Seòmar agus comataidhean

Has the issue of equality between people with refugee status and asylum seekers been taken into consideration? Will any provisions be introduced to support people coming from Ukraine? There is a wider humanitarian crisis in our midst given the current asylum system. In Glasgow, we had the Park Inn tragedy with hotel accommodation. There is a hierarchy of people in the asylum system who are subject to different restrictions. What consideration has been given to ensuring that there is as much parity across the system as can be achieved under NRPF? Perhaps Alison Byrne can answer that.

One of the key issues around the seasonal workers scheme is that of people having no recourse to public funds—that is a major menace in many immigration and asylum cases. Are there mechanisms and opportunities for the Scottish Government to enhance provisions to support people who have no recourse to public funds? There are potential ways around the restrictions; do you have particular or specific proposals?

I think that it does. However, as I said, the key ask was about using the Scottish statutory instruments that recently extended the concessionary travel scheme for bus travel to young people to extend free bus travel to all people who are subject to immigration control under NRPF.

One of the key issues that pertains to Ukrainians, which was raised by the previous panel, was that those who are here on the seasonal workers visa scheme are subject to NRPF restrictions. That is quite a significant population, although we do not know specifically how many of them are in Scotland. I believe that there are up to 6,000 across the UK. The other problem that was identified was that we do not know where in Scotland they are located, so that is a bit of work that needs to be done.

Perhaps there could be a quick-fire mechanism to extend the current well-established concessionary travel scheme to include that relatively small cohort. It would have a relatively low cost but a high impact by giving people that extra ability to move around their communities once they are located in their final place of residence.

Mr Sirel mentioned the Ukraine advice Scotland service that has been set up, which is great. However, he said that it is a passive system—an email inbox that is monitored and a telephone helpline—and that there were issues with access to data for locating people in Scotland who are have seasonal worker visas. The Scottish Refugee Council tried to access that information, not through the Home Office, which was being quite unco-operative, but through the four employment agencies that tend to deploy seasonal workers around Scotland.

Mr Ruskell asked about the farming community. Is there a way to advertise that advice line and promote it on social media through the farming community in Scotland? Could we ask people who have Ukrainian workers on their farms to introduce them to that advice service so that they can get extra access to support? That could be a mechanism to drive greater uptake of that service.

I am curious as to whether it is in the gift of the Government to change the electoral system. Surely that is a parliamentary decision. Is it not for the Parliamentary Bureau to consider a review of the Parliament’s electoral system rather than the Government?

Okay. I am happy to rest on that.

An interesting theme arose in discussion with the petitioners at the previous meeting when we discussed potential comparators for the kind of protection that they would like for ancient woodland. The listed buildings programme and scheduled ancient monuments arose as a basis for considering how a new scheme of protection could be introduced instead of protection simply being from an SSSI, which might require a significant burden of evidence about particular horticulturally, scientifically or biologically significant characteristics. In effect, the forestry could simply merit protection on the basis that its amenity is important to the community or that it is known as an ancient woodland of native species rather than any other requirements.

Is there an opportunity to consider something akin to the scheduled ancient monuments programme or listed buildings programme under which communities could nominate for consideration areas of woodland that they want to be protected? When the listing system and protections for built heritage were introduced in the 1960s, it required a national survey, which was done by the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland, to identify the national list of protected sites. Perhaps a similar survey could be undertaken for woodlands, given the national scale the pressure that is faced. Perhaps that could be an interesting benchmark to consider.

I am sympathetic to the petitioner’s request, as I think that the additional member system is rubbish—but there we go.

Thank you very much.

That is very helpful. You are calling for mandatory reporting. You described the way that you were treated, which was appalling. It was almost gaslighting. Will you describe what you think mandatory reporting should look like? How would it play out? What would it be like in your ideal scenario?