Can I call a meeting to order and can I welcome you to this, the second meeting of the Public Petitions Committee in 2018? Can I remind members and others in the room to switch phones and other devices to silent? The first item on the agenda today is consideration of two new petitions on which we will hear evidence. The first petition we will take evidence on is petition 1677 on make more money available to mitigate welfare cuts. This petition was fel dda'r mirrae yn s Сп工作orol y Unifer Fawr wortyn. Diil ''I welcome at the meeting with John Mcarddle, co-founder and campaign coordinator for Black Triangle, an organisation run by and for disabled people. To welcome you both and thank you for attending this morning. You have the opportunity to make a brief opening statement of up to five minutes. After that, the committee will ask a few questions to help保 jar o'r עch o'u O fod yn cael eu dŵr, yn darnodd a'r ysgolwgr ar gyfer unrhyw ymddangos, ond os oedd360ol yn gystechu'r beth sy'n gwybod cyhoeddiol, a o gymryd o'r lluniau ei fod yn ei ddangosu, i dd crediol iawn yr adrodd i'r rhaid, nifer y gwneud o'r cymorth a'r cerdd yma, i ddangosu teulu, ac wrth gwrs ar gael ac oedd beth gweithio gael i'r lleol~! gan spoonod bawb, ac nid oedd gennym ni yw'r Llywodraeth, a fyddwn i'r rhaglenau a fyddwn ni'n gweithio ar gyfer gwerth ddod yn y ddysgu ddysgu'r cyffredig hefyd? Felly mae'r wneud i'r drafod o gweld tynnu yn haed sydd ymyl yw'r cystafol maen nhw ein cynnwys eich barat yn gweithio'r cymolei yw'r cyflaen yw y profi rhoi'r cyfrifol. Mae nhw ymddy感覺 o'r ddwylau o'r cyfrifol yw'r cyfrifol yn gŷnol dyma fydd o'i gwneud y byddol yn bwysig a'r cyfrifol sydd o'r cyfrifol sydd yn ganfer i'r Whilefair Cymru. Fy fydd ymddill o'r muniet ar yweig o'r cyfrifol yw'r cyfrifol? sydd wedi'u panfyrdd mongol. Y minefau hynny'n gwyllwch, ac mae gynhyfyn ni yn gwrs o'r ystod yma. Felly mae'r gweithio'runo bwysig dim yn gwneud yn ymgyrch at y morhenig ymgyrch ymgyrch sy'n cyflyg ar ôl bod a'r falch ar gyfer y gwir. Felly'n cael ei amlion o'r ymgyrch o'r swyddfaen taltygiadau gyflymig argynnu'n byw yr olygu. Mae eisiau mynd i gyd-gegwyddol bwysig. darth ddaint o'r fawr mae'r hyd yn glirio i buffon i gymryd rhai blydy, a'u wneud y bydd graf, ein rhai blynyddullus sydd o gael y rhai blynyddu ar y cerdyn nhw i gael'r acefnodig sydd ei wneud â'r syroli'r system ateb. Yn y過去u nioli, rhai blynyddau rhai maen nhw i gael rhaid i gael ddweud ar ddechrau oedd y clygau ac mae yn 1980, rhaid i gael rhai blynyddau ac mwyfodol a'i gael yn gweithio i gael rhai blynyddau rhai blynyddau veel yn y goeth. Ac mae soeddexhalesiaid y gallwn amlwgplwyddiadau ar gyfer, yn cymdwyr iawn ar y doled. Mae hynny yn cefnodiol o ffordd o'r byw o ran iawn ar olydd wedi newid i gweithio'r unedul ac mae'r ghrant wedi bod. Mae angen ymddur i gyfgwrs a Truex, o'r cyfrygiaid o'r ganu cyforddol, o flynyddoedd y prif, o brydoli lle, o brydol, uffer a wneud, oedden nhw'n ni'n cymdeithasig ym ni'n cael ei wneud hynny. As the papers that have been prepared for this committee note, the Social Security Committee has commissioned research that gives figures for the benefits lost to people in Scotland since 2010 as a result of welfare cuts. By 2020-21, these will add up to over 2 billion a year. You can also see in those documents the losses resulting from different benefit cuts both to individuals and altogether. Some are very large and some households are suffering from several of these cuts simultaneously. In addition, vast amounts of distress and ongoing complications result from what we can only describe as a criminal level of negligence in the workings of the various DWP bureaucracies. Benefit delays are the cause of many requests for extra help from the Scottish welfare fund or from food banks. People are astonishingly resilient and generally that's a good thing, but it's frightening to see how people's expectations adjust to surviving in a world where options are always constricting. This has its own consequences feeding into an epidemic of mental health problems, physical health problems and isolation. This petition is deliberately not prescriptive about how best to mitigate this misery. What we're calling for is an acknowledgement of the need to put more money into the system to help those affected and for this to be done in a holistic way. Every cut translates into personal and social disasters and each has generated calls for the Scottish Government to mitigate it. These need to be looked at together or it will be too easy for all these different and desperate needs to be set in competition with each other. We would be happy to answer questions on some of the areas where more spending would make a real difference and we've got a lot of evidence on that and we can also send stuff afterwards. More help with discretionary housing payments, extra money for child benefits, more for the Scottish welfare fund, more for advice, more help for sick and disabled people, more help for people who've been sanctioned. It's a pity that this session is taking place so far into the debates on the Scottish budget because the other side of the coin is of course the need to raise more money. Now that the budget has opened the door to more progressive taxation and people have got used to this idea, let's make it really progressive and raise enough money to make a significant difference. We've also noted in our petition the potential for replacing council tax with a land value tax. I think to discuss that would need a session on its own but we would refer you to the work that's already been done on this by Andy Wightman for the Scottish Greens. Andy's report was written in 2010 and anticipated that the system could be up and running in five years. We appreciate that there's an understandable reluctance by the Scottish Government to spend money on things that should be being looked after by Westminster. It's galling when there's so much more to do but when it comes to welfare it is very, very necessary even a matter of life and death. What more important role does Parliament have than to protect a country's most vulnerable citizens and help create and preserve sustainable communities? So for those who believe Scotland's future lies in devolution then that devolved Parliament must be put to full use. For those who believe that devolution is not enough then it's important to use all the powers we have in order to demonstrate the need for more and for those who can't see beyond the bottom line while when it comes to benefits the phrase a stitch in time couldn't be more true. Help now can prevent family and social breakdown which brings much greater financial costs as well as personal tragedies and it puts money into deprived areas where it can have the greatest positive impact on the economy. The approach that's currently being followed by the Scottish Government may seem to be cautious and pragmatic but unless it does more to help those at the sharp end of welfare reform we will be left with poor people and poor economics. Can I maybe start by asking your petition calls with the Scottish Government to make more money available to mitigate the impact of UK Government welfare cuts and you've made the case effectively for that and understand that you also want to have a precise figure but roughly how much more money do you think should be made available? If you are making a budget ask, we've finished stage one but we have another two stages to go. If you're going to make a budget ask what would it look like? Ideally we would like to mitigate that to 2 billion a year but we appreciate that that is a lot of money. The more that can be done the better so for example in things like the benefit cap there was a paper done by the Scottish Greens looking at do people know what the benefit cap is? At the moment it's impacting 3,700 households and the Scottish Government estimates that there's a total loss of 11 million and have only put up 8 million so even 3 million on that would actually make it comprehensive and could make it automatic and would make a huge difference but that is only just one thing obviously I haven't seen the calculations but I imagine that there's the £5 on child benefits which I know the Labour Party is supporting and there's been a whole huge group of charities and third sector organisations is supporting that and they have got the