" products costs from data collected from local authorities and colleges at 17.6p and 16.1p; (2) that the FM estimates an annual administrative cost of £0.866 million regardless of uptake and delivery and the Scottish Government estimate includes maximum uptake and alternative delivery models which increases this cost to 4.7 million; (3) that the Scottish Government uses a wider age range of 12-54 rather than 13-50 as used in the FM and (4) that the Scottish Government includes provision for students throughout the whole year. The Cabinet Secretary reiterated that no costs were estimated for postage or initial set up costs such as training, infrastructure and stock holding. Letter from the Cabinet Secretary to Monica Lennon 22 January 2020

The Cabinet Secretary also addressed Ms Lennon's query relating to the low unit cost provided in evidence by Hey Girls and clarified that the Scottish Government had not mandated a particular supplier in order to allow maximum flexibility. She said, as a consequence, local providers are able to decide which products they wished to supply through their own procurement process and many sought to offer choice. It was, therefore, "unlikely that every local authority, college and university would move to providing only Hey Girls products which would be the only way that we can envisage costs falling to 9p on average". The Scottish Government, she said, based their estimate on an average of 17p per product from data collected at the six month point from existing providers stating however that"we do expect that unit prices may fall over time as existing contracts come to an end".

On the question of recurring costs, the Cabinet Secretary, accepted that costs associated with current measures were also likely to increase as the scheme evolved but said that in working in partnership there was more control over these costs. She argued that the scheme in the Bill is universal so there would be further bureaucracy attached to it and other ways which could mean that costs would increase such as a postal element.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 Col 18 The Committee explored whether a universal scheme ran the risk of creating "minimum standards" and whether the current variety of products on offer could suffer as a consequence of broadening access. The Cabinet Secretary said there was every chance of that happening. She said

"When I visited the University of Edinburgh I saw a variety of well know brands of products alongside reusable products that are new to market. The intent of that provision is to ensure that people can shift towards those newer products although they have higher one off costs. That variety of products is already being distributed across many different institutions, In many respects it would be a pity if that variety was lost because of the cost issue". Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 Col 25

In respect of resusable products, evidence from witnesses including Hey Girls suggested that there must be a move to think more sustainably. Although there is not a high uptake of these at present and it was recognised that they are not suitable for everyone, if reusable products were made widely available and women were supported in using them, this would change and also help to reduce future costs of provision.

Ms Lennon reiterated that it would be up to Ministers to devise and develop an appropriate scheme but that her "preference would be for a scheme that made available a range of tampons, pads and reusable options such as Mooncups and resuable pads". She considered that the scheme would be a "real opportunity to promote the use of more sustainable products".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 15 January 2020 Col 32

Discussion also took place in relation to Section 8 of the Bill which provides that "The Scottish Ministers may make such payments as they think appropriate to the councils, bodies, persons and education providers obliged by or under this Act to make period products available free of charge". Members of the Committee commented that the Bill placed an obligation on, for example, education providers to provide free products but use of the words "may" and "as they think appropriate" does not, in fact, mandate the Scottish Government to pay for them. They raised concerns that a lack of clarity could mean that a future government could simply change its mind about what it thinks is appropriate.

Ms Lennon told the Committee that Section 8 took a standard drafting approach which would allow Ministers flexibility regarding the best way of balancing demands on public funds and the ability to offset costs rising. She said that they would always expect future governments to be reasonable, that the wording was common in other legislation and drafting had followed what a general approach would be. In a letter to the Committee dated 24 January 2020, she provided more clarification, giving a number of examples where legislation was drafted in similar terms. Examples included legislation placing duties on education authorities to provide free school meals, books and materials free of charge to students, and promoting Gaelic in schools.Letter from Monica Lennon to the Local Government and Communities Committee 24 January 2020

With respect to funding of a universal scheme, there was clear expectation from all witnesses that any scheme provided by the Bill should be funded by the Scottish Government. The Cabinet Secretary also commented that "the evidence to the Committee suggested that the costs would have to be fully funded" and "in reality those costs would land on the Government".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 Col 19 When the Committee asked witnesses whether they considered the Scottish Government should meet implementation costs of a universal scheme or if these costs should be borne elsewhere (for example by workplaces in the same way they provide toilet paper), evidence from witnesses backed this up. COSLA said "We cannot possibly fund it ourselves from other resources".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 49 They argued, however, that "we also need to think about the cost of not fully funding the scheme, such as children missing out on their education and people leaving the workplace. Such costs are very hard to quantify. If we are concerned about productivity, educational opportunities and equity, such a scheme needs to be put in place."Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 46

Universities Scotland argued that in a climate of cuts to higher education funding and a tight funding environment, a statutory duty must be fully funded to be sustainable.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 38 The Orkney Partnership agreed that "it would be not possible to participate in the scheme if the Government chose not to fund it."Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 50

Unite were of the view that if a scheme did not require means testing, costs could be reduced. Engender argued that costs of days lost in education or work as a result of not having the correct products should be factored in. Plan International UK agreed, arguing that menstruation is not embedded in general community needs assessments, giving an example of women who may go to their GP suffering from endometriosis but who will not receive support to buy period products as these can not be prescribed for.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 20

The Committee asked witnesses whether they considered that legislation is required. In oral evidence, all witnesses supported the introduction of legislation. Written submissions too were largely supportive in order to future proof current measures and help positively tackle gender inequality and empower women. Seven submissions only partly supported the aims of the Bill or argued that legislation was not necessary.

