Chamber and committees

I will invite Dr Smith, the chief medical officer, to comment on that. First, I would be happy to consider the letter that has come from the member of the public and to try and address the issues that have been raised. It is important that individual cases are looked at properly.

Secondly, we have written to those who have been involved in vaccine trials to provide them with assurance that they will be exempt from the Covid certification arrangements. If a particular issue has arisen as part of that process that we have not taken account of, I would be very happy to do that.

Perhaps Dr Smith can give more detail.

I want to reflect on that point, in the light of the evidence that the committee has heard this morning. The witnesses added another important element, which was to do with the question whether vaccination certification is being introduced in an environment of trust in society. I think that the evidence generally suggests that there is a high level of trust in Scotland on the way in which Covid-related issues have been handled. It is important that we acknowledge that that backdrop enables such a scheme to be applied in the fashion that I have suggested to the committee.

Obviously, I cannot speak for the Scottish Human Rights Commission, but I absolutely accept the tests that it would place upon us. Such tests matter to the Government.

Mr Cole-Hamilton will be familiar with the Government’s position on the significance of human rights in all our activities. He knows about the legislation that the Government has taken through Parliament—for example, on the incorporation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. That is an illustration of the Government’s commitment to a human rights-based approach. The Covid recovery strategy that the Government is working on focuses on a human rights-based approach, and it will be material to the public inquiry that takes place on Covid issues. I do not in any way dispute the importance and significance of human rights questions.

I agree with Judith Robertson that those questions fundamentally hinge on the question of proportionality. The Government must be able to satisfy itself on the question of proportionality in relation to any measures that it takes forward. As Mr Cole-Hamilton will well know, we also have to satisfy ourselves that we could withstand legal challenge on any of those questions. The Government considers that issue very carefully on all occasions.

In answer to the question about alternatives, the Government considers a range of possible approaches that we might take. Mr Mason invited me to speculate on some of those as alternative measures on the restriction side. There are other arguments in relation to testing approaches, which, I would contend, the Government is using to the best of our ability in order to ensure that those devices are being used. We judge that a Covid certification scheme is a proportionate measure, in addition to the range of other interventions that we are taking to suppress the virus, increase vaccination uptake and protect the public.

There is a fair point to be addressed there, so I will take the issue away and put that into motion.

We gathered that evidence by looking at international experience. We have seen examples in other jurisdictions in which application of a Covid vaccination certification scheme has significantly increased vaccination take-up. Evidence for that has been demonstrated in other jurisdictions. One of the very strong examples is France, but there are other places where that has been the case.

We also looked at the experience that emerged from the studies that Public Health England undertook when the United Kingdom Government was exploring questions around access to events earlier this year. A lot of that research material is charted in the evidence paper that was published yesterday.

I do not have any information on that point, but I make two points to Mr Cole-Hamilton. First, other jurisdictions are bringing in a vaccination-only Covid certification scheme. Secondly, the Government has made a choice about the focus of the scheme, which is primarily to drive an increase in vaccination rates.

Yes, I would, thank you, convener.

I am grateful to the committee for the opportunity to appear before you once again. On Tuesday, the First Minister set out a number of Covid-related updates on the rules on international travel, and on promoting better ventilation, including the immediate step to make up to £25 million of additional funding available to support business to enhance ventilation.

The focus of the First Minister’s comments on Tuesday was the Covid certification scheme. The Scottish Government takes the position that the implementation of a mandatory domestic certification scheme is proportionate and appropriate at this point in the pandemic.

Recent data has been a stark reminder of the challenges that we continue to face as a nation. Getting vaccinated remains the single most important thing that any of us can do to help cases to remain under control.

We have seen considerable efforts from businesses and individuals to step up compliance with the mitigation measures that remain in place. That remains crucial to how we emerge from the pandemic.

