This search includes all content on the Scottish Parliament website, except for Votes and Motions. All Official Reports (what has been said in Parliament) and Questions and Answers are available from 1999. You can refine your search by adding and removing filters.
That was also reflected in the question that Mr Mason put to me a few moments ago. We must recognise that there may well be changes and developments ahead of us.
On the issue that you have raised, one question is how fit for purpose the emergency legislation framework was. It may be that a future parliamentary committee will be best placed to do that kind of detailed work for us.
We set out at exhibit 1 in the report—it may be helpful for the committee to look at the exhibit—the waves of benefits that have come to Scotland, what the anticipated timeline was before the pandemic and what it is now.
They could work less, take unpaid leave—if that is part of their package—or not do overtime, depending on where they sit. There may also be benefits that are worth looking at.
I am not talking about particular subjects; I am talking about things in life that some people can do because their parents can afford them and other things that they may not be able to do because their parents cannot afford them.
The convener and I have heard a couple of times discussion regarding stained glass; not too many people at the moment can deliver that service, and there will be even fewer in the future. That may be an opportunity for you to consider.
We in the political classes all agree that we need to do more to break those barriers down and help young people who have much to contribute, even though they may have a disability, into the workplace.
The broad themes will continue, but the methodology by which we get to them may differ. The example of the four-hour target was given and was discussed at the first meeting of the expert group; different people have different views on that and have had different views over time.
Questions and Answers
Date answered:
25 March 2026