Official Report 341KB pdf
I inform members that PE603, from Mr Jim Slaven, on behalf of the James Connolly Society, has been deferred until the next meeting, because Mr Slaven has made a request to speak to the committee. Is that agreed?
Rented Accommodation <br />(Complaints Procedures) (PE596)
Krystyna Ost is here to speak to PE596, which calls on the Parliament to take the necessary steps to address the alleged serious inadequacies in the existing complaints procedures in relation to rented accommodation that is committed to providing care for the old and disabled.
Last December, a young girl of 12 told the committee about years of harassment that she and her family endured from the agencies whose duty it was to protect her. At the other end of the scale, I am 79, and am a tenant in a sheltered housing scheme. I am helpless in my protests about the way that I am treated.
Thank you very much. It is now open to members of the committee to ask questions.
I see some merit in Ms Ost's petition.
I am sorry; I cannot hear you.
I will speak up. I see some merit in the points in the petition about the complaints procedure for sheltered housing. Can you identify the sheltered housing association of which you are a tenant?
I am a tenant of Viewpoint Housing Association.
Is that a publicly funded housing association?
Yes. It is a charity.
You say that the complaints procedure includes a requirement to involve a solicitor. Is that a requirement or a recommendation?
It is a recommendation—it is incorporated in the new complaints procedure document. A solicitor is specifically mentioned. If someone's initial complaint fails, they can go to a solicitor.
So it was your choice to go to a solicitor.
Yes.
Your original complaint was about the two wardens in your complex.
Not exactly. It was about how I was treated by the wardens, who have a duty of care. I had pneumonia at the time.
Your first line of complaint was about them and had to be made to them.
I complained to the manager, who took five weeks to reply and responded reluctantly after I insisted that he did so.
Could you provide the committee with a copy of the complaints procedure?
Oh, yes; I could provide it. I did not provide it because what was available was just a slip of paper, which I could not find. I just followed my common sense and complained to the manager in writing.
Okay. Thank you.
Ms Ost, you have drawn a valid point to our attention. It is unfortunate that many senior people do not complain—I think that you referred to that fact in your petition—and put up with far too much.
I do, and I suggested that in one of the papers that I submitted to the committee.
I am sorry, but I have not seen that. You are ahead of me.
I think that it would be fair if the commissioner's remit were widened to include other people who find it difficult to complain. Other people in my complex have complained of similarly callous treatment, but they are unable, unwilling or frightened to pursue the matter because there is a possibility of retaliation, which is a big threat. It would be good if someone who is generally worthy of respect and trust was responsible for complaints from people, including children, and was able to attend to a complaint immediately. It would also be good if Parliament drew up a schedule that put complaints into categories of seriousness and ensured that the most serious were attended to immediately.
Do you feel that you speak on behalf of many old and sometimes helpless silent victims, who are intimidated, or feel that there is an atmosphere of intimidation, if they complain?
Indeed I do. I cannot identify the other people who complained, but one of them is referred to in the 160-page document that I provided to the committee, which consists mostly of the writings of the management, the lawyer and me. I have indisputable proof of what I am saying. I have spoken to many people who would not consider complaining. The situation is serious.
They feel grateful for their accommodation and do not want to rock the boat, but then things get worse.
Yes. I think that the field is open to abuse. The selection of staff is another important aspect. The staff are untrained and are selected on no known basis. How they relate to people is not monitored. If I may, I will give an example, which involves three people who are resident in the complex. Two are wardens and one is a—what is the word?
An assistant?
Yes—an odd-job person. A ramp and a staircase lead from the complex to the street, and I requested that salt be put on them when they are icy, because they are dangerous. The answer I got was that that was not their job, but the gardeners' job. I do not think that that is a good enough answer. Another example was when the light on the pedestrian crossing failed and I asked a warden to ring the police. The warden said that it was not their job to do that, which indicates the attitude to people who are actually—
Are they getting them cheap? Are they paying low wages?
Pardon?
Are they paying low wages to staff and getting them cheap? They do not bother to screen people to ascertain whether they have the right attitude to human beings.
Yes.
What is the name of the charity that owns the sheltered housing, which, according to your document, consists of 49 flats?
