Chamber and committees

I thank the Deputy First Minister for advance sight of his statement.

Following the ruling by the Supreme Court, both bills have been left in limbo for months. As the Deputy First Minister concluded, I hope that we will now see movement on the legislation and on Parliament’s ability to enact it. The UK Government and the Office of the Advocate General for Scotland have reached out to the Deputy First Minister on a number of occasions to try to speed up the process, and they stand ready to engage and to help the Scottish Government in taking forward workable amendments to bring the bill within the legislative competence of our Parliament.

Previously, the Deputy First Minister stated that this is urgent, and I hope, genuinely, that we will see how the Parliament can be fully included in developing the amendments that are needed to make the bills legally competent. I therefore ask the Deputy First Minister about something that was not included in his statement: when will ministers set out a timetable for the bill to be brought back to the Parliament and for that committee process to start?

The European Charter for Local Self-Government seeks to protect the powers of local government. That is something on which I think we all agree and that, when we passed the bill, we supported. What assessment will ministers now make of the impact of the Scottish Government’s proposed national care service and the removal of powers from local government, when the bill on that is passed?

It is about the publication of the Parliament’s legal advice, which the Presiding Officer at the time received and which pointed to the legal competence of the legislation when Parliament was considering it. Would that advice be published?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. This will be the first time that Parliament will undertake a reconsideration stage of a bill, and I do not believe that any member wants to see the Scottish Government setting the parameters for that. Could you advise members of what process will be developed to enable all MSPs across the Parliament to influence the bill?

Secondly, could you look at the publication of the Parliament’s legal advice, which the Presiding Officer at the time received, on the legislation and its competence when it was originally passed?

Good morning. I know that we have covered a lot in relation to council tax but I have a couple of questions. I will start specifically with what the committee has heard about legislation in England. The Local Government Finance Act 1992 gives local authorities in England the discretion to accept reduced payments or to write off debt. Have we seen that applied in any way in Scotland? How could that be replicated to develop a new model to address those two issues?

Turning that argument on its head, in terms of different models, Betty Stone outlined that the main way that people are contacted around this debt and also how it is pursued is through letters. To what extent can we shift towards a preventative model so that such a letter triggers a process such as a financial health check?

We know that council tax is often the last debt that people will pay; it is the one that people feel they can start with not paying instead of not paying rent and so on. Is there a different model to follow? Does anyone have any examples of where different countries are doing things differently and where literacy is one of the key parts of that?

Where could Social Security Scotland play a role in this? We have looked at some of the prevention of homelessness duties, for example, and that preventative model being put in. With regard to debt, when people are in contact with organisations such as Social Security Scotland, how can it help? It can at least point towards some of the advice services that are available, but is there a different model? Could it take an early intervention approach to help people?

I do not know whether anyone wants to comment on that.

You could perhaps provide further information on that, for us to investigate it and look at it separately. Martin, you mentioned evidence around what you would like to see in a public debt bill. Is there more that we as a committee should consider looking at in relation to that? With the problems that we have discussed this morning, do we almost need a new version of the 1992 act?

We have heard quite a lot this morning about people having debts with different departments in the same council, but those departments not communicating with one another. Does that happen purely because there are different teams? Why, in this day and age, do systems in the same organisation not manage to communicate to flag up debts, enable the creation of a manageable plan for the individual and trigger a referral to support? Are councils developing that, specifically around council tax and rent?

On the same point, Dame Judith Hackitt’s review—which applied to England—was quite robust in pointing out that building regulations were not fit for purpose. Has the Scottish Government looked at that review? Are we likely to see a review in Scotland and could that review form the basis of a building safety bill or something similar?

In relation to the cost pressures of decontamination and other additional costs, is it likely that developers will not bring forward those sorts of schemes? Are you regularly told that brownfield sites are more expensive to bring online? Is that being factored in, given all the cost pressures that we are hearing about?