Chamber and committees

That is helpful. My line of questioning was also about whether any work has been done to consider whether similar bodies in the United Kingdom and Europe have a different model or other countries are using a better set of powers to govern some of that.

That is great. Thank you.

Good morning, and thanks for joining us. Last week, the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman discussed with us the demographics of people who escalate complaints to that office. Have you carried out any work yourself on those who complain, and why?

Good morning, and thanks for joining us. In some of the meetings that we have had with affected residents and experts, they have been critical of the limited progress that we have made in Scotland to date. What learning is taking place to try to align the bill with the schemes that have been progressed in England and Wales, given that many of the companies operate across the UK?

That is helpful. To return to Willie Coffey’s line of questioning, I note that the Public Services Ombudsman stated last week that it would like legislation to change to grant it own-initiative investigative powers. Are you content with your powers as they currently sit? What opportunity might you have to strengthen them?

I also note that some of our conversation today has concerned unfounded or spurious complaints about elected members and whether there is an opportunity to state earlier in an investigation whether you can investigate such complaints, especially with regard to social media.

Do you expect non-residential buildings to be included in the register that you mentioned?

My question relates to councillors as well as officials in councils. Over the past year, I have spoken to councillors from all parties who have expressed concerns about what they think is the code of conduct being used against them by officials. Often, they cannot name those officials when they talk about incidents. However, they have been concerned that simply discussing an issue has been used against them in complaints raised.

What research have you done on that and what conversations have you had about it? I have been acutely aware that that is a real concern for councillors over the past year, and I think that that has led them to feel that they cannot do their job properly.

That is helpful. As the bill progresses, there might be quite a few amendments that seek to ensure that the bill is aligned in that way, so it would be helpful to see how things are being taken forward elsewhere.

One issue that I have raised consistently and about which I am quite concerned is that the bill relates only to residential buildings in Scotland. There are many other buildings that potentially include flammable cladding where people sleep, such as care homes, student accommodation and hospital settings. Why are those buildings not covered by the bill? Why are no provisions made for non-residential buildings that could potentially have unsafe cladding?

Yes. I am happy to, if I have the time.

I agree with the sentiments that have been expressed by the member. Those who are tasked with providing support services, especially mental health services, need to do that on a case-by-case basis. In some communities, an additional barrier often arises with regard to interpreters, who need to be funded. That is something that should be considered. Health boards often find it difficult to provide interpretation services.

We need to do more to educate people on where they can find mental health services. That was an important part of the report.

Another concern, which was highlighted by the convener, was around delays in processing information on asylum seekers and safeguarding children. I agree with the points that were raised on that. Some age assessments of asylum seekers can take months or years to process. In the meantime, children are often placed unaccompanied in accommodation with adults, which raises serious safety concerns. We should acknowledge that, and UK ministers should be mindful of that.

It is important that the UK Government and the Scottish Government develop a new policy around age-disputed individuals who are currently being housed in adult accommodation services and what a different model of accommodation would look like. I am not sure that we have the right model for Scottish families and Scottish children in temporary accommodation, so we need to consider a different model.

On human trafficking and modern slavery, we are all aware that asylum seekers and refugees are among the most vulnerable to that abhorrent practice. The committee’s recommendation that we should uphold protections for all victims is one that we obviously agree with. The Scottish Refugee Council has made a number of recommendations in that area, which I think that Parliament should consider within our devolved competence.

I have already noted that support for asylum seekers is a reserved matter. Nevertheless, the suggestions for change that the committee has made are important for both Parliaments to consider. It is essential that we genuinely take into account the needs of asylum seekers in Scotland and how those can be supported.

The report has found that more can be done to protect people in our asylum system in Scotland. It is clear that the UK Government and the Scottish Government should co-ordinate a better network of support, especially when we are working with our 32 different local authorities on hosting people in the asylum system.

That would mean having proper funding for alternative accommodation sites and that the overreliance on hotels and emergency accommodation would have to change. It would also mean making additional resources available to our third sector organisations, which do so much to support asylum seekers and offer so much. Furthermore, it would mean considering how we can reform our public services to meet that challenge.

I reiterate that I welcome the work of the committee and I thank it for its report. I look forward to hearing the rest of the debate.