Chamber and committees

I will follow up on just a couple of points from colleagues’ questions. You raised a couple of issues. First, you talked about day centres not reopening after Covid. I know that that is a concern but, in my area and others, people say that that is due to a shortage of staff and cash resources.

Secondly, you raised the practical issue of people being unable to leave their homes because the council focuses on arterial routes—which, obviously, it has to do for emergency services, public transport and enabling people to get to work. In our area—and, I am sure, in many others—grit bins have been put in the streets, so that some people can at least grit the areas in front of their homes.

How would either of those issues be improved by a disability commissioner? Even if he or she highlighted them, it would not make a material difference on the ground. For example, on the snow issue, the local authority will not necessarily have more depots full of trucks and salt and staff to put the stuff out on the streets. It is one thing to highlight an issue, but, as Jamie Halcro Johnston pointed out, how do you change the outcomes?

Good morning, and welcome to the 23rd meeting in 2024 of the Finance and Public Administration Committee. The only public item on our agenda is to take evidence on the financial memorandum for the Disability Commissioner (Scotland) Bill. We are joined by Jeremy Balfour, the member in charge of the bill. He is accompanied by Nick Hawthorne, senior clerk, and Liz Anderson, assistant clerk, both of whom are from the non-Government bills unit. I welcome Jeremy to the meeting and invite him to make a short opening statement.

I am intrigued as to why you think a commissioner should be established for a period of up to eight years. Why was that time period selected?

So it was not specific to the bill.

Is it not the role of councillors, MSPs and MPs to advocate for constituents who are disabled and to work with community organisations and others to advocate for their rights? One issue in our inquiry on the commissioner landscape has been complexity and duplication, and there are concerns that having a disability commissioner would add to the issue without delivering what you want to do—it would be just another advocacy body, rather than people being able to go directly to ministers, parliamentarians and so on. What do you say to that?

Fair enough.

There is quite a big variance in the financial memorandum. Some of the evidence that we have received has suggested that the costs that it sets out are a conservative estimate with a small c. The costs vary from £574,000 to £878,000 on an on-going basis once the commissioner has been established. How robust are those figures? Disability Equality Scotland is concerned that the bill

“could have an indirect indication of reduced funding”

for the organisation as funds may be diverted to the commissioner.

The FM does not include provision for participation, legal or investigation staff, and the costs that are associated with that engagement and participation are considered to be conservative.

Would I be correct that the cost of those four staff members would be just short of a quarter of a million pounds a year and that there would be a cost of just over £130,000 for the commissioner?

I take it that those costs include not only salaries but other costs?

Do you not think that funding would be removed in any way, shape or form from front-line services? You said earlier that money had not been reduced from other charities and other organisations because we have the children’s commissioner.