Lorna Slater
Scottish Green Party · Scotland
“I am grateful to the minister for highlighting the impact of Green policies such as free bus travel and free school meals. The Scottish Greens have always maintained that progressive public services should be underpinned by sustainable and fair sources of revenue, which is why we have consistently supported changes to Scotland’s income ta…”
“It is also worth stating that the ask in this country is great, but the offer is even greater, with free tuition, free prescriptions, the baby box and the child payment, which the UK Government has followed suit on. There is also free bus travel and free interisland ferry travel for under-22s.”
“It is a matter of urgency that Scotland’s land register be completed so that a comprehensive and publicly accessible online map can be created. I would be very interested to hear the cabinet secretary’s view on the importance of that aspect.”
“If the public purse is stretched, that is the first place that we should look for money. It might involve taxing polluters or using extended producer responsibility schemes such as the deposit return scheme, but in any case it is clear that we can no longer afford to subsidise polluters. The same goes for carbon emissions.”
“In the previous session of Parliament, I was part of the cross-party SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee. I would like to highlight to the cabinet secretary two of the recommendations that resulted from that committee’s work.”
“We therefore recommend that the Scottish Government urgently undertakes a strategic mapping exercise to identify the functions of all Scottish public bodies and where they overlap, to inform decisions on future size, structure, and coherence across the public sector.” Michael Marra: It strikes me that that is precisely what Scottish Labou…”
The complete record
Every one of 468 lines we hold for Lorna Slater, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 10.
“I am glad that the Labour Party has given us the opportunity to debate the situation in Scotland’s schools, although, frankly, I am depressed and disappointed by its motion. Teachers, support staff and their students all face huge challenges, and Labour had an opportunity to lay out potential solutions to those challenges in its motion. However, the motion does not do that—it represents a wasted opportunity. The Scottish Greens recognise the challenges in our classrooms, and we have solutions to those challenges. I will start with the issue of teacher workload. Although teaching is a very well-paid profession, there are huge recruitment and retention challenges in the secondary sector. The most common reason that is cited by teachers who are considering leaving the profession is the crushing workload.”
“That is especially critical for apprentices in sectors that do not have a college affiliation. Apprenticeships in Scotland are substantially focused on men, to the disadvantage of women. The Deputy Presiding Officer: You need to conclude. Lorna Slater: Not only are most apprentices men, but women apprentices are consigned to lower-paying sectors and lower-paying jobs. It is worth prioritising and correcting that. 15:23”
“I met an apprentice who worked for one of our local authorities. That young woman had no standard hours for training, and she was expected to do online training. If she did not get on with her supervisor or did not think that the training was adequate, there was no one that she could complain to, and her supervisor could fail her if she issued complaints. That is not a good standard of training. Apprentices in traditional trades have union representation to look out for their interests and the quality of their instruction, but other apprentices lack that representation and have no one to turn to if they are mistreated or are provided with sub-par training. Apprentices need an independent regulatory body to ensure fair treatment and quality control.”
“It could be said that substantial public funds are being wasted on students who study at university but do not go on to work in their field of study. At the very least, that should be a matter of self-reflection for universities that are claiming financial difficulties. Additional funding for apprenticeships to allow more people of all ages to take them up would be a sound investment in Scotland’s future. About 90 per cent of the people who study in an apprenticeship go on to work in the field or sector in which they have studied, so that learning is valuable. Several matters concern me about how apprenticeships are being delivered in Scotland, despite the positive headlines. First, the quality of apprenticeships varies widely, with no standards for minimum training hours or quality of instructors.”
“There is also scope to find alternative funding streams to support the delivery of post-secondary education, perhaps by getting industry to fund either key placements of students or equipment that students might need to use. The Scottish Government should show leadership and set out intentions on that with urgency. Apprenticeships in Scotland are a mixed story. Employers are very keen to hire apprentices, and apprenticeships are in high demand. A higher percentage of apprentices go on to work in the subject area that they have been trained in, compared with university students. However, I was unable to find statistics on that for college graduates, which somewhat begs the question about the difference in focus and funding between those two routes.”