In line with our strategic intent

“to suppress the virus to a level consistent with alleviating its harms while we recover and rebuild for a better future”,

the Covid-19 vaccination certification scheme will allow us to meet the following aims: to reduce the risks of transmission; to reduce the risks of serious illness and death, and, in doing so, alleviate pressure on the healthcare system; to allow high-risk settings to continue to operate as an alternative to closure or more restrictive measures; and to increase vaccine uptake.

Last week, we set out details on how a domestic certification scheme would operate, and, on Tuesday, we published detailed guidance on how we expect that to be implemented in the small range of sectors that are within the scheme’s scope.

We have listened to a range of stakeholders and very much appreciate the challenges that the implementation of the scheme presents. That is why we are ensuring that the enforcement measures will not take effect until 18 October.

To be absolutely clear, the expectation is that businesses adopt the scheme from 1 October, so we will be monitoring that closely to ensure that the requirements are being met.

The interim period will allow businesses to familiarise themselves with the guidance, to develop measures for enforcing Covid certification and to test those in collaboration with local authority representatives and, indeed, with Government ministers.

The Government’s view is that certification can play a useful role in helping to keep case numbers low as we move into winter. We have come a long way in recent months, our economy is open and we are seeing a relative return to normality. Partnership has been key to that, and I ask that businesses and individuals continue with that endeavour in the coming weeks, to ensure that we are all doing all that we can to recover collectively from the ill effects of the pandemic.

This afternoon, the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Requirements) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Regulations 2021 (SSI 2021/349) will be laid and will come into force from 5 o’clock tomorrow morning. I understand that, in line with the usual agreed procedure for made affirmative Covid Scottish statutory instruments, my officials shared draft regulations with committee clerks yesterday.

The regulations that are amended by the instrument require Scottish ministers to review the requirements at least once every 21 days and revoke any requirement as soon as it is no longer necessary.

I look forward to responding to your questions.

We intend to monitor the pattern of the pandemic, as we have done on a consistent basis up until now. The key indicators that we examine relate to the daily cases, the age breakdown within those, the levels of hospitalisation and the demand on intensive care units, and we apply that information to the wider modelling of the pandemic to determine the effect that all the measures are having within the handling of the pandemic and the scale of the challenge that we face.

That enables the Government to formulate a view about what measures remain proportionate, as that is the key test that the Government must continue to fulfil to ensure that there is legal foundation to the approach and, fundamentally, to enable us to make a judgment about the course of the pandemic and the measures that are required for us to take the necessary intervention.

No, I do not. I am happy to put on the parliamentary record that we will take the habitual approach that is taken in all such settings. I had a helpful discussion with local authorities on the issue the other day. Our approach will involve engaging, explaining and encouraging before we get to enforcing. The four Es approach, with which many institutions will be familiar in relation to the work of local authority regulators, will be the one that is taken.

We want to work with businesses to make sure that they understand the obligations on them, and to support them in putting in place the practical measures that they can take. That will be the cultural approach that is taken. Local authorities are keen to make sure that that approach, which is commonplace in local authorities in Scotland, is maintained.

With regard to the process that we are going through, I assure Mr Marra that the Government is acting to rectify those past failures. I will not say in Parliament today that the journey is complete, because I await further conclusions from Lady Smith’s inquiry. Indeed, it would be premature for me to say that, because I do not know the scale of the challenge that Lady Smith will put to us. Nonetheless, I put on record my determination to ensure that the issues are properly addressed by the Government.

With regard to the redress payments, all the milestones for the establishment of Redress Scotland are being met. The chair and chief executive officer are in place, and I am confident that the steps to organise and open the scheme before the turn of the year will be met. What then flows in relation to payments being made depends somewhat on the applications that come forward and the nature of the process that has to be gone through to verify them. However, I assure Mr Marra, based on the experience of the advance payment scheme, that I am confident that payments can be made swiftly after the receipt of applications. I expect that some degree of time will be given for due consideration of applications, but the advance payment scheme has made payments very quickly.

With regard to the survivors forum, various steps have been taken to interview individuals who want to be part of the forum and, as I indicated in my earlier answer, the development work on that is on track.