Contents
- Attendance
- Subordinate Legislation
- Pre-Budget Scrutiny 2021-22
Subordinate Legislation
Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No 11) Regulations 2020 (SSI 2020/263)
Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No 12) Regulations 2020 (SSI 2020/271)
Good morning, and welcome to the 23rd meeting in 2020 of the Health and Sport Committee. We have received apologies from Alex Cole-Hamilton.
The first agenda item is consideration of two affirmative instruments. As in previous weeks, the regulations are laid under section 94(1), which is on international travel, of the Public Health etc (Scotland) Act 2008. The provisions of the act state that such regulations are subject to the affirmative procedure. However, that procedure will not apply if the Scottish ministers consider that the regulations need to be made and brought into force urgently. In that case, they must be laid before the Scottish Parliament and will cease to have effect on the expiry of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the regulations were made, unless the regulations have been approved by a resolution of the Parliament before the expiry of that period. It is for the Health and Sport Committee to consider the instruments and to report to Parliament accordingly.
Today, we have an evidence session with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and officials on the instruments. Once we have asked all our questions, I will propose that we have a single formal debate on the two motions.
I welcome to the committee Humza Yousaf, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice. He is accompanied from the Scottish Government by Rachel Sunderland, who is a deputy director in the population and migration division; Jamie MacDougall, who is a deputy director in the test and protect portfolio; and Anita Popplestone, who is the head of police complaints and scrutiny.
With the cabinet secretary’s agreement, we will ask questions on both instruments together. Will you provide an update on the proposition to test passengers on arrival, particularly at airports? That is an issue that the committee has asked about previously. What developments and discussions have there been since we last discussed the matter?
Good morning, convener. I hope that you and the members of the committee are keeping well.
Airport testing was again discussed in our four-nations call last week. As you would imagine, I will have another such call later this week. The Scottish Government remains concerned that the airport testing regimes that are proposed at this stage would not be as robust as a 14-day isolation or quarantine measure.
It has been proposed that we look at testing on arrival and again on around day 8 of someone’s isolation. The concern is that someone testing negative on arrival would be given false reassurance. However, getting those individuals to quarantine for at least another eight to 10 days would be extremely challenging. We know how people behave—there is some data on people’s behaviours if they test negative.
The systems that have been proposed so far are not as effective as the requirement to self-isolate for 14 days, but that does not mean that we are not continuing to look at proposals from the airports. I suspect that that will be another topic of conversation on our four-nations call.
Are there particular reasons for divergence in the four-nations approach or specific circumstances in which that would be required? For instance, would Scotland exempt some countries when Wales would not?
Ultimately, the reasons would pertain to individual country data. The regulations that we are discussing this week are a good example of that. Scotland removed Greece from its exempt country list unilaterally. At that point, the other nations had not removed Greece or any of the Greek islands, but they have now removed some of the islands from their lists.
When the regulations came into force, we took that decision because Public Health Scotland data, rather than the joint biosecurity centre data or the Public Health England risk assessment, showed a worrying level of imported cases: the number of positive cases that were linked to travel from Greece was the second highest, just behind Spain. The week after those regulations came into force, Greece overtook Spain, and, in the numbers that I have in front of me, Greece continues to be the country that gives us the most concern on the importation of cases.
Alignment is important, and when we can do that we will—we tend to align in the majority of cases. Equally, there is an understanding on the four-nations calls that each country will make decisions that are based on the interests of its own country, population and—[Inaudible.]
Thank you. I think that Emma Harper has the answers that she wanted. I will move on to Brian Whittle.
Can you clarify whether the Scottish Government is receiving different advice, or whether it has set different criteria, as to which countries to exempt?
I may have misheard the last part of Brian Whittle’s question, but I think that I have the gist of it.
As I said to Emma Harper, some data is shared between the four nations, including the joint biosecurity centre data and the Public Health England country assessment. In addition, each country looks at its own data individually—I look at Public Health Scotland data on the transmission of the virus coming into the country. A range of data is used, some of which is shared between the four nations and some of which is specific to Scotland or England.
