Chamber and committees

As convener of the COVID-19 Recovery Committee, it is my pleasure to speak about such an important topic, and I commend the Social Justice and Social Security Committee for bringing the debate to the chamber.

I will shortly talk about some of the COVID-19 Recovery Committee’s work within the context of the cost crisis. First, though, it is important to stress that the impact of the cost crisis is a cross-cutting issue that affects everyone. This debate is an excellent opportunity to highlight parliamentary committees’ welcome scrutiny of the issue.

Like other committees, we have just completed our pre-budget scrutiny. Last week, we wrote to the Deputy First Minister with our recommendations, which included calling on the Scottish Government to clarify whether the cost crisis will affect the funding of the Covid recovery strategy. As members are aware, the strategy was published in October 2021, well before the scale of the cost crisis was apparent. During evidence, we heard how the impact of the cost crisis could affect the funding and delivery of the strategy, with stark warnings that it will pose significant challenges for organisations, service providers and individuals that are even greater than those faced during the pandemic. The Scottish Government’s budget is worth roughly £1.7 billion less than it was last December, and we asked whether the Government intends to refresh the strategy to reflect any policy changes in the light of the cost crisis.

In a similar vein, at a recent Conveners Group meeting, I asked the First Minister whether the Government’s priorities for recovery had changed in the light of the cost crisis. She confirmed that its aims and objectives for recovery had not changed but that the context had. The First Minister spoke of the importance of focusing on inequalities made worse by the pandemic and the cost crisis, particularly for ethnic minorities and those who are less well off.

Among many other things, the report considered bankruptcy and digital exclusion, both of which have been impacted by the cost crisis. The COVID-19 Recovery Committee also considered those areas as part of our scrutiny of the Coronavirus (Recovery and Reform) (Scotland) Bill. Put simply, the bill was introduced to make permanent some provisions that were introduced through emergency Covid legislation in relation to public health and public service reform, which covered the remote delivery of public services. The aim was to retain service improvements that had been brought in during the pandemic and support resilience against future public health threats.

We heard about the experience of delivering public services remotely, including increased flexibilities and resource savings. However, witnesses highlighted some of the barriers to accessibility that exist for some users. The committee recommended that the bill be amended to ensure that all local authorities provide a choice of remote or in-person services, including the provision of hard copy documents where required.

We also considered the bill’s provisions on bankruptcy. Before I go on, it is worth explaining that people can only be forced into bankruptcy by their creditors if they owe more than a certain amount of money. Covid emergency legislation increased the debt threshold at which a creditor could make someone bankrupt, to protect people from harsh outcomes during the pandemic, and the bill set it permanently at a higher rate. The committee heard mixed views on what the debt threshold level should be, and it noted that the cost crisis had escalated considerably since the bill was introduced. The Government subsequently acknowledged the need to keep the threshold under review, particularly in the light of the current economic situation.

I turn to the committee’s future work. We are about to look at the impact of Covid on the labour market, focusing specifically on the proportion of economically inactive people who are on long-term sickness absence, as well as those who have chosen early retirement.? I am sure that issues relating to the cost crisis are bound to come up over the course of our inquiry.

As has been the case with Covid itself, this issue is a complex one that will not go away any time soon. As other members have said, addressing it will require actions from both the UK and Scottish Governments. Today’s debate highlights the strong parliamentary scrutiny that is being carried out to ensure that we can respond appropriately to the fiscal pressures that we all face.

I thank Alex Cole-Hamilton for bringing the debate to the chamber; I completely agree with him that Scotland’s natural environment deserves the highest standards of protection.

When I was elected to South Ayrshire Council as a councillor back in 2017, I was extremely alarmed to learn that Ayr beach water quality had been classified as poor for several years and that, if it tested poor for five consecutive years, Ayr beach would lose its designated bathing water status. Ayr beach is unique and the situation was challenging, as the River Doon and the River Ayr both run in at Ayr beach. Agricultural run-off from neighbouring farms was another factor that was affecting the water quality there. Losing bathing water status would be catastrophic for Ayr.

As a ward councillor at the time, I worked with Keep Scotland Beautiful. I thank my colleague Emma Harper, who, back in 2018, arranged a meeting at the Scottish Parliament between me, Scottish Water and SEPA to discuss how we could improve the water quality at Ayr beach. During 2020, Scottish Water invested £10 million to include three increased storm storage tanks in the surrounding area.

