Seòmar agus comataidhean

With regard to the bill’s timescales, there seems to be support for the bill, with many people being largely happy with it as it is. However, if more significant work needs to be done on it, that will take time. You recognise that people are living through a difficult situation; while we wait for the solutions to come, some are having to live through the current situation. Are you confident that, given the timescales involved, people will benefit enough from this? I am taking into account the fact that you want things to be thorough and you want the right kind of legislation, but is there also a recognition of the need for effective change in this area to support people in very difficult situations?

I am sorry, but we might discuss that in private session. The issue that we face at the moment is whether the bill should include the principle of a mental health moratorium, but we do not know the detail. Would there be any merit at this stage in writing to the minister? It is unclear whether the Government intends to include anything beyond what is statutory, but we can discuss that when we come to private session.

I think that we have a note that said that ICAS and the Insolvency Practitioners Association were not going to particularly comment on the diligence reform, so we can maybe focus on Katie McLachlan and Alisdair MacPherson.

There is an argument that there should be a sense of urgency; we are in a cost of living crisis, with pressures on people’s household incomes, and the Government could be doing more in this area. Although the statutory legislation before us contains provision for a mental health moratorium, the other parts of the bill represent fairly technical and minor adjustments, so it could be seen that the Government is not taking strong enough action.

You have mentioned the regulations, but do we have any confidence that those will be imminent? The argument is that they could happen more quickly, but it looks as though we are dealing with the statutory legislation more quickly and that the areas on which people actually want to see action are the ones that we are waiting on.

Thank you.

David Menzies, what are your views? There are arguments around whether the bill lacks a sense of urgency, given that we are in a cost of living crisis. As I have said, many of the responses that we have had are pushing for more than the bill offers. Is that a fair comment?

Our next item of business is an evidence session with Royal Mail. Ahead of the session, the committee put out a call for evidence and received a number of written submissions. I thank everyone who submitted their views to inform this morning’s session.

I welcome from Royal Mail Ross Hutchison, the operations director for Scotland, and Ricky McAulay, the operations development director. As always, I ask members and witnesses to keep their questions and answers as concise as possible. I invite Ricky McAulay to make a short opening statement.

Ofcom recognised that prioritising parcel delivery may have been necessary during the pandemic. Was it policy to prioritise the delivery of parcels over letters during the industrial dispute?

But would Royal Mail incur a penalty if a parcel was not delivered in a certain timeframe?

What if a company is asking you to deliver the parcel? If a person orders something online and the company cannot deliver it, it might ask Royal Mail to do it. Could the company impose a penalty on you if you failed to deliver it in the relevant timeframe, whether that was 24 hours or 48 hours?

I would also like to ask about the price of stamps. I think that I am correct in saying that it is Royal Mail that sets the price of a first-class stamp, whereas the price of a second-class stamp is still capped by Ofcom. At the moment, it costs £1.10 to send a standard first-class letter, whereas it costs 75p to send a second-class letter, which means that it is 35 per cent—or more than a third—dearer to send a letter first class. It seems that the price of stamps has increased quite dramatically. Do you think that the increase in price might be one of the factors in the reduction in the volume of letters? Particularly at Christmas, when we expect people to buy a high volume of stamps, there is a question whether £1.10 is still affordable.

We recognise that, in the UK, we have a very valued service, with a universal service obligation that other countries do not have. We also recognise that you reach every point of the UK, which is really important and is valued by people, too. However, there has been quite a big increase in the cost of a service that people regard as an everyday service, and the concern is that it has now become a special service that they use only on special occasions, because they are not prepared to pay the high cost. What consideration is given to such matters when you make decisions on the price of first-class stamps?