Chamber and committees

It was about the operation of new stock—whether it is battery powered or whether we will see further technology changes and a move to hydrogen. What are the railway workforce’s expectations of that?

I come to Michael Clark next. You referred to Scotland’s experience of decarbonisation. Do you think that the 2035 target is realistic? I went on the hydrogen train at the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—which, obviously, did not operate on hydrogen when it travelled. There are ambitions there, but there is also quite an expense. What is realistic? Is the target achievable by 2035?

That is a very expansive and informative answer—thank you.

Good morning. Thank you for coming in to give evidence.

I will ask about how you track customer satisfaction. The committee understands that Registers of Scotland customer satisfaction surveys traditionally focus on larger business customers. I understand that you do a quarterly survey of 100 of your top business customers and an annual survey of up to 400 of your top business customers. How does Registers of Scotland engage with smaller firms, sole legal practitioners and members of the public to understand the issues that they face and the level of customer satisfaction?

Many of your relationships are with solicitors and solicitor firms. If MSPs are approached about Registers of Scotland, by and large we refer the people involved to solicitors because many of the issues that are being dealt with are legal and we are not qualified or allowed to provide legal advice. MSPs tend to deal with public bodies’ processes and injustices. When something to do with land registration goes wrong—with title deeds, for example—it can be extremely distressing for a member of the public.

I have a current case. I will not go into the detail of it but I am concerned about how Registers of Scotland has dealt with it. After many years, my constituent now has a title deed that reflects the Ordnance Survey map. We have had many and extended contacts with Registers of Scotland.

My constituent paid to download the land register that appears on the website. Just a few weeks ago, they were told without notice that Registers of Scotland was going to change it after many years.

This is not about process: it is about how people are dealt with and their mental distress. Something that can seem very dry, because it is about legal contracts and registers, has a human face.

I do not know how many letters or contacts you have had from MSPs about that process. You may not have had the information to date—you have said that you are now going to find out about citizen customer satisfaction. Until now, there has been no means of knowing about that, except for the complaints process, which has not been as accessible as those of other public bodies.

You talk about the future. This meeting is part of our feedback to you about what matters. How can you improve your processes so that you are more alert? You are here as the keeper of the registers of Scotland. You have senior responsibility. When things go wrong and there is an injustice, you should be alert to that. That is about more than generalised customer satisfaction. I am being direct, but how our constituents come to us with issues about your organisation is pertinent and relevant.

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I am a member of the stewarding group for Scotland’s Climate Assembly.

Good morning, and thank you for joining us. In its statement of response, the Climate Assembly makes a very strong statement when it says:

“We believe, from the Scottish Government’s response to our recommendations for action, that Government needs to think less about what they can’t do and instead demonstrate a positive attitude, thinking hard about how they can make things happen.”

However, the Government was responding to recommendations from the Climate Assembly itself, and a lot of those recommendations, in particular the latter ones, are in areas where the Scottish Government does not have powers but the Westminster Government does.

I know that the assembly members were informed by a lot of expertise in different areas. Were you quite clear as to what the Scottish Government has responsibility for and what it does not have responsibility for? Was it deliberate that you made recommendations on which the Scottish Government could not take action?

When you say that the Scottish Government should think

“hard about how they can make things happen”,

is that in the areas in which it has responsibility, or are you asking it to try to have an impact in areas that are still reserved to Westminster?

Thank you for your perspective. Clearly, the Climate Assembly has, in its work, done great service to the people of Scotland and beyond, but the formal work of the assembly ended with your final weekend. Is any process in place for further engagement and deliberation? How does the assembly propose to monitor the outcome of its work and continue to hold the Government to account for delivery of its recommendations? If such a process does not exist, that is a challenge.

I am conscious that this is the second time that the assembly has given evidence to the committee. Are there any specific things that the climate assembly would ask of the Parliament, or of the committee, to take forward the work, monitoring and accountability that some of your members have referred to?

It is clear that the Climate Assembly is not going away but is going into the future. We are not the Government; we are the Parliament. However, if we can keep in contact, the convener might want to consider, along with committee members, what role the committee might have in anything that your members want to do to engage through the Parliament as they continue with their forum and networking. On that note, I pass back to the convener.

Thank you for those very comprehensive remarks on the history of and context for all of this. The issue is not necessarily the SSI itself but the original act, which was passed some time ago.

I am happy to pass back to the convener.

Graham Simpson might not be aware of this, but the committee is currently conducting an inquiry into how local government can work with partners to deliver the net zero target, and a reduction in car use is clearly part of that.

The question that we are faced with in this SSI is not whether we should revisit the scheme—indeed, Graham Simpson has been very up-front about not wanting a scheme at all—but one of timing. Are the charges being introduced this year, or is there some time for preparation?

There is also the question of whether the SSI will address some of the issues that have been raised today. However, those issues will be addressed not by the minister but by local authorities, and the choice for us is whether we empower local authorities in that respect.