It has thousands of tenants, but in the complex where I live there are 49 flats. Some are for couples and others are singles.
Do you know the name of the charity?
I do not, but I know that it is a registered charity. I suppose it is registered under the name of Viewpoint Housing Association. Should there be another name?
I do not know. I just thought that it would be helpful to know.
Is it Viewpoint?
The Viewpoint Housing Association.
So that is the name of the charity. Dorothy-Grace Elder raised a point about staff training. I think that we could take up the point that there might an argument that staff in charities that run sheltered accommodation and which have—at least—a duty of care for tenants should be properly trained.
Yes.
Did the manager to whom you wrote reply in writing five weeks later?
He eventually replied in writing, saying that he hoped that I understood that his priority was the wardens. A copy of his letter is contained in the document that I provided to the committee.
I do not think that I have that.
Following that letter, there was a series of stressful events.
I inform members that, if any member wants to check anything in relation to the petition, the clerks have extensive background material.
I have another point for clarification. Do the residents of the housing association pay rent themselves? If not, does the council pay the rent or does the charity fund the residents?
How can I answer that? I hope that I understand the question correctly. It is difficult for me to hear everything. We all pay an economic rent for assured tenancies. Another body regulates the rent. The service charges, which include a service charge for the wardens of about £700 a year, are variable and are reviewed every year. I hope that I have answered the question.
Yes. That is what I wanted to know.
The executive agency that is meant to monitor and regulate housing associations is Communities Scotland. It is meant to check the complaints procedures of individual housing associations such as Viewpoint. Have you had any correspondence with Communities Scotland?
No. I had some correspondence with the people who regulate rents because the description of my flat was incorrect. After my experience with the solicitor, I turned to an MSP for help. Two MSPs are involved and they distorted the nature of my complaint. After that, there was no point in complaining to the ombudsman because the green light was given that this was a trivial matter.
Have you approached the Scottish public services ombudsman?
No. Photocopies of all the letters are in a bound folder of 160 pages that was deposited with the clerk.
Do you know whether the complaints procedure to which you referred and which recommends a solicitor also recommends that people should have access to the ombudsman?
The situation bears explaining. The complaints procedure was not easily accessible. It was on a slip of paper that was tucked into a handbook and which I failed to see. I heard about the ombudsman from the citizens advice bureau, but, as I explained, there was no point in going to the ombudsman when my complaint had been dismissed by MSPs and Mr Wallace, who had a copy of my complaint and all the documents. The Minister for Justice and the Minister for Social Justice had the documents, which speak for themselves. I did not write most of them; they include my letters, but they also include letters between lawyers and the management and between the management and me. The documents are valid and concern what I have outlined.
There are two strands to what you tell us. One is a complaint about the way in which the housing association operates the complaints procedure, and the other is a complaint about legal representation by solicitors. In dealing with your petition, the committee will focus on how the housing association's complaints procedure could be improved and tightened to ensure that you have a proper complaints procedure. Other petitions have dealt with the separate issue of legal representation, which a report by the Justice 1 Committee dealt with.
Forgive me for asking, but how can the two issues be divorced?
We have to do that.
That means that no one will take up my complaint. If I cannot have representation, which is a step in the complaints procedure, where shall I go?
If you are here to complain about the housing association's complaints procedure, we are happy to pursue the matter on your behalf, but the separate issue of how legal representation is undertaken has been the subject of several petitions. Those petitions were referred to the Justice 1 Committee, which conducted an inquiry and published a report with recommendations. We can address the housing association issue, which has not been dealt with.
Treating both issues as one entity is indispensable.
We would want to see an—
My statements are serious allegations. What you describe means that if they were challenged in court, I would have no defence.
You have a defence. Your defence relates to how the Scottish Parliament regulates and controls housing associations. That is the issue that we can pursue.
We are not allowed to pursue individual complaints. We can consider the petition because it concerns the wider issue of housing association complaints procedures. We could deal with the solicitor aspect by considering the recommendation in the complaints procedure to which Ms Ost referred. That would address both issues without our becoming involved in the difficult circumstances that the convener described.
If a complaint had merit, a commissioner could take legal action on behalf of the complainer.
That relates to Dorothy-Grace Elder's suggestion.