“In the United States and Canada, it is normal process for engineering companies to take on engineering students to undertake discrete projects, and to attract potential talent for long- term recruitment. That helps students to cover the costs of learning and it helps them to gain invaluable skills. When I arrived in the UK, I was offered two jobs in my first two weeks here on the basis that I had practical experience, even as a fresh graduate, which gave me a significant advantage over my UK peers. There is a great deal of scope for improved connections between post-secondary education and industry in Scotland to support success in key industries and to make our graduates employable.”
“The Economy and Fair Work Committee has heard over and over again about the advantages of workplace learning, not only for traditional vocational careers but also for secondary school pupils and post- secondary students. I am still reasonably shocked by the relatively limited joint working between industry in Scotland and Scotland’s universities and colleges, compared with course delivery in North America. When I graduated in engineering way back in 2000, I did so with more than two years of work experience in industry through my university’s co-op programme. That involved paid work—at well above the minimum wage—in chunks of four, eight or 12 months.”
“Scottish youngsters are unlikely to have ever seen a red kite, a puffin or a sea eagle, but everybody has seen a pheasant, and that must change. 15:58”
“It blows my mind that, in Scotland, a licence and 40 pages of paperwork are needed to relocate a single native red squirrel from one part of Scotland to another yet anyone, anywhere, can release any number of tropical birds as long as they are pheasants. Pheasants might be carrying bird flu, they are probably eating the eggs of native reptiles and they are almost certainly feeding our fox population, with its attendant management issues. No consideration is given to the welfare of the birds or the livelihoods of the poultry farmers whose birds might be infected by the diseases that the pheasants are carrying. We do not know who does this, where they are releasing them or how many are being released. It is extraordinary that the release of these tropical birds into Scotland is not licensed.”
“For the past two summers, my husband and I have volunteered on Tombane farm, which is the home of a site of special scientific interest for damselfly habitat. Now is the moment to declare to the chamber that I am the species champion for the northern damselfly. My husband and I use hand tools to cut down as many of the invading Sitka as we can. Similar cases are occurring all over Scotland, where Sitka seeding from commercial plantations is causing damage to nearby habitat and to restored peatland and is costing land managers money to address the problem. The people who profit from planting Sitka, not the landowners who are being harmed by it, should pay for the damage. My second concern, which energises me enormously, is the matter of pheasant releases.”
“Aside from new powers for ministers to actually weaken environmental impact assessment, our waters and the species that depend on them barely feature. Lines on a map are not enough, and even where the most destructive fishing is banned, enforcement is weak. At stage 2, the Greens will seek practical improvements: stronger enforcement to protect marine habitats and the fishers who follow the rules; protection for wrasse, which are still taken in the spawning season and inside protected areas; and steps towards a transition to a sustainable fishing fleet. The bill is an excellent opportunity to make progress on two concerns that I know are shared by many stakeholders and are close to me personally. The first is the matter of Sitka seeding from commercial plantations into ecologically sensitive areas.”
“With sufficiently low deer numbers, native forests have a chance to recover on their own, without the need for expensive fencing and planting. We need to modernise the system of deer management and must give NatureScot enhanced powers to intervene when deer are out of control in ecologically sensitive areas. I am also supportive of the bill’s intentions on national parks, as gutted as I am that Galloway will not benefit from the estimated £10 million a year that would have come its way with a new national park, along with all the jobs, tourism and support for local businesses and communities. What a missed opportunity that was. However, the bill leaves a glaring gap: Scotland’s seas. At the time of the previous election, political parties across the chamber were signed up to enhanced marine protection.”
“I challenge the Scottish Government to make the legislation now to carry out that intention. I am supportive of the bill’s intentions around deer management, but I am concerned that they do not go far enough. Reducing Scotland’s deer population is an urgent matter, and previous interventions have been wildly insufficient. The first measures to reduce deer numbers were taken in the 1950s and failed utterly. Deer numbers have doubled twice since that time. We cannot be serious about recovering Scotland’s lost biodiversity until deer numbers are brought low enough to allow nature to recover. Deer constantly nibbling away prevents Scots pine, rowan, oak and other beautiful and iconic native trees from growing.”
“I hope to see that made into Scottish law and supported by parties across the chamber, but there are other targets in the same UN convention that Scotland has already signed up to—for example, a commitment to ensure that, by 2030, at least 30 per cent of areas of degraded terrestrial, inland water and marine and coastal ecosystems are under effective restoration, in order to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, ecological integrity and connectivity. Given how degraded Scotland is, it would make a difference if 30 per cent of it was under active restoration. Capturing that in statute and putting in place the actions to accomplish it would make a difference. At the conference of the parties—COP—in Montreal, the Scottish Government members were all happy to say that they supported that UN convention.”
