Seòmar agus comataidhean

I could go on, but I will move on to the matter of EV charging points. Once again, I will use Inverclyde as an example. Graham Simpson chaired a tenement maintenance working group in the previous session of Parliament, and a variety of issues were raised in that group. On the issue of tenements and built-up areas, I look at my area and think that there are people who will want to purchase an electric car and will then need access to EV charging points. Charging a vehicle is a bit easier for someone who has a house with a driveway; it is a lot more challenging for people who live in tenements and in built-up areas. I am keen to find out what further activity has been considered to help with that.

Finally, on working with industry and the likes of the motor trade, many people would like to buy an electric car, but they are expensive. I know that technology is always being worked on, but there are still challenges with some aspects of the battery tech; indeed, I have heard some negative stories about the batteries. Is the Scottish Government committed to engaging with the industry on that matter? As we know from the report, reducing car usage is one thing, but the transition from traditional to electric vehicles will be really important in helping to reduce car emissions.

I will go back to the previous question and the cross-Government and cross-portfolio nature of working. Is there any activity, through education and the likes of Skills Development Scotland, to train people to install EV charging points?

Good morning, panel. My first question is about Network Rail. The cabinet secretary touched on the amount of investment that is going into rail in Scotland—I think that she mentioned £1.5 billion. Would it be advantageous for Network Rail to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament to make rail travel a bit cheaper, potentially, and to have a better sense of organisational operation when it comes to rail delivery?

Thank you for that.

Paragraph 67 of the report touches on bus patronage, and exhibit 7 on page 33 is quite helpful in that regard. Would it be beneficial to have an increased level of funding for transport partnerships in order to try to maintain some bus services in communities?

A moment ago, you talked about rail, which is often thought about in terms of its ability to take people into cities, but it is also hugely important in terms of inter-town transport. For example, in Gourock, in my constituency, someone who stays in the Midton part of the town and wants to go to the town centre has to get a bus to the very end of Gourock in order to get another bus back in.

Welcome to the 13th meeting in 2025 of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee. I remind everyone to please switch off or put to silent their mobile phones and other electronic devices.

The first item of business is a decision on whether to take items 3, 4, 5 and 6 in private. Is the committee content to take those items in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Under agenda item 2, we will consider one instrument, on which no points have been raised.

Is the committee content with the instrument?

Members indicated agreement.

The instrument sets out charges that are payable for services relating to the recognition of overseas qualifications. Under section 28(2) of the Interpretation and Legislative Reform Scotland Act 2010, instruments that are subject to the negative procedure must be laid at least 28 days before they come into force, not counting recess periods of more than four days. The instrument breaches that requirement as it was laid on 13 March 2025 and came into force on the 28 March 2025.

As required under the act, the Scottish Government has set out the reasons for the breach in a letter to the Presiding Officer, which will be published in the committee’s report on subordinate legislation that is considered at today’s meeting. It explains that the instrument requires to come into force by 28 March to provide a statutory basis for Scottish customers to be charged on the start date of a new contract.

Does the committee wish to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament under reporting ground (j), for failure to comply with laying requirements?

Members indicated agreement.

In correspondence with the Scottish Government, which is published alongside the papers for this meeting, the committee asked about the timing of a planned section 93 order to be made under the Scotland Act 1998, in the context of the wider legal issues that sit behind the making of the instrument.

The Scottish Government stated that arrangements are in place for the section 93 order to be made shortly and that it is due to be considered at the Privy Council in May 2025. It is of the view that the present instrument provides the necessary legal basis for the charging of the fees in Scotland and that the retrospective validation of fees that is proposed in the United Kingdom Government’s Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill will need to attach only to fees that were charged for services that were provided in Scotland before the present instrument came into force.

Does the committee wish to highlight to the lead committee the unusual history and context of the instrument, including the correspondence regarding the proposed section 93 order?

Members indicated agreement.