Chamber and committees

The consultation invites views on 30 specific legislative proposals that have the potential to support Covid recovery, including proposals for justice system reform to ensure that the tangible benefits of modernisations and practices that have been adopted during the pandemic can be maintained, where that is appropriate. I stress, “where that is appropriate.”

Proposals will also cover the response to the impact of Covid on Scotland’s justice system specifically where backlogs have, unavoidably, built up. There is an opportunity in the consultation to address a number of the aspirations that are inherent in Mr MacGregor’s question, and the Government looks forward to engaging with members of the public on those points.

The Scottish Government will establish a Scottish public inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 by the end of this year in order to scrutinise decisions that were taken during the course of the pandemic so that lessons are learned for future pandemics. The Scottish Government is currently inviting views on the inquiry’s draft aims and principles, which will shape the terms of reference. Discussions are also going on with the United Kingdom Government on the planned UK inquiry in order to ensure that all areas that need to be considered are covered in a way that gives confidence to bereaved families and others.

The United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 has undermined any assurance around decisions on Covid recovery spending in devolved areas being taken in Scotland. The act’s spending powers cover a wide range of areas, including some that relate to Covid recovery. Any such spending could bring the prospect of unco-ordinated spending and policy incoherence, which could hinder, rather than support, Covid recovery. The way that the UK Government has used the powers so far offers little assurance—rather, it has been the opposite.

I agree with that point. The Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament have made it crystal clear that the UK Government’s 2020 act is unwelcome legislation that undermines the Scottish Parliament’s powers. It is crucial that the Scottish Parliament’s powers are respected. Those powers were supported by people in a referendum in 1997 and they have subsequently been enhanced by various legislative instruments that have been passed. Our decision-making structures should not be undermined or eroded by the UK Government.

As Mr Marra will be aware, the issue is the responsibility of NHS Tayside to determine. The board must make decisions that are appropriate based on all the advice that is available to it. I will certainly draw Mr Marra’s representations to the attention of NHS Tayside as a consequence of our exchange today.

Mr Rowley has put his finger on a very significant issue—the availability of personnel to undertake certain essential tasks in our society. Across a range of sectors—Mr Rowley has understandably highlighted the situation in the social care sector—we are all hearing that there are simply not enough people coming forward for recruitment in certain occupations. The reduction in the number of people available, which is a consequence of the removal of freedom of movement as a result of Brexit, is undoubtedly having an effect.

We are working with health and social care partnerships to maximise the opportunities for recruitment, and we will continue to discuss such issues with local authorities and health boards as we support the recovery of care services, which is essential to ensuring that we meet the needs of individuals in our society.

To date, we have provided Scottish local authorities with an additional £1.5 billion in direct support through the local government finance settlement, over and above the regular grant payments for Covid recovery. It is important that we deliver a bold and ambitious recovery plan for Scotland. My priority within Government is to work collectively and collegiately to ensure that that is the case.

I recognise the important role that local authorities have to play in that respect, and I am leading engagement to strengthen our partnership with local government in order to support recovery and to maximise every possible benefit for our citizens.

Those issues are covered in the NHS recovery plan and in the wider steps that we are taking to recover public services, which in many respects are being progressed by our local authority partners.

Partners are trying to re-establish services as safely and sustainably as possible. In a sense, Jackie Baillie answered part of her question in her own words, when she referred to the challenge of rising case numbers and the anxiety that that will cause individuals who have health vulnerabilities.

We are working in close partnership with a variety of organisations to make sure that we restore services to meet people’s needs, but restoration of services has to be commensurate with how safe it is to do so in the context of the pandemic. Of course, the First Minister will have more to say on that when she addresses Parliament this afternoon.

I echo Mr Fairlie’s comments. I am familiar with a number of the organisations to which he referred—not least, North Muirton community council, which is in my constituency. Those organisations have provided critical services to members of the public in the city of Perth; I know that similar organisations have done the same thing in other parts of the country.

With our work with local government, we want to focus on a community-based approach to Covid recovery, and to sustain many of the good examples of community initiatives that arose during the pandemic and which can support individuals—in particular, people who are vulnerable or lonely—in our communities. That was what we envisaged when we passed the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 to enable much greater community participation and engagement, and it will be central to the Government’s response in supporting organisations to make a meaningful impact on their communities.

Annabelle Ewing makes a reasonable point, but the process of and timescale for the inquiry will be matters for the chair of the inquiry, who will operate independently of ministers.

We can, of course, set out some of our expectations as a consequence of our discussions with interested parties. A very good example of how phased reporting can illuminate issues that an inquiry is wrestling with is provided by the inquiry into historical abuse, which Lady Smith chairs: a number of case studies have been reported and the approach has provided clarity and certainty for many individuals who have suffered in that regard. There are models that can operate in the spirit that Annabelle Ewing envisages, and I will consider the issue as we establish the terms of reference.