“Scotland will become a more wooded country, with bare hills populated by native trees. Scotland can become a country where endangered species can live safely and extinct animals can be reintroduced. Scotland can become a country where the sea is seen as not just a resource to exploit, but a vital and valuable ecosystem in its own right. This bill is our opportunity to set the stage for that change of direction, and that starts with setting targets for nature recovery. The Scottish Government has signed up to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity—which is where the 30 by 30 target comes from—to protect Scotland’s land, water and seas for nature by 2030.”
“It was an enormous privilege to be involved, as minister for biodiversity, in the early drafting of this bill, and I am glad to see it finally come to the chamber. There is so much potential here. Scotland has the aim of stopping nature loss by 2030 and of being on a path to nature recovery in the decades after that. We have made a start in some areas, through the reintroduction of beavers, which are a keystone species; legislation to reduce herbivore numbers; the nature restoration fund; national planning framework 4, which considers biodiversity; and reforms to support farmers to improve soil health and adopt nature-friendly practices. We are now only five years away from the point at which the Scottish Government has committed to stewarding Scotland towards a future of nature abundance and diversity instead of decline and extinction.”
“I share those concerns and I said as much to the chief executive of NHS Lothian on Monday night— I said that I expect the staffing complement to be resolved and the skill mix in that staffing complement to be properly addressed. On ensuring that we respond rather than react to the situation, I have been clear about the inspection regime that is in place with Healthcare Improvement Scotland, which is part of the reason why I am stood here today taking questions about these matters. We are uncovering areas where there is challenge and we are finding areas of success and sharing experience of both to ensure that we can learn and provide safer services going forward.”
“NHS Lothian has responded to the HIS inspection report, citing its improvement plan and apologising to staff for the working culture and staff shortages. Although I am sure that we all welcome the recruitment of 70 new midwives, that is a staggering level of understaffing—NHS Lothian was short of more than 70 midwives, and whistleblowers had to sound the alarm about patient and staff safety. How did the Scottish Government not know what was happening in our maternity services? How will the minister take us from an NHS culture of reacting to bad news, to a culture of proactively assessing and evaluating the state of our NHS services so that we do not end up in this situation again? Neil Gray: I appreciate the concern that Lorna Slater has set out regarding the revelations in the HIS report about staffing levels in NHS Lothian.”
“Members of the committees will receive correspondence from David Wallace and me on fraud and error. In due course, I will be happy to discuss the further details in those letters with committees, should they wish me to do so. The Presiding Officer: That concludes the debate on the legislative consent motion for the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation. Planning and Infrastructure Bill 17:19”
“This measure risks dragging these families into further hardship and even destitution by giving the DWP more capacity to deduct from a bank account whatever income or capital they do have.” Citizens Advice across Warwickshire raised specific concerns about the impact of taking away driving licences from those in rural or semi-rural areas, which “seems like unfair treatment.” Citizens Advice said: “New powers allowing the DWP to directly recover debts from people’s bank accounts are likely to affect people in the most vulnerable circumstances.” Because of those types of stakeholder engagement, we are not supportive of the UK Government’s proposals. However, as I have said, that does not mean that payments will not be recovered. That is a matter of the how, rather than the if.”
“For example, concerns were raised by the Child Poverty Action Group, which said: “Direct deduction orders do not come with sufficient safeguards, meaning more risk of hardship and unfairness for families. ...”
“From the consultation that the Scottish Government undertook, it came out that stakeholders wished us to do a full review of a benefit that had not been looked at for many a decade rather than to make small changes at this point. I am happy to carry out the work that reflects the consultation’s recommendations. In my opening remarks, I said that the Parliament has already provided Social Security Scotland with a range of powers to recover benefit overpayments. We have not chosen to include powers to make deductions directly from bank accounts or to disqualify people from driving. I reflect on some of the evidence that the UK Government received when it looked at the issue.”