I do not know whether that could happen. I begin to see the confusion. The main point is that you would not have needed to waste your time in going to lawyers and falling into that rabbit-hole had the complaints system been right. If the committee helped you in getting the complaints system sorted, perhaps you could consider returning to the committee later to talk about lawyers. I say that reluctantly, because I think that you know that I quite like having a go at lawyers.
Careful—you are sitting next to one.
The point today is to change the complaints system, so that nobody need undergo the stress of going to lawyers, whether good, bad or indifferent.
That is the ideal situation.
As members have no more questions, we will move on to discuss action on the petition. Ms Ost is free to stay and listen to our discussion and the recommendations that arise from it. I thank her for her evidence.
Do we have a copy of the 160-page document to which Ms Ost referred, which includes the complaints procedure?
Yes. That can be circulated. Any member can see the documents, of which Steve Farrell has a copy.
I suggest that we ask for the opinion of the Scottish Commission for the Regulation of Care, whose representatives I met not so long ago to discuss homes for disabled people. The complaints procedure should be clear. As a trade unionist, I know that disciplinary and grievance procedures should have time limits within which any complainant should expect an initial answer. If the complaint is not resolved, another time limit is provided for taking the complaint to the next management level. If the complaint remains unresolved, the complainant can take it to a final body. Time frames for resolving complaints should be laid out clearly. That is a civilised way in which to approach such matters, and I advocate such procedures for homes. I would be surprised to learn that homes did not have such complaints procedures.
The petition relates to sheltered housing. Does the care commission consider the service level in such housing and stipulate the level of care that is expected? The petition concerns the level of care given by a warden. Does the care commission have a role in policing sheltered housing complexes?
There can be all the training under the sun, but if someone does not have the decency to chuck some salt on a wheelchair ramp or to look out for the petitioner when she is lying in bed with pneumonia, we do not want them to deal with anyone in a care situation.
Yes—absolutely. We are here to be kept in touch with.
The situation has been discussed fully. It is clear that a complaint may fall at the first hurdle if the complaints procedure involves an in-house judge and jury.
It is important that Communities Scotland makes it clear how it monitors and regulates complaints procedures and clarifies the standard that it sets down for every housing association to achieve.
Thank you.
Greyhound Racing (Regulation) (PE604)
PE604, which was submitted by Mr Andrew S Wood, calls for the establishment of a Scottish independent greyhound racing regulatory body. Mr Wood is accompanied by Howard Wallace, Doreen Graham, Hamish Hastie, Arthur Robinson and Maureen Purvis. I welcome them all to the committee. Although not all six petitioners can have three minutes to address the committee, your official spokesperson has three minutes to do so. I will then open up the meeting for questions, which any of you can answer.
First, I would like to thank the committee for giving us the opportunity to submit the petition and to add extra oral evidence to the information that has been circulated to committee members.
Absolutely—any one of them can do so. Before I move to questions from the committee, Alex Neil MSP is here to support the petition.
In essence, there are two elements to the petition: the first is the animal welfare aspect and the other is the development of greyhound racing in Scotland. The animal welfare aspect is clearly within the remit of the Scottish Parliament. As the committee knows, within the next 12 months or so, the Parliament expects to have an animal welfare bill to debate—irrespective of who wins the election on 1 May. The committee that deals with that bill should investigate the animal welfare aspects of PE604 and give them serious consideration. It is clear from the evidence that there is an issue that needs to be addressed.
We understand that the power to introduce levies on racing dogs and betting slips is reserved to Westminster and is not currently within the power of this Parliament.
In that case, why is Quality Meat Scotland about to be given statutory powers to collect levies from farmers?
I understand why you ask, but that power is in the Scotland Act 1998. It is not necessarily the fault of anyone here; it is just a fact. That does not mean that the Scotland Act 1998 cannot be reformed. It is a matter for the Scottish Parliament to discuss whether it wants such powers to be devolved.
The age of a greyhound can be relevant in deciding which race it is entered for. Is that the case for horses? I am ignorant about this.
Horses and greyhounds are graded more on their ability than on their age. Like us, as they get older, they are less inclined to perform well.
I see that Mr Wallace is looking at me.
