Contents
- Attendance
- Decision on Taking Business in Private
- Vaccination Certification
- Ministerial Statement and Subordinate Legislation
Ministerial Statement and Subordinate Legislation
We will now take evidence on the latest ministerial statement on Covid-19 and subordinate legislation. I welcome the Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero, Energy and Transport, Michael Matheson; the national clinical director, Professor Jason Leitch; Angus Macleod, who is deputy director of the Scottish Government’s community surveillance division; and Graham Fisher, who is deputy director of the Scottish Government’s legal directorate. I thank them for their attendance. We will consider the following regulations.
Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No 17) Regulations 2021 (SSI 2021/301)
Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No 18) Regulations 2021 (SSI 2021/307)
Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No 19) Regulations 2021 (SSI 2021/319)
Cabinet secretary, would you like to make some opening remarks before we move to questions?
Good morning. I will briefly address in order the instruments that the committee will consider today.
The Scottish international travel regulations had provided that, following arrival in Scotland, day 2 and day 8 Covid-19 tests must be carried out by public providers—that is, by the NHS in Scotland. The Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No 17) Regulations 2021 allow those tests to also be supplied by private sector test providers, provided that they are on the United Kingdom Government’s published list of test providers. To get on to the list, providers must self-declare compliance with relevant regulations and Department of Health and Social Care guidance. All providers must work towards and complete full United Kingdom Accreditation Service accreditation. The DHSC removes from the list those who fail to follow the necessary stages of accreditation, those who fail to achieve the required turnaround times for test results, those who are not clear in their pricing, and those who act unethically.
The regulations also provide for a small but significant number of seasonal agricultural workers who are unable to isolate on a named farm due to insufficient accommodation. They allow them to isolate to the same standards as any other amber list arrival in off-farm accommodation organised by their employers.
The Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No 18) Regulations 2021 relate to the 26th UN climate change conference of the parties—COP26. I am sure that members are aware that COP26 will bring together countries to accelerate action towards the goals of the Paris agreement and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, in order to address climate change at an international level. COP26 and the world leaders summit are being held in person because of the complex nature of the negotiations and the need for secure discussions. That requires exemptions to travel restrictions.
The amendments provide for arrangements for and exemptions from self-isolation, managed quarantine, day 2 and day 8 testing requirements and completion of the passenger locator form for persons attending or facilitating COP26 and the COP26 world leaders summit. Exemptions vary for different categories of attendees. More limited exemptions apply for those attending or facilitating COP26 who have not been invited to attend both COP26 and the world leaders summit by the UK Government or who are not granted privileges and immunities in connection with COP26.
10:45Those who have been in a country or a territory that is on the amber list in the 10 days before their arrival in Scotland will not be required to self-isolate. Fully vaccinated persons who have been in a red list country or territory in the 10 days before their arrival in Scotland will be required to undertake five days of managed quarantine rather than 10 days. If they are not vaccinated, they must quarantine for 10 days.
For delegates who must stay in managed isolation, the definition of “authorised vaccine” for these purposes is extended to include any vaccine that has been authorised for use in the country in which it was administered. There is no exemption to the pre-arrival testing requirement to possess a negative result from a qualifying test.
In order for the exemptions for COP26 and the world leaders summit to apply, individuals will be required to provide written confirmation that they will comply with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change code of conduct, which sets out rigorous measures for the events. The code will mitigate the additional public health risks arising from holding in-person events in the UK and the exemptions to travel restrictions.
The Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No 19) Regulations 2021 provide for an exemption from the requirement to enter managed self-isolation for participation in European professional football club fixtures in Scotland. They were made urgently because of players arriving in Glasgow from red list countries for a fixture taking place on Thursday 16 September. There was a risk that home fixtures would be moved abroad to a neutral venue to allow European club players who had played internationals in red list countries in the previous 10 days to participate. That would have caused significant disruption to Scottish clubs and home fans and generated a far higher risk of Covid transmission than the very small number of players travelling to Scotland.
I hope that that is a helpful overview of the regulations that the committee is considering. I would, of course, be happy to respond to any questions that committee members may have.
Thank you, cabinet secretary.
I am conscious that we have only 35 minutes for this session. Questions and answers should therefore be restricted to around four to five minutes each, please.
I will ask the first question. The recently updated Scottish Government travel advice, including the removal of the amber and green traffic light system, seems like great news for Scottish people who have been fully vaccinated and are hoping to go abroad on holiday. However, as I have been reminded by one of my constituents, a remaining challenge is that Scottish people who work abroad and are fully vaccinated are able to return to Scotland for a holiday to see their families only if they have been vaccinated in one of a limited number of countries—those in the European Union, the US and a small handful of other countries. Scots who live and work outside the US, the EU and the small group of other countries and are looking to see and reconnect with their families are not currently considered as vaccinated under the new guidelines, even if they are fully vaccinated with the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine. The issue seems to be where they were vaccinated, not what vaccine they were vaccinated with.
