Chamber and committees

What is the capacity of the organisation to carry out in-depth investigations? Could it do one a year or a couple a year? What is the situation?

As a consumer, I sat yesterday and tried to find a product recall database. I found one, from Trading Standards Scotland. It highlighted 22 items, ranging from an air fryer to a storage footstool to a battery charger; those were only three of the 22 items that were listed yesterday. The public need one point of contact. They do not want to know that there are 14 or however many databases. They want to go to one place, and it has to be consumer friendly. You mentioned other databases, but typing “product recall” into Google does not highlight the databases that you highlighted. Secondly, they are not consumer friendly at all. If you are going to add value, I suggest that you do it in those two areas, but, for consumers in Scotland, the important question is this: when will you decide your plan of action, whether that is to link to other databases or have your own database, and when will that happen?

What does the member think about what Save British Farming had to say yesterday? It said:

“farming is the sacrificial lamb of Brexit ... We had the best trade deals in the world in the EU ... Brexit torched trade and now British farming is on its knees.”

To ask the Scottish Government how many front-line police officers have been trained to use, and equipped with, naloxone. (S6O-02241)

The roll-out of naloxone to front-line police officers began at last year’s international overdose awareness day. Naloxone is an emergency first-aid treatment for use in potentially life-threatening overdose situations. When will the cabinet secretary see the results of the use of naloxone on the figures for overdose deaths?

I will not continue to speak this slowly, Deputy Presiding Officer. [Laughter.]

I should highlight that I am a relatively new member of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, as Jeremy Balfour referred to earlier. I, too, take this opportunity to commend the committee’s clerks, its previous members who led on this work and, of course, the stakeholders who provided invaluable evidence.

The bill was introduced in November 2022 and has undergone two consultations, which attracted more than 400 written responses. It aims to

“strengthen and update the current legislative framework for charities registered in Scotland”.

It will do so by increasing transparency—for example, by creating a register of trustees and giving additional powers to the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator, including the ability to investigate charities and their trustees.

I support the general principles of the bill, which I believe will ensure robust regulation as well as improved openness, accountability and transparency for our charities.

The charitable sector provides important and, in some cases, essential support across communities and to individuals. From local scout groups to training providers and local playgroups, its reach is far and varied, with every community in Scotland containing at least one of the 25,000 charities currently operating in this country.

In my Edinburgh Pentlands constituency, there are 263 registered charities, on which many people in my area depend for support. However, one in eight of those same charities fails to submit an annual return and is currently flagged as being in default. Therefore, it is right that we reconsider the legislation that was passed in 2005 in order to ensure that it is fit for purpose.

Submissions to the consultation recognised that the charity sector has changed and grown significantly since 2005, with many citing the change in the public’s expectations of charities. In particular, there was a recognition that organisations that are funded by local government and national Government agencies are now subject to

“more checks and balances than ever before”.

A common theme among respondents was the need for greater transparency and accountability to maintain public trust in the sector. The pandemic had a profound impact on the sector—I am certain that members across the chamber will be all too aware of the pressure on such organisations throughout that time. Some of the respondents believe that the situation underlined the need for greater transparency as well as the need for wider reform, given the huge changes that happened in response to the challenges that the pandemic posed. Those who submitted evidence highlighted that, in the past three years following Covid-19, there has been more change in the sector than there has been since the 2005 act was implemented.

In addition, throughout the consultation process, which focused on potential improvements to the statutory charity regulation framework, there were calls for a more fundamental review of the charitable sector, and I am pleased that the cabinet secretary indicated her intention to consult further with the sector on that point following the passage of the bill.

The bill’s general provisions reflect and, I believe, strengthen the proposals that OSCR made in 2018. As I indicated, the bill proposes to give OSCR wider powers to investigate charities and charity trustees; to amend the rules on who can be a charity trustee or a senior officer in a charity; to increase the information that OSCR holds about charity trustees; to update the information that needs to be included on the Scottish charity register; and to create a record of charities that have merged.

It is clear from the majority of charitable organisations that responded that the proposed change to the legislation is a welcome move by the Scottish Government. Overall, there was agreement, in the evidence that was gathered, that the bill will lead to greater transparency in charity regulation.

Some concerns were raised that the proposal will be effective in increasing transparency and protecting the Scottish public only if OSCR is appropriately resourced and able to implement its new powers. I am pleased that the cabinet secretary has considered that point and given assurances that the additional obligations, while significant, will not be too burdensome and that the Government will work with OSCR to ensure that it is supported.

Many of the responses recognised that the increase in OSCR’s powers to investigate current and former charities, as well as the broader coverage of the right to disqualify trustees, will have a positive impact on protecting the public. In addition, many respondents believed that strengthening OSCR’s powers will act as a deterrent against maladministration, which will go some way in offering assurances to the general public about the management of funds.

Many respondents supported the creation of a publicly searchable record of trustees, which they believed would increase transparency and protect the public against “rogue trustees” who would previously have been able to avoid scrutiny.

Many smaller charities understandably had concerns about whether any changes to the legislation would result in additional costs to them, particularly as they are still in the throes of increases in the cost of living, which are undoubtedly having a significant impact on their ability to operate. I welcome the assurances from the Scottish Government, which are set out in the financial memorandum, that although the changes might result in some additional administrative time, there should not be any additional costs.

Finally, I welcome the cabinet secretary’s earlier commitment to reviewing the regulation of OSCR in any future wider review of charitable law following the passage of the bill. That is fundamental and will go some way towards ensuring that charitable organisations are treated fairly in any dispute.

For the record, I am supportive of the general principles of the bill. We all want good regulation and improved openness, accountability and transparency in our charities. We also need to ensure that charities are well served by their regulator, OSCR.

I ask the cabinet secretary this, however: who regulates the regulator? If a charity feels that it has not been treated fairly or not been communicated with well, who can it go to for adjudication during the process of interacting with OSCR?

Going back to the situation with the EU, I note that nine of the top 15 markets identified in the strategy are in it. We have been taken out of the EU against our will, given that 62 per cent of our population voted to remain in it. What impact has that had on Scotland’s exports? Do we need to refocus our attention on the other countries listed in the strategy? In that respect, I am thinking about America, Canada, Switzerland, Norway and China.

Why is it then that we are still seeing delays to funding in the project? It is inexplicable to many observers that Acorn was excluded from track 1 status. I know that you have responded to questions from Colin Smyth on that point, but can you add more detail about why Acorn is considered secondary to the clusters that the UK Government selected to receive track 1 status?

When would the first opportunity come around for a review to take place and possible elevation of the Acorn project?