Dr Ewing is excluded from that.
That makes the matter clear, because it is desirable that greyhound racing be regulated and licensed. My knowledge of horse-racing is limited to my having been the member of Parliament for Hamilton. I went to races at the racecourse there because a lot of voters also went.
I do not want to hog the discussion, but I will answer that question. The Retired Greyhound Trust has put in place a rehoming scheme for ex-racers from licensed tracks that have retired because of old age, injuries or lack of ability. By and large, that scheme has been successful. Many caring people are involved with unlicensed tracks, but—as in society as a whole—a tiny minority are callous and cruel. Some will not go to a veterinary surgeon to have their dogs put down. If, in the longer term, we can bring together the two codes through legislation, England and Wales will follow us. There are many unlicensed tracks in England.
Mr Wallace has answered a number of the questions that I intended to ask. The only track that I have ever visited is the flapping track in Ayr. When I was there, I was struck by the fact that people were gambling without knowing what they were gambling on. The dogs could have come from Shawfield or anywhere else. Do flapping tracks have to be licensed with local authorities?
Under the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963, tracks must have a betting licence from the local authority. They must also have a liquor and entertainment licence. The role of local authorities goes no further than that. Powers could be devolved to local authorities. As a condition of issuing licences—especially betting licences—local authorities could insist that veterinary care be provided. At flapping tracks, veterinary care is not provided on course, whereas at licensed tracks there is veterinary attendance both at trials and at races. Local authorities should make the granting of licences conditional on the provision of veterinary care and retirement and welfare schemes.
Some of the most appalling cases of cruelty with which the SSPCA has dealt have involved greyhounds at the end of their career. For the past six years, we have been one of many animal welfare groups that form part of the International Greyhound Forum. We have worked with the Society of Greyhound Veterinarians to produce a greyhound charter from cradle to grave. The charter covers everything from the number of litters that a bitch will have during her lifetime, racing and how dogs are transported to races, through to the dogs' retirement and their departing this world. The British Greyhound Racing Board has embraced the charter. However, because most tracks in Scotland are flapping tracks and are unregistered, we have no way of ensuring that it is implemented there.
Maureen Purvis can provide members with information on what is happening south of the border and at United Kingdom level.
I represent an organisation called Greyhounds UK, which is led by the actress Annette Crosbie, who, unfortunately, could not be here today. We have been working for a long time with the British Greyhound Racing Board and the National Greyhound Racing Club. We have found that they regard the greyhound as a commodity. We have also found that the safeguards that are in place are just cosmetic—they are not real—and that the abuses that have been referred to happen. The money that is gained from the bookmakers in England is just put into the promoters' pockets; it is not put into facilities for the dogs. A dog died in kennels at a track in London recently.
I acknowledge the sporting nature of the matter, and I want to ask Hamish Hastie, the vet, about that later.
I represent the independent greyhound rescue organisations. I am the chairman of Dumfriesshire Greyhound Rescue. There is one track in Dumfriesshire, which is at Gretna. Since we were formed in December 2001, we have rehomed 43 dogs. Five of them were lurchers and four were coursers; the rest were ex-racing dogs.
I have a question for Hamish Hastie. I thought that there were always vets at dog tracks—even at flapping tracks. If that is not the case, there are no tests for drugs and no other checks are made.
At tracks such as Shawfield, doping tests are done after racing.
That is a licensed track. Is testing done at the unlicensed tracks?
No. Not at all.
There is no identification. If I took a dog to Gretna to try to qualify it to race at that track, I would go along on the track's trial-session day or evening and present the dog. If the dog did the qualifying time, he would be marked up, as it is termed. In other words, the detail of his ear markings would be taken. If he did not have ear markings because he was not registered at birth, his body markings—such as colour and toenail colour—would be taken, but I could give a false name and address.
Do you have any rough figures for the dogs that are retired every year? What is your estimate of those that might be abandoned or put to death cruelly?
I would be delighted to reply to the first questions, because I have been involved in greyhound racing all my life—since I was born. I have a great passion for the sport. That is why I have undertaken an in-depth study of what is happening in greyhound racing.
I ask for briefer answers, because we have a lot of business this morning.