“There is a more general point in relation to process, irrespective of the merits of the subsequent LCM, which is that the Scottish Parliament committee should have time to scrutinise the bill more generally. Shirley-Anne Somerville: The deputy convener makes a fair point about the time that the committee needs to scrutinise the legislation. Michael Marra touched on the industrial injuries disablement benefit. I gently say to him that, if he thinks that the Scottish Government has sat on its hands, I wonder what he thinks about consecutive UK Governments—Tory and Labour—that have not changed that benefit for literally decades upon decades. If they had done something, the records would not be sitting archived in a paper format in warehouses down south. That is one of the challenges that we are facing.”
“I appreciate that that is frustrating for the Parliament; it is also frustrating for the Government. I gently point out to members of that committee that, some time ago, I made it clear that I was not willing to accept some aspects of the bill. I am not aware of the committee inviting me back for further discussion of the principles behind the stance that I took, even before an LCM was in place. Bob Doris: I am happy to put on the record that the Social Justice and Social Security Committee recommended the various provisions in the LCM to the chamber, based on the evidence that the cabinet secretary gave when she came to the committee.”
“However, the definition of non-benefit payment is extremely broad—a concern that is also noted in the memorandum. For those reasons, as well as the wider concerns raised by the third sector, the Scottish Greens suggest that we do not grant legislative consent. 17:14 Shirley-Anne Somerville: I thank members for their contributions and point out that the motion that we are discussing could not be lodged until the UK Government tabled its amendments, which was not done until last week. I share the Parliament’s frustration about the timetabling of the LCM and the fact that the Social Justice and Social Security Committee was not able to scrutinise it in the proper manner. That is a reflection of the timetable followed by the UK Government for amendments at the House of Lords report stage and the third reading of the bill in the Lords.”
“With regard to clauses 90, 98 and 99, the memorandum notes: “the UK Government has confirmed that there is no intent to use these powers in relation to devolved payments” and that “the provisions are not intended to interact with devolved functions and would relate to payments for which UK Government has responsibility.” Although the current Government might not intend to do so, we are not comfortable simply taking the UK Government’s word for it, and who knows what a future UK Government may make of the powers? The Government could have explicitly exempted Scotland from the provisions, as it has from other parts of the bill, but it did not. In bringing non-benefit payment into scope, the intent appears to be to apply investigatory powers to grants as well as to social security payments.”
“Although some overpayments cannot reasonably be noticed by the recipient, the bill would allow unjust investigations and could result in the money that claimants depend on being withdrawn. It appears that the DWP has not learned its lesson from those who have been pushed into poverty by universal credit deductions. Today’s LCM relates to clause 78 of and schedule 4 to the bill, as well as to clauses 90, 98 and 99, on non-benefit payments.”
“The Scottish Greens have serious concerns about the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill. The bill provides sweeping powers to investigate the bank accounts of those who claim social security, yet the DWP already has powers to tackle fraud. Concerns have been raised by disabled people’s organisations, Citizens Advice Scotland and even the banks themselves that people’s privacy rights will be further intruded on as a result of the changes. There has been no clear justification that the currently held powers are insufficient and that further change is needed. The bill fails to distinguish between overpayment due to error on the part of the DWP or on the part of the recipient and overpayment due to fraud.”
“Just two weeks ago, our capital city and my home town, Edinburgh, backed Scottish Green councillors’ calls to ensure that no public money is being used to bankroll Israel’s genocide. That comes more than a month after our Parliament voted to back our calls for boycott, divestment and sanctions against the genocidal Israeli regime. What additional legislative changes will the Scottish Government pursue to enable local authorities such as the City of Edinburgh Council to legally adopt the BDS policies that the Parliament has agreed to support?”
“We can all agree on the vital importance of skills and training. We know that the ability to obtain them substantially determines a person’s opportunities in life and, collectively, the success and dynamism of our economy. What we are debating is how best to use public funds and resources to support skills and training. There is no doubt that, in times of constrained public spending, more money cannot be the only answer. We need to properly explore the art of the possible and how to make the most impact with the resources that are available.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Richard Lochhead to speak to and move S6M-19253.3. Minister, you have up to five minutes. I apologise—I meant to call Ben Macpherson. You still have up to five minutes, minister. 16:10”
“I move, That the Parliament recognises that future economic growth is reliant on providing the right opportunities to create good jobs that allow businesses to expand; notes with concern the findings of the recent Audit Scotland report, highlighting a 20% real-terms cut in funding to the college sector over the past five years, and believes that this has a negative impact on the economy and limits opportunities for young people to get ahead; acknowledges the concern from business representative groups about the future of apprenticeships, and the harm that a restriction in apprenticeship numbers causes to job creation in Scotland, and calls on the Scottish Government to restore funding to Scotland’s colleges and raise the number of modern apprenticeship places from 25,507 in 2024-25 to at least the 34,000 identified by Skills Development Scotland as necessary to meet Scottish economic growth ambitions.”
