Seòmar agus comataidhean

My question is on SSI 2021/277, which requires, subject to some exemptions, that face coverings should still be worn in some indoor spaces. That was the subject of some discussion in the Parliament’s Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee on Tuesday of this week. It identified that

“The guidance ... states that face coverings are not required to be worn while dancing in a nightclub or dance hall. However, a specific exemption for dancing is not listed in the instrument.”—[Official Report, Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, 31 August 2021; c 2.]

I ask for clarity on that issue. Has there been an omission from the terms of the instrument?

I would like to raise one more issue in relation to Covid vaccination, if I may. I go back to correspondence on the issue that I have received from constituents. My question is about the practical implementation of the measures. We know from what was announced yesterday that vaccine certification will be required for outdoor events that are attended by more than 10,000 people.

We can see what would happen at football or rugby matches, for example. As I understand it, 50,000 people turning up at Murrayfield, Hampden, Ibrox or Parkhead would be required to have proof of vaccination. From a practical point of view, how would you expect that to be addressed? It would require the authorities at stadia to employ stewards to check people as they arrive. I presume that they would have to have the technology to be able to do that and that there would be training and cost implications, as well as issues with supply of the technology. Has the Scottish Government given thought to how those issues might be dealt with? What timescale are you looking at for the introduction of the measures, given that all those issues have to be considered?

Good morning, gentlemen. I am sure that I am not the only MSP either in this committee or in Parliament who has had, overnight, a large number of concerns raised by constituents about the Scottish Government’s announcement yesterday on the introduction of vaccine passports or vaccine certification. I have a number of questions that I would like to ask about that announcement and the practicalities of it.

I will start by trying to understand the policy intent behind the measure. We know that double vaccination, although it helps to protect individuals against the symptoms of Covid-19, is not in itself a protection against people either catching the illness or carrying it and passing it on to others. Against that backdrop, what is the primary reason for the Scottish Government considering the measure? Is it to prevent the spread of Covid-19, or is it more about pushing those who are presently resistant to getting vaccinated, particularly younger people, down the route of taking up vaccination?

Thank you. I am sure that we could pursue the matter in great detail, but I think that the discussion highlights the need for a degree of precision in relation to the drafting of the instruments.

I am grateful to Mr Swinney for that answer, but I am not sure that it entirely addressed the question that I asked, which was more about which of the two purposes was the primary intention behind the new initiative that has been introduced. However, constituents have raised a number of other issues with me, so perhaps I could raise a couple of them.

It is clear that there are concerns about the civil liberties angle of introducing vaccine passports. The Scottish Government has said, entirely reasonably, that those who have medical conditions that mean that they cannot be vaccinated will be exempt from the requirement. Does the Government intend to exempt those who might have objections to taking passports—for example, because they might be a member of a religious group that believes that the vaccination is wrong? Will individuals in that category also be treated as exempt?

Thank you for that answer. I suppose that the question is then, “When is dancing not dancing?” Perhaps that question is for Michael Gove, rather than for the Deputy First Minister. However, if there is an exemption for people who are exercising, does that apply to people who are walking, for example? What constitutes exercise?

Acting convener, you are doing a fine job so far.

As per my entry in the register of members’ interests, I am a member of the Law Society of Scotland, although I am not currently practising as a solicitor. I also own some property from which I derive rental income.

Thank you very much. I look forward to working with you and the other members of the committee in the weeks and months ahead.

I thank the clerks and SPICe for putting together the background papers, which are very helpful.

I support the two proposals. We are about to go into the summer recess. By the time we come back, at the beginning of September, the world may have changed quite significantly, so getting an update as soon as possible thereafter from the cabinet secretary would be very useful and would help to guide our future programme.

On broader topics, it will be important to look at the economic situation when it comes to recovery from Covid, and at the health service situation. However, we have to be conscious of the fact that we do not want our work to overlap with any work that other committees of the Parliament are doing. For that reason, I am sure that our clerks will liaise with those of other relevant committees, in order to make sure that we keep abreast of what those committees are doing and that we do not duplicate any work that they are planning. When we get together in late August, that work will give us a good steer on the sorts of areas in which we could usefully provide a contribution and which areas it would be less useful to look at.