Okay. To return to the question, there are 360 retired dogs from licensed tracks. Of those, 63 are waiting for rehoming. Nineteen are racing casualties or are injured and put down at the track for rebreaking a leg, for example. Thirty-four dogs are unsuitable for rehoming—they might have a wee bit of a nasty streak and be difficult to rehome into family care. Seventy-two dogs have been euthanised and I have come across three cases of non-euthanisation.
Thank you. It is marvellous that you have such precise figures and that you have done a lot of work on what is, as you say, a migrant industry.
The vast majority of dogs that race in Scotland start their lives as Irish racing greyhounds. There are regular auctions in Ireland, through which many dogs are exported to Spain. The last remaining track in Spain is in Barcelona and is owned by a very powerful man. According to figures that I was given in February, there are 1,000 dogs there, 999 of which come from Ireland. Those dogs see one hour of daylight a day and are kept in 1m2 kennels, which sometimes contain two dogs. The dogs lie in their faeces and urine and have no blankets; they have a life of darkness. That is unacceptable in animal welfare terms. The SSPCA is concerned about that and would like a board in Scotland to examine the export of dogs.
They are nice dogs.
They are wonderful; the breed is the oldest pure breed of dog in the world.
Since we have taken up the issue and it has started to receive media attention, people like Arthur Robinson have had more dogs presented to them—the number of dogs that are presented to Arthur has increased tenfold. The problem is serious and it must be addressed.
Have you had any response from the British Greyhound Racing Board, which, technically, is in charge of the industry in Britain?
Yes. I received a letter from the board, which, if I recall correctly, said that everything was okay in its house.
One of the witnesses mentioned lobbying Parliament. Previously, I was a member of Parliament and I know that MPs are appointed as parliamentary consultants to the British Greyhound Racing Board—I think that Jack Cunningham MP is the present consultant. Have you received responses from MPs when you have reported the atrocities and outrages that take place?
I wrote to Jack Cunningham once and received no reply.
I do not think that Mr Cunningham is involved with the board at present, although he was the consultant for a time. We have lots of experience of the British Greyhound Racing Board and the National Greyhound Racing Club. I asked the chief executive of the board how long he expects owners to subsidise the industry, which is the case at the moment because prizes do not cover kennel bills and trainers are not paid enough. He said, "We'll get away with it for as long as we can." The board is a business that looks after promoters and bookmakers—greyhound racing is a medium for betting.
There is no legislation in England either—the British Greyhound Racing Board is made up of stadium promoters and, crucially, bookmakers, which includes big public limited companies such as Ladbrokes.
So the board is not a statutory organisation.
No—it is an industry organisation.
The welfare issues at flapping tracks relate not only to dogs. We know of two incidents involving rabbits at separate tracks. One track in the Borders used live rabbits on the lure to train dogs, which resulted in the rabbits' limbs being almost severed. All animals, including rabbits, are entitled to good welfare. There was also an incident in which live rabbits were sold outside an Ayr track for people to use in training their dogs. There have also been instances of dogs suffocating in vans on the way to races. There are many aspects to the welfare issue, which is why we want to ensure that flapping tracks are governed in some way.
The suggested action on the petition includes writing to the Scottish Executive, the British Greyhound Racing Board and the British Greyhound Racing Fund. Given that our first job is to get a response to the petition, should we contact any other bodies?
I suggest the National Greyhound Racing Club.
The committee should consider writing to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to point out that the revenue from betting on greyhounds in Scotland alone is about £221 million. The request for £3 million or £4 million of that to be reinvested in the industry is fairly modest and, it seems to me, a sensible proposition.
I am not sure that it is the Chancellor of the Exchequer's decision.
I am not too keen on the Chancellor of the Exchequer getting the money, because I doubt whether it would be returned to the greyhound industry.
Money is already received through the betting levy. All that the petitioners seek is for some of their money to be recycled and reinvested in the industry.
There has been a renaissance in horse-racing and if there is one in greyhound racing, which is possible, it should be done in the right way.
I suggest that we draw the issue to the attention of the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport, who might be able to initiate action through sportscotland or other Executive agencies before we move towards legislation.
I thank the petitioners, who have given a harrowing account of what goes on in the greyhound racing industry.