Unite said legislation could be "landmark for Scotland" and that without it "the programme could be stopped tomorrow". Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 15 On the Ball described their campaign as a project which "was a means to an end and the end was legislation because the free provision of sanitary products should eventually be the norm". Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 16 COSLA told the Committee "We need something that is set in legislation and is more long term and permanent." They considered that "in terms of education and workplace productivity, the cost of not passing the Bill would be huge. The benefit of increasing dignity is also huge so in that sense we need to do it". North Ayrshire Council described the proposed legislation as a "massive step forward" and said that where they have been reliant on other organisations making provision voluntarily, the Bill would lock in that duty and benefit a huge number of people. They saw the impact of doing that as "immeasurable".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 18 December 2019 Col 52

A number of witnesses suggested that period products should be provided in toilets as standard in the same way as toilet paper. On investigation, the Committee noted, via a briefing from Spice, that there is no universal legal provision setting out a requirement for toilet paper to be provided in toilets used outside the home. Instead, this has become a cultural norm. The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare Regulations 1992)The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare Regulations 1992, however, sets out a requirement for toilet spaces within work places and the Approved Code of Practice states that "toilet paper should be provided in a holder or dispenser" and "In toilets used by women, suitable means for the disposal of sanitary dressings should also be provided". Section 20 of the 1976 Local Government Miscellaneous Provisions Act^vLocal Government Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1976 states that if premises provides food and drink for consumption then toilets must be provided for visitors and consumers. This specifies that a local authority can require an occupier to supply sanitary appliances, to maintain and keep clean the appliances and to provide and maintain a proper supply of such things for use in connection with the appliances.

The Cabinet Secretary said she wished to ensure that everyone who needs to access period products can do so but does not support legislation to deliver that aim. She said current measures benefit 400,000 students in education and 60,000 people on low incomes and that products are available in more than 20 public bodies including libraries, community centres and sports centres. She highlighted positive feedback from the Young Scot Survey recognising that there were areas which required improvement and the Scottish Government were looking at how these could be best addressed.Young Scot Observatory Access to Period Products in your school, college or university survey report December 2019

She argued that measures are flexible and, not overly bureaucratic, and said that legislation setting out a scheme may erode this. She emphasised that measures were in the very early stages of policy delivery and the Scottish Government are learning and changing what they are doing and that a full evaluation of those measures was needed. She told the Committee that the Bill required a universal scheme to be in place 12 months from the Bill receiving royal assent and that would be "extremely challenging." She said

"We need to remember that passing the bill would mean that the responsibility for the provision of period products would fall entirely to the state which would make such products the only material item that the Scottish Government had a legal obligation to provide. We must consider carefully whether legislation is the best way of achieving the desired benefits."^vLocal Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 Col 2

She also emphasised that the "the costs of Monica Lennon's approach are significant" and that "we need to be mindful of that if we are to change our approach and adopt the proposed universal system".Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 Col 6 She argued that the flexibility provided in the Bill for Ministers to deliver on its requirements had resulted in a lack of clarity of its true policy intent and mechanism of delivery.

When asked if she considered that there was a benefit to legislating and guaranteeing that current work would not be abandoned, the Cabinet Secretary reiterated that "the non-legislative route delivers better outcomes, quicker and faster". She said the Scottish Government had committed to baselining the funding to local government so she could not see such a situation arising. She explained that the Scottish Government's policy, while not aiming to make the provision of free period products universal, was also going beyond measures set out in the Bill by working in partnership internationally with projects in countries including Malawi and Rwanda.

Ms Lennon said she did not accept that having legislation which allows Ministers to design a scheme would stifle flexibility or innovation. She said that the universal scheme as set out "leaves Ministers significant latitude in how to design the universal scheme" which meant it would be up to Ministers to do it in a way that would allow local needs to be met.Letter from Monica Lennon to the Local Government and Communities Committee 11 December 2019 She praised the collaborative and pioneering work that organisations and the Scottish Government were undertaking but reiterated that the only guarantee that work would continue was to put a duty in legislation.Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 15 January 2020 Col 10

When asked if she agreed that everyone who needs period products should have access to them as a right, the Cabinet Secretary said that the aim of current measures was to create universal access by targeting provision through education settings and local authorities with a focus on poverty. She did not say that access to period products was a right in itself but that not having period products could inhibit rights. She told the Committee that the current provisions are about targeting women who do not have access so they may exercise their other rights, i.e. to work and education. Local Government and Communities Committee Official Report 8 January 2020 Col 16

The Cabinet Secretary emphasised her position to the Committee in a follow up letter dated 14 January 2020. She said

"What (this Bill) does is establish a right for everyone in Scotland to receive period products for free, sets out that these must be available by post and then leaves it to the Scottish Government to design and implement this new public service through Regulations for delivery across 32 local authorities and an unquantified number of public facing bodies and public service bodies. Ms Lennon wrote offering to make a number of amendments at Stage 2 in return for our support. However, given the number of amendments and that she is not proposing removing Section 1 which sets out an absolute right to products, I am unconvinced that this Bill could be amended to make it workable."Letter from the Cabinet Secretary to the Local Government and Communities Committee 14 January 2020