Are you aware of those challenges? When do you expect the list of qualifying countries to be expanded so that fully vaccinated Scots can return home for a holiday without a 10-day quarantine?
Last week, some changes were made that extend the number of countries that will qualify for the vaccination programme and for people’s entry into Scotland and the UK. I am aware that there are issues relating to vaccines that are provided in other countries for which there are travel restrictions. However, I suspect that Professor Jason Leitch is better placed to give members a more detailed clinical understanding of why that is the case and what action is being taken to address the issue.
Seventeen countries were added to the vaccine list. The UK as a whole recognises the vaccinations given in those countries. However, there are two problems: the type of the vaccine and the certification of the vaccine. Does the country provide a piece of paper, an app or an electronic version that can be checked? For example, Zimbabwe gives no evidence of vaccination. It may well vaccinate its citizens, but the citizens have no evidence of vaccination. That is a challenge.
UK-wide, we added to the list 17 new countries, including a host of areas from around the world. Those countries are now recognised. That list will be kept under review, and ministers will get advice on when new countries should be added.
I want to ask about polymerase chain reaction tests for international travellers.
I welcome the regulations that open up private sector test providers for travellers, because a number of constituents have raised complaints with me about the cost of doing the PCR test through the one previously designated provider. However, there is an outstanding issue of which you will be aware. The UK Government has announced its intention to remove the requirement for international travellers who have been double jabbed to have a PCR test when travelling. On Tuesday, the First Minister indicated that the Scottish Government was considering what steps it would take in that respect.
The travel industry has been vocal on that matter, as I am sure you are aware. It is concerned that Scottish residents who are looking to book last-minute travel for the October break will now look to fly from an English airport because they will then avoid the requirement for a PCR test, and that that will be to the detriment of the Scottish travel industry and Scottish airports. Every day that goes by potentially costs the Scottish travel industry because people are making those bookings right now. When will we get a decision from the Scottish Government on that issue?
There are two aspects to that. The first relates to the UK Government’s intention to remove the requirement for pre-departure testing and the second relates to the requirement for day 2 PCR testing. It is important to understand and recognise the importance of both those tests.
The pre-departure test is intended to certify that a traveller is not positive when they get into an aircraft and that they do not have the potential to infect other people on that aircraft. It is an important element in trying to reduce the risk of infecting other individuals. I understand that contact tracing becomes complex when infection takes place in an aircraft.
The PCR testing at day 2 is an important element in our surveillance programme to identify potential variants of concern. If someone is infected, removing the requirement for a PCR test at day 2 potentially compromises significantly our ability to identify variants of concern that are coming into the country and to have them genome sequenced. If we simply go to a lateral flow test, we do not have the same ability to undertake the genomic sequencing as we have with a PCR test.
Given the UK Government’s decision, we have sought further advice, as the First Minister said in her statement to the Parliament on Tuesday. Officials are still providing that advice, and I expect that the First Minister will set out our approach as early as possible—in the next day or so, I hope—in response to the further advice that we have received from clinicians. I will be open with the committee: the clinical advice is that PCR testing pre-departure and at day 2 should remain in place. It plays an important role.
Mr Fraser will be aware that not only the Scottish Government but other devolved nations have raised significant concerns about the approach that the UK Government is taking to the issue. However, we need to recognise the potential impact of continuing with the existing regime, given the UK Government’s action, because people will simply choose to go to airports in England, and its impact on the aviation sector. We are taking those factors into account alongside the clinical advice on the value of pre-departure tests and day 2 PCR testing.
Okay. Thank you, cabinet secretary.
First, I will ask about the factors that you are considering in relation to COP26, which you briefly outlined. Were any lessons learned from the recent G7 summit, or were there any problems after it? Are some of the systems that you will put in place for COP26 similar to what happened with the G7 summit?
The G7 event was much smaller in scale than COP26, and it involved a much smaller number of individuals. Some aspects of what we have agreed to put in place for COP26, such as the testing regime and restrictions, are there so that we can facilitate an in-person COP to take place—because we recognise the significance of the event—while trying to mitigate some of the risks. I would not say that we have drawn directly on the lessons from the G7, because it was very different in nature and scale, as COP26 is significantly larger. I assure you that we have tried to strike a balance in allowing COP26 to take place in person while mitigating the risks that are associated with such a large number of people coming together over a relatively limited period.