I ask members to bear in mind the positive side; I do not want them to think only about dogs dying and other negative issues. The industry has fantastic potential and could be of benefit to local rural areas and, through tourism, to Scotland as a whole.
I thank the petitioners for giving us their time. They are welcome to listen to the discussion on what to do with the petition.
The Executive should consider incorporating the issue in the animal welfare bill that is being drafted.
Yes. We will ask the Executive whether it intends to incorporate the issue in that bill.
Can we also contact the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to find out whether conditions can be attached to betting and drinks licences that are issued to tracks?
Yes. We will ask COSLA whether it has any views on animal welfare in relation to the issuing of betting and drink licences to greyhound racing tracks.
On the grounds of welfare alone, the case has been made that legislation is required to draw together the licensed and unlicensed sides of the industry. We must also ensure that other welfare measures are taken, such as the creation of a database to ensure traceability. Without such a database, we cannot be sure whether animal welfare rules are being obeyed. The new Parliament must conduct an inquiry into the issue with a view to the production of a bill.
It has been suggested that we ask the Scottish Executive to comment on whether the issue will be included in the draft animal welfare bill, which will be considered in the new Parliament.
A couple of points have not been covered. Comments have been made about regulation in Ireland and the fact that Shawfield is a licensed track, but I am concerned that, although licensed tracks follow the rules until—in their opinion—the dog comes to the end of its useful life, dogs are then sometimes passed to unscrupulous tracks. The story that we heard about dogs from Ireland being sent to Spain is absolutely horrendous. That is a wider issue, but the petitioners might want to consider passing a similar petition to the European Commission. The misery for the dogs is the same, whether they are in Europe or the UK. The petitioners, rather than the committee, might like to do that.
They are listening.
Rhoda Grant mentioned COSLA. I am sure that COSLA could take action on animal welfare at unlicensed tracks. Councils could at least ensure that a vet is on site during races.
When we receive the responses, we will get in touch with the petitioners. However, the matter will have to be pursued in the next session of Parliament, because this Public Petitions Committee has only two meetings left and we will not be able to resolve the matter in such a short period. I thank the petitioners for their evidence, which was useful.
Law Society of Scotland<br />(Complaints Procedures) (PE606)
The next new petition is PE606, from Mrs Katherine Smith, calling on the Parliament to take the necessary steps to improve the transparency and accountability of, and accessibility to, the complaints procedures of the Law Society of Scotland. The petition was prompted by the difficulties that the petitioner experienced in attempting to raise a civil claim for financial loss against a solicitor on the ground of negligence.
I do not understand what is meant by "individual master policies". I do not see an objection to a standard master policy being issued—why should it not? However, solicitors have some leeway in what they can put in their own insurance policies. They can go all the way and increase such policies to more than the minimum—that is a personal and private matter. I do not see why anybody should have the right to know what a solicitor's own policy states.
None of us really knows what an individual master policy is, but that is one reason why we should write to the Law Society.
The expression is meaningless.
The Law Society can write back to explain the situation. We can simply ask for its comments at this stage. Are members agreed?
Robert Burns (National Holiday) (PE607)
Petition PE607, from Safeway plc, calls on the Parliament to take the necessary steps to declare 25 January a national holiday in Scotland in celebration of Robert Burns.
For people in Scotland, 25 January is a special and well-recognised day after the Christmas and new year holidays. Although I am keen to make the most of the Burns season, I do not know whether another holiday in January would be the best way ahead.
So we should write to Dumfries and Galloway Council rather than to the Scottish Executive.
We should also write to the three Ayrshire councils.
It is possible to have a national day without its necessarily being a statutory holiday. To many people, Burns is much more recognisable than St Andrew, for example. Although it is customary to have a saint's day, Burns is internationally recognisable. We could ask for the day to be made an official national day and/or a holiday, which would be a wee bit of a compromise. That time of year is rotten, as is the time around St Andrew's day. Perhaps there will be a lot of popular support for such a proposal.
Rabbie Burns was certainly no saint. I have no objection to writing to the Executive to ask whether it would consider making 25 January either a holiday or a national day. We could also write to the councils that were mentioned. Are members agreed?
Previous
Item in PrivateNext
Current Petitions