evidence behind that which is reckoned to be the most effective way of putting money back in well the biggest single cut is actually just the cuts right across the board the freezing of benefits that's affected everybody and this is deemed to be probably one of the most efficient ways of actually dealing with that and I'm sure John's got something to say about the disable which is that people have been hit probably the worst. Well there's definitely been disabled people have been extremely hard hit by the migration from disability living allowance to personal independence payment it's called comfort for people who are being reassessed at the moment under the current regime that will have our own system set up in a few years time people are losing their entitlements now of 526,000 DLA claimants reassessed for PIP up until October 2016 21% were rejected and 23% ended up worse off financially we also have the judgment from the the appeal the court of appeal this before Christmas which the government Westminster is not going to appeal that people with mental health problems have been discriminated against with regard to mobility allowance for mobility within the DLA so many people have been left stranded they've lost their mobility vehicles and it's been absolutely catastrophic the spectre we have now on the horizon is people being migrated if there's a change of circumstance any change of circumstance will see them migrated to universal credit and they'll lose their severe disability premiums they'll just be gone so it's poverty and immiseration on a very vast scale and I would have thought that in a country that prides itself on being progressive such as Scotland that a serious discussion should be had about what we can do given the powers that we have to mitigate this catastrophe it's been described by the chair of the of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Tories here does your name as a human catastrophe catastrophe for disabled people that's no exaggeration I don't think that the chair of a union committee is given to hyperbole the UK government has been found to be in breach of the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities in a grave and systematic way so given that the disabled community of Scotland faces such a catastrophe it's incumbent upon our government to step in and take very hard and well thought out measures to alleviate the suffering that people find themselves in can I just add a couple of things because I think that one a couple of ways as well that money can be really targeted I think is a lot more help through the Scottish welfare fund which can you know help some of people hardest hit from all different groups and also more money for people to give advice so that people do get the help they need and they get the benefits to start off with so they you know we don't we're not picking up the pieces afterwards which is obviously makes good sense because you know we've come across people who've been told well we can't put your appeal through yet because actually we haven't got anybody to do it for months or the person that you're seeing is not with us and we don't have anybody else to replace them or people even if they have got help and help is very variable across the country what how much help is available but even people who have have got help have said you know the people who are helping us are just so busy impressed they're not doing the job properly. I think possibly giving disabled people assistance with their applications and negotiating the system is perhaps the most helpful thing of all. Okay, thanks very much. Angus MacDonald. Okay, thanks. Can we now good morning Sarah? Good morning John. In your petition you've outlined the steps you took today is the issue with your local MSPs and ultimately the majority of MSPs prior to submitting the petition and you also wrote separately to the minister for social security. Can you tell us about the responses that you received particularly from the Scottish Government? I haven't got them with me I mean it's we didn't get very much that was very positive to be honest and I know the most recent question that was raised with was actually wasn't by us but by Edinburgh Coalition Against Poverty writing to Gene Freeman about the money for for well people are being evicted but the family evicted just this week actually as a result of this and it's absolutely horrific and I can give you some more information about that but I mean that was a very very disappointing response because you know the the the Scottish Scottish Government prys itself I think on on the housing legislation and particularly the homelessness legislation but that doesn't mean anything if if you haven't actually got the housing benefits to pay for homes and the people are being evicted because because of that so that was very disappointing and again sort of slightly pushing it back onto the councils in that particular case but we haven't got very far to be honest it's been sort of yeah we take it on board and but but nothing very constructive and and a list of obviously what what they are what is being done but which you know and we're very appreciative of what what has been done and what's been done with the bedroom tax but it just actually shows us the difference that these things can make can you confirm you got an official response from the minister oh yeah yeah we've had a letter from the okay can you share that with the committee when you get the chance okay that'd be good thanks I mean in general terms anything that once the session is over if there's more information you want to feed in or things that you feel as if you could expand on then we're more than happy to take a further response from us yeah it was just some time ago to be honest so I can't remember the details of it okay rona mackay very good morning seara good morning john um just to we follow up from angus's question did you contact your mps and and the west minister government have you made representations to them um specifically we've contacted msp's about this because i mean we're we're always very in touch with our mps about you know ongoing problems and i'm sure you well you're you're about to get down to see people in London as well but i mean you know we've i've been to see ash denim and i speak to lots of people in the party yeah to tree brock and that person that's fine i just wondered if there was a balance of i've gone to west minister as well constantly lobbying yeah but yeah crystal has been very good and yeah rising issues as well okay well you know there is i'd like to say there's a lot of what you said i totally agree with and with regard to the UK government's benefit cuts but i just want to also say that you will know we only get 15 percent of the powers here of social security powers um so that does you know tire hands as much as you know decreasing budgets do but what i'm interested to know is i was going to ask you about the sort of human and financial cost of this but i think you've outlined that well in your your statements i don't want you to have to i think we all know what the human and financial costs of these cuts are but i'm interested to know what your views on a citizen's income might be i would very very supportive i think that would be um it would just solve so many problems and and just provide a bit i mean a base that people could go from i mean i think and that it's there's different ways of looking at a citizen's income and it has to be a citizen's income it isn't instead obviously of all the things that society provides like um you know health and education and all these other things because you can have a very let's say right wing citizen's income that just says this is it now you're on your own mate but a citizen's income that's as well as all those things that provided i think would be fantastic it's been very very encouraging seeing the growth of interest i mean i'm amazing growth of interest in it for obvious reasons i think one of the interesting things about um child benefit and the call for extra help on child benefit is actually that's in that sort of vein that i mean child benefit well apart from recently when it was removed from the very top which i i don't think was the right decision because you should tax people more at the top not take away what should be a universal benefit