The decision that was taken on Greece is a demonstration of that. Scotland took the decision to remove Greece from its exemption list. Following that, Wales removed a number of Greek islands from its list and the UK and Northern Irish Governments then decided to do the same, but some of the islands differ from those that Wales removed from its list. Wales now has an expanded list of islands.
The decisions that are taken depend on the data that Governments have in relation to their own countries as well as the shared data. I hope that that clarifies it.
What is the relationship with other countries around Europe and further afield regarding the data that we gather from them? What are their reflections on how we are dealing with their issues?
Ultimately, we have to take decisions on public health grounds. I understand that there can be concerns about diplomatic relations and that countries might be upset by the decisions that we take, but as long as we can justify our decisions—I am confident that we can—and explain the reasons and rationale for a particular decision, on public health grounds, we hope that other Governments will understand that our decisions have been made on no basis other than public health.
In some respects, that is quite liberating, as it means that we do not have to think too much about the politics or other matters that might often be part of our considerations. Decisions are made purely on public health grounds.
It would be wrong to suggest that some Governments are not upset—[Inaudible.] We have the consular corps here, in Edinburgh, and in Scotland more widely, and we are always happy to engage and explain the reasons for certain decisions.
We move to items 2 and 3, which are the formal debates on the affirmative instruments on which we have just taken evidence. Are members content to have a single debate that covers both instruments? I see that you are. Thank you. In the formal debate, members have the opportunity to contribute to the debate but not to ask further questions.
I ask the minister to open the debate and to move motions S5M-22576 and S5M-22619.
As always, convener, given that you have a packed agenda, and given that I have answered questions on the instruments, I am happy to waive my right to speak in the debate.
I move,
That the Health and Sport Committee recommends that the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No. 11) Regulations 2020 (SSI 2020/263) be approved.
That the Health and Sport Committee recommends that the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No. 12) Regulations 2020 (SSI 2020/271) be approved.
Before I put the question on the motions, does any member want to contribute to the debate?
I know that we are tight for time, so I did not want to press the cabinet secretary on the matter, but at some point I would like us to explore how other countries gather data and how that is fed into our decision making, because I do not think that there is a consistent approach across other countries. That is probably for another time, but I would like to discuss it with the cabinet secretary at some point.
Thank you. As no other members want to contribute, I ask the cabinet secretary to respond briefly.
I will just say that I am more than happy to have that discussion with Brian Whittle at any point. You have pressed me previously, convener, about Public Health Scotland publishing the data on imported cases, and I am pleased to say that it will do that from 23 September. That will give the committee more detail on some of the data that we use when we make our decisions.
I should also say to Brian Whittle that the data that we use when we make decisions is owned by the United Kingdom Government. The Scottish Government and the Welsh Government have written to the UK Government in strong terms to suggest that the data be released. We do not own the data. Any influence that the member can bring to bear in that regard would be greatly appreciated. On our most recent four-nations call, I think that the UK Government understood the strength of feeling on the part of the Scottish and Welsh Governments about the release of the data, so I hope that we can get to a position, relatively soon, in which the data that we use to make decisions on four-nations basis can enter the public domain in some shape or form.
That concludes the debate on the motions. I will put a single question on them. The question is, that motions S5M-22576 and S5M-22619 be agreed to.
Motions agreed to,
That the Health and Sport Committee recommends that the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No. 11) Regulations 2020 (SSI 2020/263) be approved.
That the Health and Sport Committee recommends that the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No. 12) Regulations 2020 (SSI 2020/271) be approved.
We will report to Parliament accordingly. I thank the cabinet secretary and his officials for attending.
National Health Service (Free Prescriptions and Charges for Drugs and Appliances) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2020 (SSI 2020/258)
The fourth item on the agenda is consideration of a negative instrument. As members have no comments on the instrument, does the committee agree that we should make no recommendations in relation to it?
Members indicated agreement.
Previous
Attendance