Seòmar agus comataidhean

That was very helpful.

I am sure that a colleague will come on to the issue of resourcing, in short order. I do not know whether Maggie Brunjes would like to comment before I move on to my next line of questioning.

A suggestion that was made in our session with the first panel is that the Home Office could have a role to play. Obviously, we cannot put a statutory duty on the Home Office, but should it have a role to play?

I had better move on before the convener chastises me for going off on tangents with my scrutiny.

I have a question for Jules Oldham. You might have answered it in part but, given that the issue is so important, I will ask the question again. Can you say more about how the ask and act approach might impact those who are at risk of domestic abuse? You alluded to the dangers of people not being trained properly and so on. What needs to happen to ensure that women are not placed at further risk? Can you say more about your alternative proposals, which you hinted at in your earlier answer?

That is really helpful.

Maeve McGoldrick, you have been very patient. Do you want to make some comments?

As that question was at the convener’s discretion, my business is done. I have taken too much of your time.

Good morning, everyone. I will roll my questions together. There are various questions—I will leave it up to the witnesses how they wish to address them.

On the ask and act duty, what is your view of how the relevant bodies that are listed in the bill currently work to prevent homelessness? How good are the links with local homelessness services? Do you think that the proposed statutory ask and act duty will help to address any areas for improvements?

There is a lot in that. I will leave it up to the witnesses how they want to respond.

That is very helpful evidence.

That is helpful. I was going to ask whether witnesses think that the proposed statutory areas will lead to improvements, but I suspect that might be a case of stating the obvious, so I will leave that hanging. Does anyone disagree with the view that, if properly resourced, with appropriate pathways and so on, the statutory areas have significant potential to dramatically improve matters?

Annika Joy might want to comment on that.

On that point, I note that this committee has taken evidence in relation to that. In a meeting that I had before Christmas with the Mears Group—the housing agents for the Home Office—I was told that it is not allowed to do any kind of scoping work with individuals and families who are in Mears accommodation and who, to all intents and purposes, are likely to get a positive decision. The first time Mears can talk to those people about potential homelessness is at the point where it has to say, “You have had a positive decision, you now have a notice to quit.” That has surely got to change.