Chamber and committees

I thank you for coming along this morning, minister. I thank our other witnesses, too, of course.

There have been some issues with the single building assessment giving only a pass or fail, and lessons have been learned relating to PAS 9980 and intermediate risk. We have heard particular concerns from across all sectors that pass or fail scoring could lead to buildings that are not dangerous to life failing the assessment. What is your response to the calls for the single building assessment to recognise tolerable or medium risk?

In evidence, we have heard calls for more detail in the bill on the responsible developers scheme. However, there has been a debate around that. Some say that the bill is too broad and relies too much on secondary legislation, which could come too slowly. Others state that the bill is too narrow and that it should be a framework bill, as long as the secondary legislation follows quickly. What are your reflections on that, minister? Might draft secondary legislation be available during parliamentary consideration of the bill?

It is good to hear you highlighting that, including the point about talking to the developers in the first instance. I know that there have been issues around having to look at making changes to the primary legislation in England. Obviously, we do not want to be in that position.

Although making provision for a profit threshold sounds like a nice, simple solution, perhaps the situation is a lot more nuanced than that and not as straightforward as it might seem.

I, too, am pleased to be contributing today, and I congratulate my colleague Kenneth Gibson on securing the debate and calling for the removal of the annual sales limit in charity lottery fundraising.

The idea that there could be a restriction on funds raised for the betterment of society is a bit baffling. However, under the UK Gambling Act 2005, society lotteries are subject to a maximum sale of £50 million, as we have already heard. The limitation is seemingly in place to uphold their primary purpose and to ensure that their fundamental mission of raising funds for good causes remains intact. However, a striking disparity emerges when we consider that other forms of gambling, particularly those that are deemed harmful, operate freely without similar constraints.

To provide some insight, I note that the Gambling Commission reported that, excluding all the reported lotteries, the gambling industry generated an eye-watering total revenue of £10.9 billion last year; that figure was already cited by Kenneth Gibson, but it is certainly worth repeating. Not only is that gambling revenue amassed by preying on society’s most vulnerable people, but it exacerbates issues such as homelessness, crime, fractured relationships and mental health problems; it even contributes to suicide rates. The impacts are far reaching and profound.

Meanwhile, we impose a £50 million limit on society lotteries from which no private profit is gained and funds instead go towards organisations that diligently work to eliminate some of the very inequalities that gambling supports. That is nothing short of ludicrous.

Faced with the post-pandemic era and the relentless squeeze of the cost of living crisis, charities and voluntary organisations are grappling with the dual challenge of increasing demand while their resources are diminishing. As a result, around half such organisations are struggling to deliver their essential core services. That is outlined in the “Third Sector Tracker Report” by the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations. To put it simply, organisations are absolutely crying out for a funding lifeline and, with society lotteries generating an impressive total of £420 million annually and displaying signs of significant growth, they are well placed to provide that essential support.

I, too, welcome to the public gallery the representatives who are here today from the People’s Postcode Lottery, and I thank them for the leading role that they have played in the campaign and for their tireless efforts to remove the absurd upper limit.

Reading the briefing for the debate today, I found it disheartening to learn that, taken over the next five years, the existing cap on annual sales will jeopardise a staggering £175 million in crucial funding for 100 supported charities. It is clearly ridiculous that such a substantial contribution to charities is being seriously hindered by the outdated legislation, especially, as we have already heard, when it would cost the public purse absolutely nothing.

Nevertheless, community grants from the People’s Postcode Lottery of £26,400 have been distributed across my constituency of Uddingston and Bellshill, and that support has translated into tangible benefits for various projects that affect people on the ground. Examples include funding for equipment for the nurture in nature initiative and funding that was awarded to Viewpark Gardens allotment and community gardens, which allowed it to buy a range of seeds, plants, food containers and gardening tools for its grow in the community projects. The funding has been transformational, and my team is happy to encourage and support more local organisations to apply to society lotteries. I am grateful to Paul O’Kane for highlighting Enable Scotland, too.

Although lotteries policy is a reserved matter, I hope that the UK Government is listening closely to today’s debate and the call to remove the charity lottery fundraising cap. The growth of the fantastic organisations in our community and voluntary sector should be celebrated and nourished. We cannot and should not put a limit on social good, and it is time for the UK Government—to use Paul O’Kane’s words—to get a move on and sort it out.