and make all the sort of bring in all the means testing stuff i mean the point about a universal benefit is it's universal um but actually a five pounds on child benefit that's kind of in that same sort of vein as a universal basic income and in the same way it would you know it it would be for everybody people it's the most effective way of making sure people get get what's needed um and it's and you know people don't feel they have to plead for it it's yours by right yeah thank you that's interesting um there's a very good report that was written by ontario coalition against poverty or people that we have a relationship with um i'd be happy to provide it to the committee i think in principle it's a good idea but um i think that there are many pitfalls that um need to be avoided um enrolling one out um so um and just as i would just echo what um sarah had said that um provided it's not going to take away from other areas i think in principle it makes sound economic sense can i ask you john um when you talked about the assessments and the you know the terrible nature of of what disabled people are having to put up with just now are you encouraged by um you know the future plans of the of our own social security system that there won't be revolving door assessments and that you know people will be treated with dignity and respect does that give you any comfort i know it's not next year but you know when we can do it um certainly um i just wish that it could happen more quickly um i think it's quite alien to um most scots the kind of scapegoating that has gone on in the right wing press um these past seven years um i think that no matter who you are in scotland there's always a sense of where all job times are spent um and we are still a larger degree of social solidarity i believe um i just think that um it's going to be a hard job because um well it's great that you know we don't want for-profit companies assessing having anything to do with the assessment of disabled people in fact we don't want assessments that are based on a pseudo scientific model called the biopsychosocial model of disability which is complete nonsense has much to do with evidence-based medicine never let alone okay there's the medical model we don't want that i mean more of a holistic approach but but uh this is just simply catastrophic uh this assessment regime um we'd like to see it done away with all together um we don't think it's saved money we don't think it makes any economic sense we think it's been profoundly damaging for society and for the economy okay thank you thank you thanks ronar Brian Whittle thank you give me a good morning mr mccarland go on in the morning daughter clan thank you for coming in to give us some evidence um i was considering your position petition at the same time as the social security bill is being scrutinised by the social security committee and i note that you contributed to the Scottish Government consultation on the bill and made a submission response to the social security committee's call for evidence on stage one of the bill have you made any representations regarding amendments you would like to see to that bill at stage two to deliver some of the changes that you you're asking for in your petition um yes i'm trying to remember what the details of them actually well we can send it we can send it to you but we have we did submit i mean it um god um you can let us yeah i think the areas of interest are there as i want to focus on them it is interesting that i think the social security is sitting as we speak so they're actually going through some of these areas on the screen i mean just following up from what john was saying just now i mean we are very can i mean there was enormous excitement obviously in it particularly about you know that that it's going to be a more dignified approach and everything but then dismay really among people and and a lot of disillusion at the at the delay that um and obviously that debates past but the question now is what can we do as john was referring to to to help the people who are being hit now because i think by the time it's it comes devolved there'll be a fold of it's expected that everybody will be on pip the transfer will be complete um and so there will be a lot of people who will have lost out meanwhile and people people for example i mean could the scottish wealth or this is something that we have raised and um i think have raised in that document you're asking me about could the scottish welfare fund be used we certainly raised it with minister anyway um be used as a vehicle for helping people who are suffering mobility problems now maybe even lost their mobility vehicle and as a consequence been really isolated and had that you know their ability to leave an independent life pretty devastated so this is a discretionary fund but it's a fund that has although there are more and more needs for it and universal credit is going to be putting more and more calls on it because of all the delays and the debt and everything and the general bureaucratic mess ups that happen with it um there's going to be more and more calls on it but that's Scottish welfare fund has stayed the same for the last three years and and yet that's a quite a flexible way of providing help to people who most need it so maybe and you know is this a vehicle and i'm not an expert on all the legal things of it but could this be a vehicle for helping people with vehicles yeah sorry about that show and these are the last couple of questions so good morning both of you and thank you for coming um you provide an example in your petition about how you consider the scottish government could make changes to the tax system as a mitigation measure and obviously some of that is happening at the moment through the budget but could you expand for me on that and what you would like to see in terms of changes to the tax system um well it's got a bit more progressive but you know by changing those bars and changing where the different levels come in it could be more dramatically progressive and i think possibly easier to do that earlier in a parliament because so that people can see that actually it doesn't affect the majority of people it affects only those at the top um i think there's there's also things where taxes are being misspent i mean the one that i would absolutely single out is the the help that's been given to first time buyers and it's been pointed out that it doesn't really much help first time buyers and it is all it does is push up the prices of housing for everybody so it's it's economically not a good measure at all um but the other thing we we raised was um change replacing council tax with a land value tax and um i have a background in housing so um the that's actually something i've argued before from a housing perspective as well that it actually not only is it a much more progressive system um but it's a system that can actually be used to limit um property speculation and stop houses and housing being as absurdly it's expensive as it is in this country right so so do you have any concept of of when you talk about um you know the taxation being more progressive so that it would just hit the ones at the top so so do you have any thoughts about where you'd like to see that pitched i i'm not a tax expert i know there are lots of people who who've done more i just think you know the the changes that we've seen have been really very small um and i you know and if one looks back historically of course i mean people or even at other countries and the Nordic countries obviously would be the first ones where we'd think of there are there are places with much higher taxation systems and it certainly doesn't mean that people leave the country because people recognise that those taxation systems are actually paying for much better services for everybody and i think not probably not enough notice has been taken about all the work that's been done as well on the advantages of a more equal society the work by Wilkinson and Pickett um looking at the advantages of a more equal society actually for everybody even for people at the top it's Michael Marmot it's Michael Marmot as well the public health epidemiologist i think the problem is a great deal of this is to do with um the fact that um Scotland doesn't have the economic levers to um to crack