Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you for that. I hope that the committee hears what you have said, because I think that everyone in the Parliament is disappointed by the lack of progress that has been made. That has to change.

I do not know whether any other witness wants to come in.

I have a question that you might want to follow up in writing. I want to ask about a new model around information and access to services for kinship carers, which goes beyond what we have been talking about in terms of payments. I think that we were all impressed with what we heard this morning about Perth and Kinross Council, given the urban and rural nature of that council area. Is there a best practice model for providing a whole package including, for example, peer support for kinship carers and access to and information about local third sector organisations? You might want to write to us about that, as I said.

In West Lothian, in my region, there are a lot of good third sector organisations that link with and help people without waiting for a referral pathway to be put in place. Are there any examples of that additional support for when people become kinship carers, or of models being developed around that?

Yes, thank you.

I am sorry.

Good morning. I thank the minister and his officials for joining us.

I want to carry on with Mark Griffin’s and Paul McLennan’s line of questioning and ask specifically about Homes for Scotland’s concerns about the likelihood, as it stands, of NPF4 reducing the number of homes that will be delivered. Obviously, that will exacerbate the housing crisis if it happens. I have listened to what you and your officials have said about local plans moving to a 10-year timescale, but I wonder whether you can give more detail on the mechanism for introducing additional land. What will that look like? We have been talking about open and transparent processes, but how is that sort of thing being put into NPF4? After all, that issue will be important to a lot of communities.

That is helpful. One of the key things that I have picked up during the committee’s work on planning is that it needs to be accompanied by a 10-year capital investment plan across the public sector. That will be challenging for the national health service and education services, in particular. The minister will be aware of conversations that we have had in the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee about how a lot of new-build development can destabilise general practice surgeries. Therefore, we need to see that complementary capital investment.

My other question is about renewables. We have received some evidence expressing concern that NPF4, as it is currently drafted, could lead to delays in renewable energy developments. The minister said that he uses the word “minimum” in terms of numbers expected around housing. Is it the same for targets around renewables? Is it your opinion that we need to see a presumption in favour of renewables in NPF4? Again, the language will be key. Local authorities will be delivering not necessarily targets but the minimums that we expect.

That is helpful. My question is on the draft delivery plan. I note that the onshore wind policy statement specifically looks at 8GW to 12GW of onshore wind being delivered in a much shorter timescale than we had in which to deliver the renewable energy that we now produce. Planning departments will look at renewable energy projects, although they will not necessarily take them forward. There is a huge issue around how we meet the target and what delivery plan the Scottish Government expects local authorities to use. Often, the planning authorities that are involved are large and rural rather than urban. I would be interested in seeing where the discussion goes. It is possibly something that we can take forward around the draft delivery plan. The devil will be in the detail.

I thank the witnesses for joining us. During the pandemic, COSLA issued framework guidance on supporting people with no recourse to public funds. That guidance is being updated. We have heard evidence, and received written evidence, about inconsistencies in how that is being rolled out across local authorities. Have the witnesses seen that, in their experience?

I will bring in Maggie Lennon first. If anyone else wants to come in, they should put an R in the chat function.

Yes—thanks.

Thank you for that. I am not sure whether anyone else wanted to come in on that point.

If not, I will move on to discuss models that are in place to support unaccompanied children and young people and how such models could be developed. Perhaps we could bring in Phil Arnold on this. How is that different, how do services engage directly with young people, and is there a model that the committee could consider?