I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests.

I thank the minister for the advance sight of his statement and for his willingness to engage with MSPs on a cross-party basis since the invasion of Ukraine in February. I also put on record my thanks to the Ukrainian community in Edinburgh and across Scotland, to those who have volunteered to host Ukrainians in their homes and to the third sector organisations and charities. Last but not least, in my own area of Edinburgh, I thank the City of Edinburgh Council for the fantastic work that it has done not just through its staff in the arrival hub—which has been crucial—but in the schools, and I thank our businesses across the city that have opened their arms to help.

Where is the investment now to support our councils across the country? Why are we not seeing more forward planning, given that it is six months on from the invasion? The issue of support for people from Ukraine is centre stage for our councils, and they need support now to deliver the homes, to work with communities and to provide the schools, the help with transport costs, the access to English courses and the advice that will enable Ukrainians to recover. Being in a warm home, having access to the support that they need and, crucially, being able to use their skills and knowledge to work and support themselves and their families is what those people who have arrived in Scotland want and need now.

Yesterday, the Deputy First Minister said that the cost of supporting Ukrainians requires us to

“find around £200 million, which was not planned for at the time of the budget, just as the invasion began.”—[Official Report, 7 September 2022; c 25.]

Will the minister clarify how the investment will take place? He mentioned an investment in 500 more homes, but do we not need many more new homes than that? For example, in the case of City of Edinburgh Council, there are £1 million-worth of unfunded one-off costs across the piece and more than £5 million-worth of unfunded recurring costs. When will councils get the money that has been promised for supporting Ukrainians? Councils are providing support now and they desperately need the investment.

First, I echo the comments of the Presiding Officer and the cabinet secretary and say, on behalf of Scottish Labour and my colleagues, that our thoughts are with Her Majesty and her family today.

To ask the Scottish Government how much funding it is providing to third sector organisations in the Lothians that are supporting refugees from Ukraine. (S6O-01335)

The minister agrees with me that the volunteers and the voluntary sector are doing a commendable stretch of work to support the high number of people from Ukraine who have arrived in Edinburgh and across the Lothians.

Last week, I visited the Welcoming, a charity that supports new Scots who are making Edinburgh their home. The charity told me that the demand for its services has increased substantially and it has had to turn away Ukrainians staying in Edinburgh who needed to access its English language sessions. It also said that it is now receiving referrals from the Department for Work and Pensions, the council and service teams on the MS Victoria, but it has not received any additional funding.

Groups such as that one are providing front-line services, so will the minister commit to meeting with the range of third sector organisations that provide direct support on the ground to people who have fled Ukraine and ensure that those groups receive funding to continue their incredible work in what is an incredibly tough financial time for them?

I want to follow up the answer that we have just had. From a devolved perspective, what specific issues could arise from changing the status of, and basis for amending, retained EU law that should be taken into account in the future? I am thinking particularly of our job as a committee. We have already heard comments about scrutiny and the challenges in that regard. What areas do you suggest we start focusing on? Scrutiny has been mentioned by a couple of our witnesses, such as Dr West, but I will continue with Professor Lock. What topics should we be focusing on and prioritising?

That is helpful.

Dr Whitten, do you have a perspective on oversight, from having looked at the structure?

That is really helpful. My observation is that, if you look at this committee, we do not all have the same politics, but we usually find that it is possible to agree on things that we might not personally agree on, because we have the capacity to at least have those debates.

That is helpful. That is one of the big issues that we need to record and think about.

That is very clear.

We have talked about cross-parliamentary liaison before. For example, we have the parliamentary focus with UK parliamentarians talking to the European Parliament—we are in the room, but we do not have speaking rights. Should committees in different UK Parliaments have such conversations among themselves, given the sheer weight of potential legislation, to share best practice or concerns?

It feels like we are at an incredibly tough impasse. We have already debated in this committee how on earth you monitor the alignment process, but we are at least able to sit here and do that. Are there alternative sources that you have to get your voice heard as businesses or consumers, either through individual elected representatives or through cross-UK business networks where you can at least get these concerns on to a level at which they might reach the people making decisions, whether it is the UK Government, civil servants or even UK parliamentarians? It feels like there is a real gap here. We get that the politics are really difficult but, if we were not even able to be here, I do not know how our businesses would be able to begin to get their voices heard, never mind consumer groups and environmental groups. Are there ways that you can at least get your issues raised or be seen?

That is useful. Mr Billington, do you want to come in on that? It is one of the issues that come up in your written evidence.