down on tax evasion and avoidance um that's reserved to Westminster so i think that our elected representatives must keep up the pressure to make sure that um Westminster really does the business um in collecting the tax which is owed um and avoided because corporations are simply not pulling their fair share it's absolutely scandalous um the uh Bermuda papers and so on um it's high time people stepped up to the plate and paid their fair share because people are really really suffering in the society and it's to do with people who take take take who are already obscenely wealthy and give nothing back okay in any of the campaigning or discussions that you've had on the issues raised in your petition and and you've mentioned a couple but are there any other ways of mitigating reductions in the welfare spending other than taxation system that you've considered sorry in bringing more money in you mean well to you know how how can they be mitigated other than tax so i mean you've mentioned a couple in the sense that you said use the welfare fund in a more um open way you know allow more people but the moment the fund would still be the same so you need no you need to put sorry i'm talking about put you you definitely would need to put more money in if it was going to do more well the the other thing is as we mentioned earlier more funding for advice so that people can actually get you know more people can get the benefits that they should be due which actually a part of the Westminster system and that would be obviously a uh a very a very good bit of funding but you know when one's looking at at this at the funding figures the amount of you know it is a stitch in time thing it is if you if you help people so that their lives don't fall apart so that you know because you speak so often speak to someone and one small thing's happened and then you know they're going to say and then my marriage broke down and then we both needed homes and then i didn't get somewhere where my um children could come and visit and you know it's just one thing leads to another thing so if you can stop stop it right at the beginning with good advice with that bit of extra funding at the beginning it's actually it makes economic sense too and and those people can play a full apart in society i mean it's just wasteful for individuals it's wasteful for society um and the areas that are being deprived as well a geographically very concentrated quite often so those areas you know it's it's a little bit more money went to those families that money would be in that local community and it would make those whole local communities more viable as well so i think there's you know it's it makes there's a really strong economic case um just an economic case for more money for people right at the bottom so in the in the current envelope of spending if you like um i mean you've you've mentioned ensuring that all tax due is paid um now obviously evasion is illegal avoidance isn't so there's a question mark around that and whether you feel tax laws should be changed and tightened up but is that within the envelope of spending that we have at the moment are the things that you think we shouldn't be spending that should be redirected into to welfare spending you know to mitigate some of these issues well i just give the example or do you think we should just be raising more money to i think i mean what what i hate to see and and you know that it so is that you um to say oh to raise this with people and they say oh yes but we're already you know we're committed to spending money on this and money on that we're not you know the last thing i want to do is say you shouldn't be you know raising public sector pay or providing proper funding for the councils those things are absolutely vital and that's why we need to actually raise more money the whole point of phrasing it in the way that we did was to say you know there is more money there we're a really wealthy country um we're not you know vital things shouldn't be set against each other and so we do need to raise more money but as i said i did give the example of um i don't think putting actually more money into first time bias is helpful for anybody but i'm not sure what the the sum of money it's involved there but i'm sure it's a sum of money that for a lot of the people we're talking about could make a real significant difference okay thank you i'm just going back to the land value tax i was pleased to see you mentioned it in your papers and throughout the course of of your contributions this morning um clearly it's an idea that's been meted in this parliament for a number of years now but it does seem to be gaining traction um and well to the extent that the Scottish Government's programme for government has tasked the new Scottish land commission with a review on the introduction of a land-based land value-based tax but as part of your research into that aspect of it apart from the work that Andy Wightman's done have you looked at any examples in St Northern Europe or further afield where land value-based tax works? I I don't I haven't actually no no um but I'm glad that the you know that it is being looked at and I know there's a huge amount of interest in it and I mean I know it's been discussed over the well over the last century really here but it it has has to be done properly and fully I think and I'm very interested in it and how it can it's got so many good things in bringing in you know when you've got land improved due to some government spending it's a it's the most efficient way of getting those the benefits of that improvement to come back to the public as well so there's many many good aspects of it. Okay I'm sure we'll all wait to see what comes back from the Scottish Land Commission. Everybody flew Michelle? Yeah I just want to ask one last question actually and it sort of lept out at me when I read your petition initially in that you wrote to everybody except the conservative group and you didn't write to any of us is that because you just feel it's totally pointless or is that a political stance in terms of your your decision-making? Well it was it was writing to see when you know mitigate the cuts that's being brought about by the conservative party in Westminster so I suppose it was just a thought that you know I was assuming that you were behind the party policy in Westminster. But even so so surely logically you would still write and present your evidence. Next time you'll get a letter as well. Thank you. If we create some more rebels that would be quite interesting. Can I just thank you very much for for coming along I think that's been really useful quite thought provoked because there have been some solutions suggested in there as well and it is interesting that Social Security Committee is sitting in parallel to us and we'll also be wrestling with some with an integrity in this. I suppose it's a question of what do we want to do with this petition at this stage by writing to the minister and getting their view of the petition in front of us. Brian? Also because of the work that's been done by other committees I think that there's that cross-reference to Social Security Committee I think that it would be interesting to see where they have gone with us to see whether or not we can feed into that particular committee or whether or not that committee should actually take this petition. I think that the consensus that we write to the Scottish Government to get a specific response to your request to what extent they would consider mitigating welfare cuts have they looked at other things in their budget that they would you've made one suggestion presume whether there are others to test this argument while we haven't got any money elsewhere but you know what would they look at and just to get a response from them on the idea again of the Scottish welfare fund being increased but also support for people to access benefits because I think there's an argument round supporting people to being sure they're entitled to I mean there is a frustration I think in the system it's not just that there's a cut that people have to deal with but actually getting access to what the entitled is also being limited by cuts elsewhere so I think that that would be worthwhile as an initial response and I think after that at that point we might think about