“The SNP’s response is to mess around with quangos, transferring responsibility for apprenticeships and national programmes from Skills Development Scotland to the Scottish Funding Council. It is hard to find any stakeholder who believes that that is the right move at the present time, and the transfer is likely to consume precious resources that could be spent elsewhere. We need a restoration of funding to our colleges and apprenticeships, because they are vital to the economy of the future. They deserve investment, not cuts. That is what my motion calls for.”
“Will the member take an intervention? Murdo Fraser: Yes, if I have time. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There is really not very much time in hand. It is up to the member. Murdo Fraser: I will take a brief intervention. Lorna Slater: It is on a point of agreement, I think. The member will recall that the Economy and Fair Work Committee heard evidence that apprenticeship and other college students have a much higher rate than university students of working in the field for which they have studied. There is something to be said for the success of apprenticeships and college places in producing people who are able to work in the field for which they study. Murdo Fraser: I absolutely agree with Lorna Slater’s point about the importance of apprenticeships in delivering skills for the future.”
“Given that the amount of capital raised is about £195 million, if even some of that is reinvested in helping us innovate to get to net zero, I think that that is money well spent.”
“I note the support in the Techscaler scheme for international flights and for what the Deputy First Minister calls “deep tech”, such as AI, which can have high energy needs. How is the Scottish Government ensuring that the programme supports its stated ambition to transition to net zero? What is the carbon cost of all the money that has been spent on Techscaler? What will it cost the public purse to sequester the emitted carbon later? Kate Forbes: I really like the way that the member has framed that question because she is absolutely right that a lot of those companies are involved in support for the transition and for the innovation that is required to meet our climate change goals. She may have heard me say in my statement that the spend on the international element of the programme is only 2 per cent of the overall spend.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted yes. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms Slater. Your vote will be recorded.”
“We believe that his amendments 348 to 350 would provide an often- exploited group with valuable protections and rectify a glaring gap in accommodation standards that the Scottish Government has thus far been slow to act on. 20:00”
“Ministers would also be able to determine the standards that landlords would be held to by local authorities. Those changes maintain the spirit of the amendments that Ariane Burgess lodged along those lines at stage 2. They put rogue landlords on notice that it is not okay to provide dangerous, substandard housing and that, if they persist in not fixing problems with the homes that they rent, they will face a penalty. Amendments 380 and 381 are consequential to amendments 300 and 301. The Scottish Greens welcome Richard Leonard’s move to bring back the seasonal worker accommodation standards amendment that we lodged at stage 2.”
“Those landlords are let down by a minority, and it is that minority whose behaviour and practice we are trying to change. It is pleasing to note that the amendments have support from stakeholders representing both landlords and tenants, including Scottish Land & Estates and Living Rent. We believe that that reflects the fact that we have listened to and acted on the feedback on amendments that we lodged at stage 2. There was a concern that imposing a £10,000 fine on landlords would deter investment in the private rented sector. We have taken that on board and have modified the amendments so that ministers would have powers to determine the level of fine that private rented landlords may face. Likewise, we have stated that ministers must set out a timescale within which private landlords may resolve issues before they face a fine.”
“I am speaking to Ariane Burgess’s amendments because she is currently unable to attend the chamber. Amendments 300 and 301 would revamp the rules on local authority inspections of private rented accommodation. Amendment 300 would allow local authorities to routinely inspect homes. Amendment 301 would give them the power to undertake spot checks of private lets at any time as long as they had the prior consent of the tenant. Both amendments would build on existing powers in supporting tenants and pushing standards higher by cracking down on the minority of rogue landlords who do not meet their obligations to provide good-quality housing. I underline that many private landlords are good landlords who do their best to meet their tenants’ needs and fulfil their obligations to them.”
