Seòmar agus comataidhean

Another issue is that some groups feel that the relationship between the ombudsman and public bodies is too close. In fact, Accountability Scotland said to us that the SPSO is not measuring service standards against best practice and that too much agreement with public bodies is evident. I invite you to respond on the relationship that you have with public bodies. Is it too close?

Thank you very much for answering those questions.

Thank you. I have a brief follow-up to that. Suppose a single building assessment is carried out now, but it does not look like work will proceed until a year has passed, do you have to do the single building assessment again at that point? How long is the SBA valid for in terms of allowing you to remediate the building?

My next question is on the UK fire safety standard PAS 9980, which you mentioned earlier, Paul. There was a huge discussion at the committee about why we did not just immediately jump to embrace that at the time and incorporate it in the developing technical specification. Did you say earlier that you were discussing with developers the applicability of that standard to the Scottish circumstances?

Does your panel of advisers reach out to complainers to get a more rounded bigger picture and a more articulate presentation of the issue? As I have said, the balance of evidence can sometimes favour the institutional side in the quality and depth of the defence paperwork that you might receive on an issue. Do you reach out to complainers to ensure that there is a balance when it comes to the quality and quantity of information that you consider?

So, we have a variability scale rather than a safe or unsafe outcome.

I have two brief questions. One is on the overall review of the SPSO. As you will be aware, the Parliament has agreed to hold a root and branch review of all the commissioner services and so on. What are your views on that? Who should review the SPSO? What should a review of the commissioner service look like?

My final question is about own-initiative powers. You have answered that, so I will ask the question in a different way. You agree that it would be handy to have those powers. What do you do currently if issues arise that are of a wider and more systemic nature? Do you have no powers whatsoever to widen your scope of inquiry? For example, we heard that female prisoners never complain about issues and you will probably never see a complaint from a woman or young girl in prison. What is preventing you from writing to the Scottish Prison Service when an issue arises to ask for feedback and so on? Why do you need the own-initiative powers to solve that?

Who would determine that? Will there be any guidelines in place for a sheriff—if such a case goes before a sheriff? How would the determination as to whether there is a legitimate issue be arrived at?

Thank you. My other question is about the ability of people to use the new protections.

As you well know, minister, when considering the Housing (Scotland) Bill, the committee heard about issues around how tenants can be made aware of and enabled to exercise and enforce their rights. It sounds as though the same issues might confront us in relation to the Renters’ Rights Bill. How do you see us giving support to tenants who may wish to bring issues forward? What support might they be able to receive?