Seòmar agus comataidhean

I will be brief, convener.

Good morning, minister. I was pleased to hear that you are keen to look at the cost of the school day, which was the question that Marie McNair was exploring. When women leave a household, they do not always leave with all their belongings and clothes, and they may have children.

I do not expect you to say yes to this today, but in relation to the cost of the school day, I note that school clothing grants are issued once a year. Could there be circumstances in which a bit of flexibility could be considered in relation to an additional application for a school clothing grant where a woman is fleeing domestic and economic abuse from a perpetrator? I am just asking for consideration of that suggestion, rather than saying that we should do it.

Before I move on to the next theme, I will ask a little more about Jeremy Balfour’s line of questioning. Something that has come up consistently during our evidence taking is that women need a pathway to leave. Victims and survivors might leave because of a crisis, but they sometimes know for a long time that they need to leave, before they take the final step of leaving an abusive relationship.

Mr Balfour said that the five-week wait for the first universal credit payment is a major challenge. Women cannot apply for universal credit in confidence and have certainty that an award will be issued seamlessly. Community care grants and crisis grants can take domestic abuse into account, and we have heard about the fund to leave. Should consideration be given to cross-Government working, and to work between the DWP and the Scottish Government, to give financial certainty to a woman who decides that she must leave an abusive relationship? Should a package of measures be put in place before a woman, often with children, has to flee an abusive relationship? Real partnership working could mean the end of the five-week wait and could also change some of the criteria for Scottish Government grants. Could you work with Shirley-Anne Somerville to take that piece of work forward across Government and could you encourage work between the Scottish and UK Governments on that pathway to leave?

I am very aware—again because I represent a Glasgow constituency—that Glasgow City Council sees some of those issues at first hand, as new Scots who want to get their leave to remain status to stay in the country have very quickly become homeless and have gone into that system.

Glasgow City Council and Paul McLennan, as housing minister, made representations to the UK Home Office, which seems to be shirking its duty and responsibility to ensure that proper support is in place. They made those representations from a housing perspective, but you are the Minister for Equalities, so have you added your weight to those calls?

In my, as always, rather long-winded way, for which I apologise, I am asking whether you think that you could work with the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and with the UK Government to have in place a package of measures in advance of a woman leaving, to ensure that she has certainty and has cash in her pocket at the point at which she leaves, instead of being in crisis after she leaves?

Thank you. I got my money’s worth out of that question, minister.

There is going to be a new legal duty for social landlords to develop and implement a domestic abuse policy. The equally safe strategy commits to supporting social landlords to embed gender equality commitments. How is that going? What work is taking place in relation to that?

I find that a reassuring answer. I do not want to follow up on that. That answer was pretty strong.

The committee has heard how the high cost of refugee accommodation, the lack of suitable temporary accommodation and the high cost of housing all contribute to the difficulty of leaving an abusive relationship. In what ways is the Scottish Government taking that into account when developing its housing policy?

I get that that is a cross-portfolio issue that also goes across Governments, because some of the structural issues are Home Office matters; however, what is the Scottish Government doing to try to resolve that?

So there are no specific actions at the moment. One suggestion that was made about how to reduce the costs of green hydrogen was to blend green hydrogen into the existing gas networks, which could reduce costs by up to 30 per cent. That could be actively considered now and taken forward, so is the UK Government actively looking at that?

Okay. I have no further questions, but I will put on the record that, if we can reduce electricity costs for green hydrogen, blend into the existing gas network and secure carbon capture and project union for Scotland, that could transform key elements of project willow and the market. Investors need certainty, and they need it quick, minister. Anything that you can put in concrete and in writing would be incredibly helpful.

That would be helpful. I think that you can get to about 20 per cent in blending before you have to start looking at the infrastructure and changing the pipe network.

I want to ask about project union, the 1,500-mile transmission pipeline grid for hydrogen that is being considered. At yesterday’s meeting of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, one of the witnesses—I think that it was the general manager of the Acorn project; I apologise if it was a different witness—said that the Scottish Government should put pressure on the UK Government to give certainty in relation to when the Scottish part of the project will be complete. I understand that the next leg will be in Scotland, hooking up the Acorn project, the Grangemouth cluster and other grid networks.

We have been told that a lack of commitment to carbon capture through the Acorn project and also to grid and pipework infrastructure will surely compromise the investment that we all want to happen. You said that you will do everything that is possible to speed up investment. It would help industry and investors if the UK Government could say, “Project union in Scotland means that this will happen by date X, and this is what it will look like.” That would bring investment into the sector now. Can you give any clarity on that, either just now or following up in writing?

Minister, I am sorry to interrupt, as it is not in my nature to cut across people who are giving evidence to the committee. I apologise—it is only because I have time constraints in relation to my questions.

I know that I mentioned REMA, but the point that I was trying to make was about the actions that the UK Government can take to reduce the electricity costs for green hydrogen. I am not being discourteous but, rather than asking for an extended explanation of what REMA is, I am asking: what is the UK Government doing to reduce the electricity costs for green hydrogen? That is what the five energy companies and the Acorn project wanted to know.