and maybe we can flag up Social Security this petition is going through just flag up to them that this is something that we will need to make a decision on the next time whether it would be appropriate to pass it on to them or perhaps a similar work that we can do but I think at this stage we'd be agreeing certainly to get an initial response from the Scottish Government to the evidence that you presented today if that's agreeable okay in that case can I thank you again for your attendance and a suspended meeting briefly to allow a change over our witnesses order the next petition is petition 1678 on a national strategic framework for countryside rangers services in Scotland the petition was submitted by ranger Robert Reed on behalf of the Scottish countryside rangers association we'll take evidence from ranger read this morning and he's accompanied by George Potts who's the chairperson of the Scottish countryside rangers association can I welcome you both to the meeting can I write you to provide a brief opening statement of no more than five minutes after which we will move to questions from committee members okay okay we are here today on behalf of our association seeking your support for our petition asking the scottish government to implement the strategic framework for rangers services as set out in the document rangers in scotland convener within the rangers in scotland report it states that there are over 300 full time equivalent posts in this sector with an expectation that this number would grow we can show that in the last 10 years at least 100 ranger posts have been lost and we are deeply concerned by this the impact on service delivery the impact on the environmental and social benefits that rangers can deliver and also the impact on those remaining and their career prospects this is not a planned reduction it's random unstructured and ill-considered and we feel we're now at crisis point the strategy marked a watershed as the direct link between scottish natural heritage and the local authority ranger services that they had grant aid agreements with was broken however the structure and function of ranger services their role within local authorities and other funded bodies was by that time well established the training and background of countryside rangers across scotland resulted in a significant degree of continuity from the model that snh was able to support a couple of employing authorities did attempt to redefine the role of the rangers particularly trying to break down into their constituent parts the jobs but almost without exception this diminished the role of those involved and created vulnerable services where previously strong ones with an established track record had operated i would advise you that scottish natural heritage still operate successful grant aid agreements with ngos community based and private sector ranger services these partnerships continue to prosper and act as a vital conduit in the delivery of snh's corporate strategy looking at the relationship between scottish natural heritage and local authority services our association feel the main casualty of this change was the loss of national reporting on the outputs of scotland's rangers that snh was able to coordinate and in doing so provide the comprehensive picture of what rangers deliver across scotland and benchmark that against the continued investment of grant aid now we know of a social return on investment study done at that time which showed a return of 10 pounds to every pound invested convener a significant investment of public money had had been made over 44 years to create ranger services across scotland with both a local and a national identity and these operated under the guidance and support of a government agency and ensured that national priorities were recognized in the delivery of local services recognized to by the use of our national ranger service badge the only one in the world that has people on it and this acts as a charter mark and equality standard in our sector now this model works extremely well and has been copied by other countries in the development of their countryside ranger services and it's led to the formation by scottish rangers of the international ranger federation which is now in 90 member countries now we feel this leading role will soon be lost as the capacity of rangers in scotland to deliver falls into terminal decline in conclusion i would draw your attention to the public support our petition received and in particular the many supportive comments made the wider public recognise and value their ranger services as part of that national approach and we feel that the government and relevant agencies should be asked to revisit this 2008 policy document 2008 well this document is still relevant is still aspirational and if it's properly implemented and monitored will begin to address the issues that we bring to your attention today and help secure the important asset that is rangers in scotland thank you thank you very much for that can i begin by asking just a wee bit about the background of the national strategic framework which is a 2008 maybe you can say a wee bit more when you've referred to about who was involved in it the preparation of framework what the tension was behind it which i think again you flagged up but i'm interested whether you realised when you were developing that in 2008 it is what seems to be in the critical decision which was in 2009 with the local government finance distribution review understand where it became part of the main settlement to local authorities when you were developing the framework did you see that coming and what at that point when that was on its way were the representations in opposition to it because you believed that what was going to happen is what has happened well really our involvement that was very small but mainly on the edges it was organisations like coslar it was organization like scotch natural heritage who basically put that strategic plan together and sort of gave it the nod now as to what happened that's a 2008 one so therefore that was that was basically put on the table and i don't know whether it was ever looked at to address it in the future but some employers and SNH have looked at that particular document and basically their targets there and these targets are being made unfortunately the the problem that we have is that the number of Rangers to meet these targets are declining the new pressures that's coming on the Rangers who are left to deal with it having an impact effect on their health and their welfare and also the loss of jobs is a career opportunity downhill and these are concerns that we have it's maybe worth saying that our association is totally voluntary for 40 years it's based on a voluntary of the Rangers who run and support the association so 2008 cosla SNH produced what they thought was a really good kind of blueprint for the future yep and it would be to have still have a national framework that if you knew if you came across a countryside range in one part of the country there would be a connection with someone in another part but the decision in 2009 which is to bundle up the money and give it to local government and you know saying that we know and put to that whatsoever but you believe that that is where the change has been because there wasn't a discrete fund to support a nationwide approach okay the national reporting that SNH would coordinate is still in that document so we believed at that time that they would still take an active interest in the outputs of Rangers and the type of work that they were asked to do so the point now is SNH where they grant aid to the NGOs and various states they still have to return national figures but local authorities don't need to return national figures so we don't know there's no one really no one in Scotland knows how many Rangers we have we are working a survey at the moment and we'd hoped to have had it completed for today but at the moment we're about 50 through doing that survey and it looks as if yes we've lost a hundred Rangers both in Scotland there's a lot of good news coming out as well because we're asking a lot of other questions as per the ranger service delivery which is very much meeting all the targets which is in the strategic plan so we as people in the ground are delivering on a