My second question is more constituency based. We still have constituents who are getting their first jag in England and their second jag in Scotland, but the connection has not yet been made, so they are struggling to get their vaccination certificate. Are we any closer to getting a solution to that?
I will hand you over to Professor Leitch, because he is looking at resolutions to that issue.
We have a solution, but there is a backlog of problems. People should phone the helpline, and the staff will fix their problem, but they will not fix it instantly. Because there are identification numbers from both countries, it can be quite complex. We have solutions, but there are a lot of cases, so the helpline staff, including those who are providing the tech solutions, are working their way through them. We have fixed a lot of those cases but, if some remain, people can use a form on NHS Inform or call the helpline and the staff will get to it as quickly as they can.
Excellent—my constituents will be delighted.
I will follow on from Mr Fairlie’s questions on COP26. One of the things that we learned from the European championships was that a balance has to be struck between risk and benefit. We recognise that bringing together people from different countries will significantly increase infection rate, and COP26 will be an even more significant risk, given the number of countries that are involved. Will Mr Matheson comment on the evidence on that balance between safety and benefit? Is it the Government’s intention to publish the evidence?
11:00
We have taken that forward through negotiations with the UK Government, the Scottish Government and the UN, to create a pathway for registered delegates to COP26 or the world leaders summit to attend in-person negotiations and meetings. From the regulations, you will be aware that those who are travelling from high-risk countries—which are classed as red-list countries—still have much more stringent restrictions. Those who are unvaccinated will have to go into managed quarantine for 10 days, just as any other individual would have to, and then, as part of that, go through the normal testing regime on days 2 and 8. If those who have travelled from or have been in a red-list country in the past 10 days are vaccinated, they will be able to reduce their managed quarantine period to five days but will be required to have PCR tests over that period.
For those travelling from non-red-list countries, there is still a requirement for pre-departure testing, the completion of a passenger locator form, and day 2 testing, as well as daily lateral flow tests as part of the code of practice that has been put in place by the UN to try to minimise risk. The two Governments and the UN have tried to collaborate on finding a mechanism that manages the high-risk elements as best we can through managed quarantine and testing while also managing the broader risk through pre-departure, day 2 and daily lateral flow testing for delegates attending COP26.
Moreover, those arrangements are restricted to registered COP26 delegates. If you are not a registered delegate or if you have not been invited by the UK Government to attend the conference, the measures will not apply. Where things have been relaxed, it is only for registered delegates or invited participants. We have to try and strike a balance.
It is difficult for me to easily give you information on the balance of risks; all I can say is that we are trying to manage the whole thing in a planned way that helps minimise those risks. We know that, for example, vaccination, regular testing, early identification of positive cases and managed quarantine help to reduce risk, and we have put in place a range of measures to mitigate the risk of people having the virus while reducing the potential importation of the virus.
I have a quick follow-up question. A key element of COP26 will be the fringe events, at which delegates might interact with those who are not delegates and therefore might not have gone through that stringent testing procedure. What consideration has the Government given to putting in place safety protocols in that respect?
Members should keep in mind that, aside from the testing arrangements that we are putting in place for COP26 delegates, the overlying system of restrictions in Scotland—appropriate social distancing, the wearing of masks, good hand hygiene and so on—will continue to apply to any venue holding a fringe event. The numbers of people in venues will be limited in view of the need to maintain social distancing. It is important to recognise that the present layer of restrictions will also apply to COP26 fringe events, and venues that would normally hold larger numbers of people will not be able to do so and will need to manage numbers in a way that supports social distancing, mask wearing and so on.
As members have no further questions, we move to item 6, which is consideration of the motions on the made affirmative instruments.
I propose that the motions on the agenda be moved en bloc. Are members content?
Members indicated agreement.
Motions moved,
That the COVID-19 Recovery Committee recommends that the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No. 17) Regulations 2021 (SSI 2021/301) be approved.
That the COVID-19 Recovery Committee recommends that the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No. 18) Regulations 2021 (SSI 2021/307) be approved.
That the COVID-19 Recovery Committee recommends that the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel) (Scotland) Amendment (No. 19) Regulations 2021 (SSI 2021/319) be approved.—[Michael Matheson]
Motions agreed to.
The committee will in due course publish a report to the Parliament setting out our decision on the statutory instruments considered at this meeting.
That concludes our consideration of this agenda item and our time with the cabinet secretary, and I thank him and his supporting officials for their attendance this morning. The committee’s next meeting will be on 30 September, when we will take evidence on vaccination certification. We will also hear from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Covid Recovery on the ministerial statement on Covid-19 and subordinate legislation.
That concludes the public part of the meeting.
11:06 Meeting continued in private until 11:20.Previous
Vaccination Certification