Chamber and committees

Andy wants to say something. You had better say it in a sentence, otherwise the convener—

Does anybody else want to answer that question?

I thank the witnesses for their opening statements. Following on from the discussion about hotel usage, my question is about the source of tension in the community. It touches on what was said earlier. We all saw what happened in Erskine. When asylum seekers are in hotels, what are organisations doing to help to integrate them into communities? What sort of work is being done? I will direct my question to Graham O’Neill, who touched on the issue, and Andy Sirel.

Some of this has been mentioned, but it is very important that we look at what the Scottish Government is doing as well, which is why I want to focus on this question.

Many of the challenges that we have talked about concerning the placement of refugees and asylum seekers are a result of accommodation and housing shortages. For example, there are around 14,000 households living in temporary accommodation, the number of homelessness applications is the highest since records began and the Scottish Government failed to meet its affordable home targets in the previous parliamentary session. What changes should be made by the Scottish Government to improve the situation? What can Scotland learn from other places that you know of?

Yes. With regard to the financial side, I have had cases in which it is more often the woman who does not have a financial cushion and is out of her home, and there is also a criminal domestic abuse case going on.

We are finding that there is a broken bridge between a civil case and a criminal case, in that one does not talk to the other, so both cases are taken separately. Is that something that witnesses have dealt with? I am currently dealing with a case involving a woman who has come forward as a result of domestic abuse. Access to her finances has stopped, so that is the subject of a civil case, but there is also a criminal case, as she has been hurt through domestic abuse. However, those two processes are not joined up. Quite a few people have spoken to me about that concern.

Do you do any outreach work? Obviously, it is good to have things, including the literature that goes out, in different languages, but do you go into communities to say that you have a service that is available and make people aware of it?

I have to agree with you on that, Jen. A couple of weeks ago, my mother went to hospital and my sister was there. My mother can fully understand English, and she has some broken English but, when it came to medication, my sister had to step in. She was asked not to speak and an interpreter was brought in. My mum was going for a CT scan and some other scans. It was quite a serious matter that she could not move when she was under that equipment. The interpreter did not pass that key information to my mum, but my sister heard it and had to intervene. My mother-in-law was in the same hospital that day and had the same problem.

I know that this issue is not for this committee, but regulation on interpreters is important. That was key information. The interpreter turned round and said to my sister that they did not think that that was really important. However, they were not there to say what was important; they were there to interpret.

I know that that is not up to the committee, but I agree with what has been said.

Good morning, and thank you for your opening statements.

Rachael Hamilton can still ask the broad question, because my question does not cover the issue that she was asking about.

As you know, not everyone has access to digital devices, especially in some of the poorest and most deprived areas in Scotland. Given the shift during the pandemic and afterwards to digital technology and services, what is being done to ensure that face-to-face services exist for those who need them? Are people aware of them? Is it easy to access those services?

Convener, can I come back on that after the question on broadband?

I will go back to Colin. Earlier, you spoke about the legal aid model being 70 years old and not fit for purpose today. We have so much diversity in Scotland now, and I certainly think—and I hear from people who use it—that the model is not fit for purpose.

I have a question on language barriers. It would be good to hear from Colin Lancaster, Fiona McPhail and Gillian Fyfe on those. Do you face or see any language barriers to accessing advice or even to accessing the legal aid system today? Obviously, a 70-year-old system is not fit for purpose, given the changes in Scotland.

To go back to Gillian Fyfe, Citizens Advice Scotland is among the largest advice services in Scotland. Do you see any language barriers, Gillian? If not, what is it that you provide that helps people who cannot speak English? I also put that question to Fiona, but Colin can start.