daily basis but the basic decision was to lift ring fencing from the local government with a consequence that I think has probably been true in other areas as well okay that's very helpful thank you Brian Whittle good morning mr potts mr reed the strategic framework dates back to 2008 and that's obviously a decade since that work was done and I wonder if anything has changed in terms of the initial concerns that prompted the development of that framework the framework was how could we put it was brought to us we didn't have any input to that framework so therefore you know it was your countryside Rangers you will that's what you'll deliver it was a new approach to what had to take place we we had no way of asking the questions or having any input as to what the impacts would be of these but we had to implement them on the ground as when they came in in terms of changes no not really bob and I between us have 70 years of experience and in essence we did the same job we just changed the language in which we did it so we moved from promoting country parks to by diversity to access and then later year to health but the job was much the same and that document reflected a distillation of that experience Scotland wide and I'd really set the tone for how we could go forward. I was just asking why you consider the 2008 framework would still be relevant today and in terms of what you know what benefits we bring to the provision of ranger services basically ranger services are delivering it on a daily basis the trouble being is that we don't have a number of people to deliver it to to to impact in the way that that document was hopefully going to take it. The 2008 is still relevant yes that's what the rangers today are out delivering and meeting Scottish Government targets meeting EU targets and meeting Westminster targets as to by diversity and all the other aspects which come within the job remit so yes ranger services evolved to take has been I wouldn't say evolved but has had to absorb a lot of changes which have come through naturally from European Union from Westminster and from the Scottish Government so we we are trying to meet the requirements that are made of us because our employers are forcing that in the sense being that they have to report back at the year meeting the targets so it filters down to the ranger filters back up to the head of departments and therefore that's how the stats are brought together so you would ascertain it's a numbers issue morning gentlemen my question was going to be is the framework still referred to by stakeholders at the time when it was first introduced to and you've really answered that to Mr Whittle can I ask you he talked about the survey that you're doing what when do you expect that to be complete and what are your plans for that what are you actually going to do with it when you get the information we were we were hoping that today's thing might be next month where we probably would have had it completed unfortunately we don't have that it's a telephone conversation with every ranger service in scotland roughly a 15 20 minute survey asking a lot of questions concerning the numbers the roles that they're delivering and some have changed so that itself brings that and we're also finding out questions within that survey of how our association sits and are we delivering what our members express I would hope by the end of February we would have that document together as to what we do with it I think what the evidence that it seems to me coming out of it is that maybe government should do a stat major stats on it because we are not statisticians we are basically concerned people who are trying to look after our members welfare and just off the jobs that have been lost who's who's is someone fulfilling those who's actually doing the jobs or are the those jobs not being done no no one there's been some reconfigurations in certain services but that deals with whose heads of departments and what departments are actually attached to so yeah it's one of these areas where we we see that senior ranger posts have been lost main grade posts and seasonal posts are being lost and seasonal posts basically back up the ranger service in the busy time of year when scotland's gone through it's tourist boom so therefore we have less people on the ground to actually provide a professional service are there some areas that are better than others in terms of holding on to or it's you know keeping the ranger service going think about rural areas or particularly tourist areas well the example is that the Highland Council in the last two financial years basically were actually in the whole of their ranger service from that they have now been moved into a trust we were also finding out in the survey that even with rangers who had been put into local authority trusts a number of years ago are not secure in their job and feel that they are basically at the targets at this next round of cuts so you know moving them from one organisation to another local authority has taken a big has been taking the big hit but we're now finding that organisations like national trust for Scotland are looking at shedding 79 members of staff in the rounds of cuts at the moment and we know that rangers are within that as well and it's maybe worth saying in one local authority maybe four weeks ago they did an interview for a ranger post they appointed the ranger and they've now paid him off so that's the crisis okay thank you i note from the evidence that when there's been a transfer from Highland Council to Highland I think to call it the council itself has said that there's been a reduction of countryside ranger posts from 22 to 10.5 full-time equivalent posts so it's also worth noting that while 2008 is the point that we've taken this reading from within the sort of 1990 1996 period there was a lot of job losses as well so this is this is probably a second round of reduced reduction that's taken place and one of the reasons for that is that local authorities under various legislation have said had a point access officers where the ranger service did the job before the access officers were there they're by diversity officers there's conservation officers so there are other jobs in the countryside there but they divert away from the wide role that the ranger provides okay in terms of the survey we can once you've got that completed it would be helpful for us perhaps to get a copy of it in your survey you're expecting to get an indication of the numbers of rangers that are we are working on that at the moment um maybe it just works well a bit a wee click here is to the amount at the moment the over 34 services this is done by a service by service the senior ages posts have been lost to 17 and they're at the moment sitting at 24.5 the rangers at the moment are sitting at 147.5 and they've been a loss there of 50 posts and seizdol's we have 44 there but they've been 33 lost that's ours only halfway through the survey thank you good morning gentlemen and in your petition you refer to the ranger development partnership and the ranger manager forum can you explain who's involved in these groups and what sort of things they discuss it's got its national heritage forest commission national trust i think historic environment scotland is involved in that there is representation for the national park a lot of moment and there's representation from causala i think there's one or two who are local authority we feel as an organisation we now need to go and write to every ranger authority council or employer to state our concerns at the moment so so in that group you said and in some of them local authority so the key funders employers aren't involved then this is well from local authority point of view through causala it would be but we've not been in these discussions and there has not been a meeting for potentially two years as far as i'm aware of either group of the group yeah who yeah all right okay and what sort of things did they discuss when they were actually then well some of the things you would discuss is that the association has developed a professional qualifications for rangers so therefore that would be part of the discussions we have developed other programmes which hopefully as an association that employers would consider taking on board such as a scotland student