“Those changes must embed transparency and ensure that learners, staff and communities have a meaningful voice in decision making. Ben Macpherson brings experience and a thoughtful approach to the role. We look forward to working constructively with him to ensure that the legislation delivers a tertiary education system that is fairer, greener and more resilient. 14:28”
“The proposed statutory framework for apprenticeships and work-based learning is a step forward, but it must be matched by a commitment to fair work, inclusive access and climate- conscious skills development. We are particularly focused on ensuring that the bill delivers for learners who have been historically underserved, such as those in rural communities, disabled students and those from low-income backgrounds. The Scottish Green Party will continue to advocate for robust student support mechanisms and for a system that prioritises public good over market forces. We note the bill’s provisions on governance reform, including the creation of an apprenticeship committee and new expectations for council membership.”
“On behalf of the Scottish Green Party, I welcome Ben Macpherson’s appointment as Minister for Higher and Further Education. It is a critical appointment at a time when Scotland’s tertiary education system stands on the cusp of significant reform. I also recognise Graeme Dey’s power of work and leadership in that area, which has gotten us to this point. The Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill presents an opportunity to reshape how we support learners, educators and institutions. We welcome the bill’s intention to simplify the funding landscape and strengthen the role of the Scottish Funding Council.”
“The whole landscape would benefit from analysis and wider reconsideration to ensure that there is an effective network of public bodies to support advocacy and public trust without duplication or undermining of the excellent work of third sector organisations that already do that work. It might be that the remit of an existing body can be adjusted or that bodies can be consolidated. In the extraordinary case that a new body that is intended to last in perpetuity is to be created, it should absolutely be done following strict criteria, including that the proposed work cannot be done by anyone else with or without a change of remit to an existing body. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move to the open debate, with back-bench speeches of up to five minutes. 16:16”
“The systems that we set up to support trust in public services and organisations should be designed to be proactive in finding problems and failures before they become serious; systems should not just react when things have gone wrong. We heard from the ombudsman about the limitations to their remit that prevent them from undertaking proactive investigations that might prevent public service failures before they happen. There are proposals and recommendations on the record already about how the ombudsman’s remit could be expanded, and that should be considered seriously. There was agreement among the committee that the landscape of SPCB-supported bodies and Scottish public bodies in general is messy. There are both gaps and overlaps in what organisations do and are responsible for.”
“My colleague Maggie Chapman proposed an excellent alternative for dealing with failures when they arise: instead of having stand-alone commissioners, there could be focused periods of work to address the issue. She said: “If we ask whether a dedicated piece of work should be done in the next five years by a body within the Scottish Human Rights Commission, that essentially creates a sunset clause.”—[Official Report, SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee, 15 May 2025; c 23.] That would be a mechanism to bring resources and attention to a specific area of concern without creating a whole new public body of questionable effectiveness that would last in perpetuity.”
“There is no evidence that commissioners have any more sway than anyone else, because we can see commissioners creating report after report and then getting ignored, in the same way that parliamentarians sometimes get ignored when we ask for specific actions—for example, on climate. Creating more commissioners who are just going to be ignored by Government is not a solution at all. Creating a commissioner can be a substitute for real action and a way for the Government to say that it is taking a matter seriously while being able to distance itself from delivery and delay action by waiting for the commissioner to report or suggest something.”
“Is it those groups or individual MSPs that the member thinks should be carrying out work around guidance and investigations into the Government, individual local authorities or the 131 public sector bodies? Lorna Slater: I understand the point that the member is making, which is that resources need to be put into investigations and guidance. However, there is a whole civil service for that. It is up to us to push the Government to do those things, because the evidence is that, whether it is parliamentarians, third-sector organisations or commissioners who are pushing for such work to get done, it will not get done unless the Government takes it up. The issue is about being effective.”
“It is understandable that, when there is a perceived failure in public services, we want to see something being done to address that failure and prevent it in the future, but is a new commissioner the right answer? The committee heard that commissioners have no sway or influence on Government greater than that which members of Parliament or third sector organisations have. When we asked a colleague from New Zealand about who held their Government to account and advocated for the needs of disabled people, victims of crime, patients and so on, the answer was that they expect members of Parliament to do that. We also heard concerns in our evidence that putting in place commissioners might be letting the Government off the hook. Sarah Boyack: We have fantastic advocacy groups, such as Stop Climate Chaos, which was lobbying us all today.”