Although Scotland continues to perform really well across the four nations of the United Kingdom in its uptake of childhood immunisations, recent data from Public Health Scotland highlights a gradual decline. The overall uptake of both doses has fallen below the World Health Organization’s target of 90 per cent—a critical level that protects against the return of large outbreaks. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to highlight the importance of receiving both doses of the MMR vaccine? What strategies are in place to ensure easy access to follow-up appointments for children in cases where vaccinations—whether one or both doses—have been missed?

To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to prevent a resurgence of measles in Scotland. (S6F-02778)

You spoke earlier about how victim impact statements might have a disproportionate impact on panel members. Surely that would also give the panel the fullest possible information and the fullest possible understanding of all the facts and of the matter in its entirety.

I speak in support of the Scottish Government’s amendment as we consider the decision-making process and outcomes of the pandemic response in our nation.

As we know, the Covid-19 pandemic has been the most serious public health crisis of our time, affecting millions of lives and livelihoods across the world. In Scotland, we have faced many challenges and difficulties, but we have also shown resilience, solidarity and compassion in the face of adversity. Individuals in communities across Scotland stepped up to look after each other, including our children. Although our young people missed some school lessons, they learned some really big life lessons about the things that really matter—looking after family, friends, neighbours and strangers, too. I trust that the comfort of human touch and the value of hugging each other tight will never be lost to them.

The Scottish Government was guided by the best available scientific evidence and advice at that time, without the benefit of hindsight, and it acted swiftly and decisively to protect the health and wellbeing of Scotland’s people.

Scotland pursued a zero Covid strategy in 2020, aiming to eliminate the virus entirely, and lifted lockdown rules more gradually than the rest of the UK, following a cautious and careful approach. Testing capacity was expanded to ensure that everyone with symptoms of a respiratory infection, including those of Covid-19, could access a test. A successful vaccination programme was rolled out, through which the vaccine was offered to every eligible person and boosters were provided to all who needed them.

The inquiry will rightly examine the early challenges on guidance, personal protective equipment and care home admissions, but, as Jeane Freeman told the inquiry,

“you cannot magic out of thin air appropriate buildings, appropriate kit and skilled individuals.”

The learning that flows from the current inquiry will support future Governments to improve planning and offer better protection to us all.

Throughout the pandemic, our First Minister kept the public well informed, communicating clearly and transparently about the rules and restrictions, the risks and benefits and the rationale and evidence behind decision making. Various channels and platforms were used, such as daily briefings, social media, websites, leaflets and posters, to reach out to different audiences and communities. It took its toll—the public could see that in the First Minister’s face—but it was absolutely necessary. The Scottish Government is rightly taking the time to listen to the views and feedback of the public through a range of consultations and surveys.

Recognising that the pandemic is a global challenge that requires a co-ordinated and co-operative response has also been key. Hence, there is a need to work closely and collaboratively with other UK nations, as well as international partners, to share information, resources and best practices. However, the different circumstances and needs of each nation must also be respected. It is right for Scotland’s Government to exercise devolved powers and responsibilities and to tailor responses to specific situations in Scotland. Sadly, those on the Tory benches disagree, but that is to be expected.

We cannot be complacent or self-congratulatory. The Scottish Government acknowledges that there were mistakes and shortcomings, and it is committed to learning from them and improving. It welcomes the UK Covid inquiry to Scotland, because conducting a thorough and independent investigation into the pandemic response across our nations is really important. The Scottish Government must continue to co-operate fully and openly with the inquiry, providing evidence and documents and answering questions from the inquiry panel.

Today’s debate feels really premature. As we have heard, the independence of the inquiry is central, and politicians attempting to pre-empt the conclusions is really unhelpful.

No, I will not.

We should let the inquiry get on with its work, as we have heard. We should act accordingly when the recommendations are released and be prepared to accept any criticisms and suggestions for improvement. I trust that the inquiry will also recognise the efforts and achievements of the Scottish Government and the people of Scotland in tackling the pandemic and that it will identify strengths as well as weaknesses and draw together future lessons and implications.

The Covid-19 pandemic is not over yet. We are still living with the virus, and we still face uncertainties and challenges ahead. We need to remain vigilant and adaptable and must continue to follow the public health guidance and advice. We need to support each other and look after ourselves, showing kindness and compassion to those who have been affected by the pandemic, because grieving families are at the absolute heart of this and it has affected all of us.

The Scottish Government must continue to do everything in its power to protect the health and lives of people in Scotland and to support the recovery and renewal of our society and economy, and it must remain transparent and accountable to the public and strive to engage and involve people in the decision-making process. Co-operation and collaboration with other UK nations and the international community will also remain key as we continue to contribute to the global fight against the pandemic. Let us focus where we should be focusing.