ranger programme the challenge award but the problem being that we're finding is that through doing the survey that the services do not have the capacity to promote these or take them forward so the policies and guidelines for rangers you know that they work to are they done by your association and updated or are they just stagnating now then the whole range of system come out of the formation of the countryside scotland act and the countryside commission for scotland for the people who threw up the how could you put it the vision as to what the rangers in scotland would be and i would say they got it right the parts system for scotland which had to bring in country parks regional parks at that time special parks because national was not a word that they would use so the outcome of that is that we find that things are not as they were in the good as George I would say the good old days when through government funding we were the the carrot that was put forward was a 75 percent grant from central government at that time to establish this system it was recognised that the system was required because of the implications that were taking place on the ground on a word that you used which was stagnating that word we're not familiar with this is a very young and a vibrant profession and there are a lot of young people with energy and enthusiasm who take forward new ideas share best practice and ensure that the service that they're delivering is relevant to the customers that they have so there have been many changes over these years and a lot of these changes have been led by the rangers themselves so the profession doesn't really stagnate in that sense because we have all these young people coming through we have new challenges new legislation to meet and new requirements from the employing authorities so your policy guideline your qualifications all that i was really referring to mr reed's comment that the committees hadn't met for two years and that was where it was done so that's that was what i was asking in terms of does that mean things have stagnated in that two years or is somebody else taking on the work well i suppose it's about establishing just how powerful is the little group as it gets together in that sense representing the industry so to me it may not cover the wider scope as it may be expected to do so really you've lost a voice by that that group of meeting and do we know why they're not meeting no not really i think possibly it may the pressures has been put on the association having just delivered to survive at the moment so if things just slip to the side or someone has not picked up the gauntlet to actually move forward i note that you met with the chair of snh in 2016 and you've liased regularly with a nominated member from snh since then as you put it to exchange information and address concerns um have you found this helpful in terms of the relationship between the range of service and snh and can you advise whether there's been any direct approach to the Scottish Government on this matter um we have a good relationship with snh we're a linked person um Alison Martheson and Vanessa um we're well supported in that sense as to how we take it forward um i'm not sure if snh like many other organisations seems to be going through the the movement of change um forestry emissions seems to be going through movement of change um so we think possibly at decision level at the snh it may not feature as we did in the past um but we're in a sort of unknown period at the moment within the sort of i would say the industry which relates to the countryside either at me forestry historic Scotland or the private sector or the states okay that there is of course a new chair at snh so it may well be worth uh requesting a meeting with him um i'm sure there's he we've had him in front of our environment committee and he's willing to look at the number of issues so this might be an opportune moment to to speak to the new chair well we we are in the process of seeking a meeting at the moment on that case we we see that and um i'm just looking here from my quote from the last chair at the last ceo of snh and it was back in 2014 and it states that the the best value for the national health service in scotland is the scotland's ranger service at the moment through this survey we we we can see that already there's about 13 million visitors if you put all the ranger services that we've serviced together so we we provide a big service over a wide area and a professional service that's our pride envied elsewhere the Danish government picked up the scotch system the English and Welsh rangers associations are so jealous that we have a national identity they don't have it and we'll partly almost have lost that and it may be worth to say that that logo is in this parliament it's part of the petitions committee exhibition in the foyer okay thank you um michelle ballarty yeah i understand that ranges are employed in a wide variety of um by a wide variety of employers in a range of sectors so how does the framework apply in relation to ranges that are employed in the private sector and do you know whether the implementation of the framework would be supported by you know for example landowners yeah so the the framework applies across the board whether they be ngo's local authorities or private sector or community or island community so yeah it goes over that whole area and we're also finding in the private sector that the some rangers are not while it's still being granted still fear that their jobs are not secure even in the private sector at the moment because the general atmosphere is one of it's an area that can be let go yeah it seems to be we we have not been able to have any um what's the word i'm looking for overall protection is a scottish national ranger service thank you okay i think we've reached the end of our question thank you very much for that we now need to think about how we're going to take this forward and i wonder if there are any suggestions brine remiss at the start of this i've kind of should have declared an interest in my brother although it's actually a ranger so although not in scotland and the england have the same issue that you're currently raising just now i would think firstly we should write to the scottish government to seek their view on the petition as a starting point i think we'd be interested in their views about how much do they perceive the importance of a national service and what they were recognizing what you describe as the changes as a consequence of decisions in 2009 i think we could maybe write to other organisations of interest in the land force recommissioning national trust being two and just seek their thoughts and position because they've obviously been directly involved whether there's any conversation that haven't taken the ring fencing off of they've been tracking what's happened anyone else in addition to causal i wonder if we could maybe write to every single local authority just to yeah rather than just get an overall view from causal because it'd be good to get the figures from each local authority as to how many rangers they've still got employed and not just not just the local authorities but any allios that are associated because we've seen we've seen the higher life highland and the reduction there now that's an allio presumably so we need to we need to get figures from from them too in an island region at the moment where the tourist industry is homing in in sky in the fairest pool there is no range of service in sky now really no and that's what rangers have been trained to do is to actually deliver and manage people in the countryside that's our training from the 1970s and you know these are issues which have settled over a wide area these issues if we're asking the local authorities for their numbers either via causal or directly can we also ask them for their three to five year plan in terms of rangers as well because most of them are forward budgeting and if they've got budget cuts intended it would be good to know that so and also the national park authorities and Scottish land in the States I don't know whether the likes of community land Scotland would have a view whether they manage the land in terms of ground properties have range of service if you're looking at communities that have taken over land if