Seòmar agus comataidhean

Absolutely. I and my officials have spent a fair amount of time looking at the linkages and listening to the voices of lived experience and stakeholders. I am in regular discussion with Shona Robison on housing and homelessness, and I have had a number of meetings to listen to housing and homelessness stakeholders, as members can imagine. As the former chair of the homelessness prevention and strategy group, that is incumbent on me.

We need to build on some of the good work that we have done in the past on the linkages. As the committee is aware, I introduced the housing first approach, which is a person-centred approach to ensuring that people are housed appropriately and that all the other services come into play around about them. As I said yesterday, I do not have the most up-to-date figures—I should have looked them up last night, but we were busy with other things—but I know that the tenancy retainment rate under the housing first approach has been around 90 per cent, which nobody expected. Why is that? It is because we ensure that housing, social work, health, social care, addiction services and other services work together so that a person-centred approach is taken. If we can do it for housing, we can do it in other areas and ensure that the linkages are right.

Beyond that, legislation is proposed that will cover the public duty to prevent homelessness and get it right for people, which will also be beneficial in ensuring that the linkages become the norm.

It might be helpful if I quote from the policy memorandum. The bill comes with a suite of other documents, and I am not sure that everyone has looked at those. It says:

“Section 30 of the Bill requires the Scottish Ministers to consult publicly about any proposed transfer relating to justice services using the enabling power before regulations are brought forward. When laying draft regulations to transfer JSW functions, the Scottish Ministers must also lay before Parliament a summary of the process by which they consulted in relation to the function transfer and the responses they received to that consultation.”

As I have said, we will consult. I reiterate the point that I just made about consultation and what I read from paragraph 142 of the policy memorandum. Section 30 of the bill requires us to consult publicly about transferring any services, including justice services, using the enabling power. We will consult. We have set that out quite clearly.

It would be wrong of me to sit here and say that we are doing all the research and options appraisals and listening to stakeholders and voices of lived experience, and then say what I think at this moment. What I will do, as I have done with all the work that we have done, is listen to people and look at the evidence. That will guide our decision making.

I will bring in Ms Dalrymple.

That is what I have just said to the committee.

You would be voting for the framework bill and the general principles of the bill. As I have said to other committees, the framework bill scenario was the way in which the national health service was established. Other aspects were then slotted into that to fulfil its creation.

You would be voting for the general principles of the framework bill, but that is not the end of all this, as I have said. We will continue to speak to and listen to stakeholders and the voices of lived experience, and of course to committees and the Parliament, as we move forward in our decision making around those moves and possible secondary legislation.

A number of things are going on at the moment. We have, of course, listened to folk all the way through the process, and there has been a huge amount of engagement across the board by not only me but officials. For example, the national care service forum brought a huge number of people in person to Perth concert hall as well as a lot of folk online, including for a lot of stuff before the event.

We are now at the stage of recruiting for lived experience panels—lived experience expert panels, I should say. More than 450 folk have applied, and we are encouraging folk from throughout the country with different experiences to play a part in that.

Beyond that, we recognise that that is not for everyone. We are also involved in targeted engagement, supported by the third sector, and that will continue. People with lived experience will also be able to participate in the options appraisal that I talked about. Options appraisal workshops will be led by the Scottish Government specifically for people with lived experience of justice social work.

I am absolutely adamant that we will continue to listen to the voices of lived experience all the way through our journey. Earlier, I talked about the implementation gaps that we all know exist in service delivery. I truly believe that the only way that we can plug those implementation gaps is by having folk with lived experience help us to shape those services, along with front-line staff.

Absolutely. If we look at some of the survey work that the professional bodies have carried out, we see that some of that stress is caused by the fact that folk feel bound by budgets and eligibility criteria.

I come back to my earlier points about creating freedom and autonomy; being person centred in providing support; and changing the current situation, in which there is a huge amount of spend on crisis, by moving to prevention. That reduces not only the cost to the public purse but the human cost.

I think that a lot of the stress that is felt—I am sure that the committee has heard this from front-line social workers, too—is because folk do not feel that they are able to put in the right help and support at the right time. That is what we need to change.

I will try to answer everybody’s concerns and to find solutions to everything that is put in front of us. The Finance and Public Administration Committee went over that in some depth, as others have. Local authorities are concerned about the movement of budgets. I reiterate what I said to the Finance and Public Administration Committee: we will try to make it cost neutral. I want to ensure that we co-operate and collaborate to the max with local authorities.

Unfortunately, COSLA is not at the table on some of those issues at the moment. I hope that that will change, because COSLA needs to be at the table too. Others will be at the table for the co-design of the national care service, and COSLA needs to be there on all the issues—not just some of them—so that its views are also heard.

As I have said, there is worry about resourcing. Let us be honest: there always is. That is the way of the world. However, as I said to the Finance and Public Administration Committee, we will try to make this as cost neutral as possible for local authorities.