Chamber and committees

One aspect of that that we have not necessarily had clarity on at stage 1 is what happens to lifetime gifts when a charity goes through a merger. What work is the Government doing ahead of stage 2 to provide that clarity?

I apologise for not being in the chamber at the start of portfolio question time, Deputy Presiding Officer.

Community care grants are part of the Scottish welfare fund. What plans does the Government have to reform the application process for families and individuals who are caring for someone who has been released from prison or a young offenders institution? Will such payments be able to be made before people leave such institutions?

I declare an interest as the chair of Heart Research UK’s heart of Scotland appeal board.

As others have done, I thank the clerks to the Social Justice and Social Security Committee and those who gave evidence to the committee. I also thank the charities across Scotland for the work that they do in our communities. As other speakers have said, we do not want anything in the bill to have a negative impact on any of them, and especially not on the smaller ones.

It is worth reflecting that my colleague Jeremy Balfour and I are the only current members of the committee who took evidence on the bill. Conservatives have said that we will be strong and stable, and we are definitely demonstrating that in this Parliament.

As members have mentioned, Scottish charities have a combined income of over £15 billion and employ 200,000 people, so it is important that they operate within a regulatory framework that safeguards that funding and those jobs. The charity law that they operate under has been in place for 17 years, and it is necessary to modernise it and provide more transparency. I do not think that any of us would disagree with that.

There are some very sensible things in the bill. It seeks to allow the provision of information about trustees and to update the law in relation to disqualification criteria. It also seeks to allow the appointment of emergency charity trustees. I pursued that in committee, but I still want more clarification from ministers as to who those individuals will be. Will there be a Scotland-wide group of individuals? I want Parliament to pursue that and seek clarification at stage 2.

As I said in my intervention on the cabinet secretary, I am concerned about lifetime gifts and charity mergers, which matter has been touched on previously. In the future, we will potentially see fewer charities, not necessarily because of the bill, but because of changes in the direction of travel. At present, many people very generously give lifetime gifts in their wills, but what happens to such gifts if charities merge? I do not think that inheritance law has necessarily been taken into account in that regard. Again, I would like the Government to clarify the position on that at stage 2, because we need to make sure that we do not burden charities.

As a number of members, including Douglas Lumsden, Paul O’Kane and Foysol Choudhury, said, the bill must not become overly burdensome for charities, and especially not for small charities that are fully volunteer led. The fact that such charities are volunteer led may be a reason why many of them have not engaged in the process. They might not have been aware of it or they might not have had the capacity to input to the Parliament’s or the Government’s consultations. We need to take that on board.

The bill seeks to require charities to have a connection to Scotland. In committee, I asked about the definition of that, but I do not think that we have necessarily worked out what impact it would have when, for example, a charity that is not registered in Scotland but is a UK-wide charity undertakes research in Scotland. As John Mason and Fergus Ewing said, we need to be mindful of possible unintended consequences as the bill moves forward.

John Mason made some interesting points that may be relevant—if not to the bill, then to future consultations and reforms. It seems unfair that a charity that operates in Scotland and has income of less than £25,000—that could be a church hall anywhere in Scotland—is under the same regulation. We need to look at that. I do not know whether there should be an income threshold or an employment threshold, because there are different criteria and costs around administration.

We have not had an opportunity to input on that. It is probably not something that the Government will open up at stage 2, but it is something that we need to be mindful of. I am keen to pursue it and consider whether we could have different criteria, and I hope that there may be a cross-party consensus in favour of taking that forward in the next session of Parliament. I believe that the Government has stated that it might consult before the end of the current session on what that should look like. I certainly think that there is an opportunity for us to do that.

My final point is about the recruitment of interim trustees. The Government has written to the committee—we discussed that this morning—with clarification of who those individuals would be. That is important, as is the appeals process for individuals who might not be considered suitable. I hope that we will have an opportunity for further clarification of that at stage 2, which is coming very quickly down the line.

Finally, I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate and to the work of the committee. If there is one thing that we, as a committee, have heard loud and clear, it is that charities want to make sure that every penny that they raise goes to the front line of the causes that they advance in Scotland. Certainly, I have been clear in our work on the committee that we do not want the legislation to be burdensome on them in any way.

I take the points that Fergus Ewing raised and have reached out to the Church of Scotland on them. We need to look again at registration of persons who hold a controlled interest in land. Charities that operate in very different circumstances have also made the point about privacy, which is fully understandable.

The Scottish Conservatives will support the bill as proposed at stage 1. However, as the committee’s new convener, Collette Stevenson, has stated, that support is for the general principles of the bill. We now need ministers to provide detailed answers for the sector. Then, collectively, the Parliament will be able to approve the bill, I think, as it goes forward.

That is what you get for going first.

Good morning, everybody. Thank you for joining us here and online.

I will ask some questions about current policies. I will ask them both at the same time so that everybody has a chance to touch on them. The first regards the actions that are set out in the tackling child poverty delivery plan. Do they need to be revisited, given what we have heard about the rising cost of living?

Also, can you provide examples of existing policies that are particularly effective and policies that you think have been less effective? We have heard from many of you about the Scottish child payment, but I wonder whether we can gather any more information on that.

Shall we start from the beginning again, with Satwat?

There was a lot in there. Thank you. That was very helpful.

I am sure that the cabinet secretary will agree that the United Kingdom Government’s levelling up funding of more than £16 million to restore and reopen the B-listed Granton gas holder is a welcome investment and can act as a catalyst to support the regeneration and redevelopment of Granton and the whole city waterfront. What work is the cabinet secretary doing to help with the next set of levelling up funding projects and make sure that every part of Scotland, especially Edinburgh’s waterfront, realises that potential?

To ask the Scottish Government what impact assessment it has undertaken regarding any reductions to core funding allocations in its budget for third sector organisations. (S6O-02177)

I wrote to the former Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy over a month ago with regard to the future of Bridgend Farmhouse in Edinburgh, which has received Scottish Government investing in communities funding for the past four years.

On 15 February, the organisation received notification that it would not continue to receive that funding. It is a fantastic organisation, a host of more than three social enterprises and a place where the community can come together. Does the cabinet secretary agree that Bridgend Farmhouse no longer being able to operate would have a significant impact in the south of the city, and will she agree to visit Bridgend Farmhouse and review the cut to core funding?

We are obviously talking about two different sectors, so does the Association of Landlords have any comments on repairing standards and how those can be enforced? Has there been any learning from what has been developed in the social rented sector?