they're taking over this responsibility as well so I think there's quite a lot there for us to an SNH itself of course yeah crony state Scotland yeah okay I think that's quite a lot to be going on with and in terms of your survey you've already said that once you have it in a form that you think we're worth us seeing it then we would appreciate that as well can I therefore thank you very much for your attendance for your evidence and for your answering the questions it's quite a lot for us to proceed with and obviously we'll keep you in touch with the progress of the petition so thank you very much and can I just suspend briefly to allow the witnesses to leave the table come back to order and we're now moving to agenda item 2 so the second agenda item is the consideration of a new petition on which we'll not be taking evidence petition 1676 on the land registration etc scotland act 2012 was submitted by Tony Rosser the petitioner believes that there are two major flaws in the act and his petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to review the act with particular regard to the cadastral map and the provision of supporting materials members of a copy of the petition and a spice briefing with regard to the cadastral map the spice briefing explains that this is the statutory term given to the map which covers the whole of scotland the briefing sets out the current process for mapping in the land register under the 2012 act noting that the base map currently used is the ordinance survey map it adds that section 116 of the act empowers Scottish ministers to make regulations to allow other systems of mapping to be used the briefing notes that the registers of scotland receives 500 updated map tiles per week from ordinance survey and explains that sections 117 of the act allows the registers of scotland to make consequential changes to the land register when the base map is updated the petitioner indicates that within this process he would like it to be mandatory for the registers of scotland to check the validity of any updated ordinance survey maps which he considers will quote avoid any inaccuracies or questions about the validity of updated maps he also considers that when maps are in dispute the register of scotland should arrange a resurvey to be conducted by ordinance survey or register of scotland and to give proprietors the opportunity to question or approve the revised plan the spice briefing explains that under section 80 of the act the keeper of the registers of scotland must rectify the land register where there is quote a manifest inaccuracy in a title sheet or the cadastral map and notes other inaccuracies it adds that where an individual has a query or concern about an inaccuracy they can refer it to the land's tribunal for scotland in recent correspondence with the clerks the petitioner indicates that he does not recognise this as being the case he states that he had three refusers to update an error on his title deed plan i was not made aware that he could raise the issue with the land's tribunal the second concern raised in the petition relates to the provision of material and support of requests to make registers of scotland for a revision of the deeds specifically in the event that a property owner has died the petitioner believes that any such request should be supported by a death certificate he indicates his understanding that this was quote commonplace under previous legislation and considers that this negates the possibility of error by proprietor or solicitor the spice briefing refers to correspondence with the registers of scotland which states quote the keeper takes a view that if a solicitor tells us that proprietor is deceased we're entitled to rely on that i should note here also that the petitioner has contacted the clerks to say that it's not necessary to use a legal person within this process the clerks have checked this with spice who has which has confirmed that technically the petitioner is correct spice would however stress that not using a solicitor is rare in practice spice notes also that it's often the case that people would use solicitors when dealing with complex matters before the land's tribunal as were referred to previously the clerks note indicates that the economy jobs and fair work committee took evidence on two draft SSIs in November and the instruments were not approved the Scottish Government subsequently laid a replacement draft instrument the registers of Scotland digital registration etc regulations 2018 draft the economy jobs and fair work committee took evidence in that instrument at its meeting on Tuesday 3 January and agreed to recommend that the draft regulations be approved I wonder if members have any comments or suggestions for action Angus? Yes, thanks. Having served on the Iraqi committee in 2012 when it scrutinised the land registration bill I have to say I've got some sympathy with this petition and it doesn't seem to me to to be a big ask however I'd be keen to know if there are capacity issues at the registers of Scotland before we take this any further unfortunately I can't recall why the need for a desert of it wasn't included in the bill or the act at the time but I think there's certainly merit in looking at this further. Yeah well it did strike me as something that if it's possible to represent yourself and take that action forward yourself then that would that not give everybody comfort that there was a day certificate rather than relying on the word of a solicitor but I also think that it's not something in the petitioner's own evidence that actually his issue was that he solicited into the job directly or that may have been something behind it so would this give more confidence it would be a reasonable question to ask? Ms Redress is down to you you know if you find there's been an error and there's also time bars and I've actually had a couple of constituents who've come to me with this very problem so I think there is a need to revisit it and look at it you know when you suddenly if you've lived somewhere a long time and then you suddenly find the boundaries moved and you find yourself time barred from addressing the issue that is incredibly inequitable and unfair because you didn't know about it so you know I think this is something that we really do need to to take forward and have a look at. When the register of Scotland when again the petitioner says that he didn't know he had the right to appeal to the land's tribe you know so is there a process is there a form is there information that's provided termed in that situation it would flag that up but we're worth asking them that. So yeah I think the registers of Scotland is would be definitely a port of call and maybe there's a need for a greater public awareness of what the process actually is and what is available to people so I think contact them and the government Scottish Government on the action called for here. Yeah and certainly from the Scottish Government's perspective are they looking at the legislation to ensure that it's doing what they intend to? Is this the kind of example that allow them to reflect further on what's happened with the legislation? It just seems to be in effect a loophole you know also gaping things you know people are falling through. I would hope there aren't an awful lot but for those who are it's a big issue. Okay Brian. I think you're noting that the economy jobs fair work committee just taken evidence on this instrument I'd be quite interested to try and cross-reference a little bit and see what kind of evidence. Although it does say that they agreed to recommend the draft regulations be approved so it might be worth just flagging that up or a sense of what I mean quite interesting in fact the original ones weren't agreed so that's maybe something that we can look at I think there's quite a lot there then we would be agreeing to write to the Scottish Government and writing to the Registers of Scotland in the terms that have already been identified but recognising that if there's an issue about people having to deal with a system that's not friendly to them in that sense what's caused that so perhaps this issue of capacity is something that would flag up as well. Is that agreed? Okay if that's agreed that ends our conclusion of petitions today and can we now move into private session.