In 2021, Ayr beach, after being classified as poor for four years in a row, finally—with collaborative work from South Ayrshire Council, SEPA, Scottish Water, supported by the Scottish Government, and farmers and rural land managers—received classification as good.

However, the work does not stop there. It is indisputable that the discharge of raw sewage into rivers and seas in Scotland is, unfortunately, on the increase. Scottish Water has said that the growing problem of sewage discharge into rivers is caused not by a failure to provide the correct infrastructure but by the increase in heavy rain as a result of climate change. Climate change and flooding is a huge problem.

I highlight an on-going project in Prestwick, where there are historical and complex issues relating to sewer flooding. In 2019, the Prestwick strategic drainage project was set up; it included Scottish Water, elected members, Ayrshire Roads Alliance and local community councils. The aim of the group is to identify strategic short-term, medium-term and long-term measures to be put in place in local areas of concern where flooding occurs regularly. Short-term solutions were put in place, such as speed tables, where the tarmac on the road is raised slightly to alleviate flooding, and medium-term solutions such as new storage pipes and water tanks are planned.

The on-going work has led to improvements in Prestwick. However, there are things that we, in individual households, can do to mitigate surface water flooding when we experience increased rain as a result of climate change. For example, rain butts—big tubs that hold rainwater—can be used in gardens, along with rain garden planters. We can also limit the area that we tarmac—for example, driveways—as that adds to the problem of surface water locally because it cannot be absorbed into the ground. We can all do our bit and be mindful about climate change.

I welcome that the Scottish Government is being proactive in this regard and has implemented its “River Basin Management Plan for Scotland 2021-2027”, which takes comprehensive action on sewage spills, among other water quality issues. The plan includes actions to increase monitoring, provide more public information and reduce sewage litter and spill frequency. I look forward to hearing from the minister on how the plan is going.

I welcome the genuine concerns that members have raised tonight. However, I highlight that Scotland’s bathing water quality is the best that it has been since 2015, when stricter standards came into force. On top of that, 38 per cent of bathing sites are now rated as excellent. In addition, we should not forget that Scotland has the highest number of high-quality rivers in the UK, with 66 per cent in good condition; I look forward to that number increasing further as a result of the improvement plans that SEPA has outlined.

I want to see Scotland as a world leader in water quality, across all possible measures. Yes, we have our problems, and those need to be addressed, but we are improving and are on our way to reaching that goal.

Out of genuine interest, I ask whether the member agrees with the position that was put forward by Ross Finnie, formerly Minister for the Environment and Rural Development for the Lib Dems, who supported the idea that mutualising Scottish Water—which is really like privatising it—is the way forward.

Will data on youth vaping that is collected from the local schools survey be collated and considered in the Scottish Government’s tobacco action plan that is due to be published next year?

It is vital that the families and relatives involved have the utmost confidence in the public inquiry and that the process allows for credible answers to be reached. Can the Deputy First Minister provide further assurances that the important progress that has been made so far by the inquiry is continued and that it will be done in a transparent manner that operates independently of ministers?

Will the member take an intervention?

A press release from Inclusion Scotland this morning said that a lot of disabled Scots are worried about dying this winter because of the cost of living crisis. In fact, 75 per cent are not eating or not heating their homes at the moment. Does Jeremy Balfour acknowledge that his party’s policies—Brexit and the recent chaos down at Westminster—are to blame for what is a broken UK?

Thank you, Deputy First Minister, but I think that we are veering slightly off the budget scrutiny agenda.

That concludes our consideration of the agenda item. I thank the Deputy First Minister and his officials for their evidence today. The committee’s next meeting will be on Thursday 27 October, when we will consider a draft letter to the Scottish Government on our pre-budget scrutiny.

That concludes the public part of our meeting. We will now move into private session.

We intend to conclude the evidence session by 11 am, so members have approximately 10 minutes each to ask questions of the Deputy First Minister. We should be okay for time, but I apologise in advance because I might, if time runs on too far, have to interrupt members or witnesses in the interest of brevity.

I will begin the questions. Will you please provide some more detail on the scale of the on-going Covid-19 spend?

I am sorry, Mr Rowley—