Chamber and committees

I extend my thanks to the members and clerks of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee for producing the report, which is not only helpful but clearly shows the views of our third sector throughout its findings and recommendations.

We all agree that our third sector is the lifeblood of so many of our communities. It provides on-the-ground services that Governments struggle to provide, and it meets the needs of residents that large-scale organisations have difficulties in tackling. Whether through befriending programmes for the lonely, rehabilitation for people who are affected by addiction or warm hubs for those who are struggling with household bills, the small-scale local actions of our voluntary organisations are central to wellbeing and community cohesion throughout Scotland.

I want to take the opportunity to thank the incredible charities of the north-east. There are too many to name, but I highlight Camphill School Aberdeen, Big Noise Torry and the men’s shed network. Those are three fantastic charities that, through their work with young people and adults in the north-east, provide a vital service and resource in our community. They deserve our thanks and our support.

Reform of charity legislation is long overdue, and I join colleagues in welcoming the Charities (Regulation and Administration) (Scotland) Bill. It goes some way to developing a clearer framework for charities and their trustees in Scotland, and seeks to encourage the use of technology and to build greater transparency into the system so that our third sector has greater accountability and access to support and help.

I also welcome the consultation that took place with the third sector in relation to the drafting of the bill. It has been well thought through and the third sector has engaged widely. Although only 12 of the 32 third sector interfaces responded to the consultation, I recognise that it took place during the pandemic, when many organisations had to put resources elsewhere.

I support the Social Justice and Social Security Committee’s recommendation that the Scottish Government should look again at how it engages with the third sector, and I ask the cabinet secretary to produce a plan for how that might be done in future consultations.

I note that many of the organisations that responded to the consultation had concerns about the place of people with lived experience as trustees under the new legislation, and I welcome the committee’s focus on that in its report. It is clear that the committee thought carefully about the issue and considered the implications for boards and the recruitment of trustees.

The committee calls for much greater clarity to be provided on the disqualification criteria around bankruptcy and asks the Government to ensure that the waiver process is well understood by the sector. As the convener said, it is clear that OSCR will have some work to do to ensure that that is in place once the bill has been passed.

As anyone who is involved in charities in Scotland knows, the recruitment of trustees is challenging. Finding the right people to do the right jobs is difficult; the difficulty of doing so in our more rural communities, in particular, has been highlighted. Therefore, it is important that the bill does not dissuade anyone who is suitable from becoming a charity trustee and does not make the process cumbersome and, in so doing, put people off.

More clarity is also needed around the interim trustee process and what that will mean in practice, and I look forward to the committee considering that during the passage of the bill.

Among the charities that responded to the consultation, there was a great deal of concern about the level of additional administrative burden that the bill might place on small charities. As we know, the majority of charities are small, and most are wholly staffed by volunteers. It is vital that any additional administrative responsibilities do not negatively impact on their ability to deliver services in our communities. The committee’s report refers to the important point that Alzheimer Scotland made about the administrative and financial burden. Any additional burdens that the bill imposes should not put anyone off becoming a volunteer treasurer or administrator for a charity.

That is a key concern that needs to be addressed as the bill progresses. The Government and OSCR need to provide clear guidance, and information technology solutions need to be put in place that make it easier rather than harder for charities to report.

Although this issue is not included in the bill, it is worth highlighting the section in annex A of the report around the auditing threshold for charities. I understand that the income threshold for charities in Scotland is slightly lower than that elsewhere in the UK, but I ask the cabinet secretary to listen to the calls from the third sector on the issue. I note that, according to the summary note on the informal consultation that was held on 1 March,

“Anecdotally there is a lack of availability of auditors.”

I am sure that front-bench members of the Scottish National Party would agree with that, and have recent experience of it.

I support the principles of the bill, and I welcome the reform of charity legislation. More clarity is needed on some areas, and I echo the views of the third sector in its calls for clearer guidance in certain areas. I am genuinely pleased that the Scottish Government has listened to the concerns of the sector and has worked with it to develop the bill. I hope that that can be a model for future legislation.

Do you think that there is a danger of some of those decisions being taken behind closed doors and of things being done in different ways?

Thank you. Sophie Howe and Steve Martin, do you have a view on transparency in decisions that were taken?

Professor Martin, do you have anything to add?

COSLA raised serious concerns about what the bill means financially for our local authorities. It would be good for local authorities to have some assurance that they will not be impacted. Do you think that that assurance will come out as we go through the process and that they will not be impacted financially by the bill?

Local government has highlighted that it is concerned that it will lose out financially in that area due to the bill.

So that will be part of the updated financial memorandum.

I will build on the point that Michelle Thomson was making by asking a question about transparency. Professor Flinders, in your submission, you talk about two different aspects of transparency:

“transparency of the decision-making process”

and

“transparency around the reason for why a final decision was taken”,

which I think is what you were just talking about.

In previous evidence sessions, we have heard that, in New Zealand, minutes of Cabinet meetings are published a few weeks after the meeting has taken place. From your point of view, would that be a good thing or would it—the expression “government by WhatsApp” has been used in previous meetings—drive a lot of the decisions away from Cabinet meetings if the process were almost too transparent?

Social Work Scotland also notes a lack of available secure accommodation. Who would be responsible for providing such accommodation? Do you have, or will there be, capital budget in the financial memorandum to try to plug that gap?

The figure seems to be based on the £6,500 weekly cost for secure accommodation. So, my final question is about whether the cost for a 12-year-old in secure accommodation is the same as the cost of a 17-year-old. Would we expect to see differences between those two costs?