³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

There are a number of issues in your question, which I will try to respond to in turn.

I am not surprised that Highland Council is expressing concern about the funding situation, because we share those concerns. I have stated publicly a number of times—in the chamber, in this committee and in every meeting that I have had with the UK Government—my concerns about the lack of parity that there is between those who arrive on the family scheme and those who arrive on the supersponsor scheme or the homes for Ukraine scheme. A £10,500 tariff is supposed to go to local authorities for people who arrive on the homes for Ukraine scheme—there is still an issue around the arrival of that money, and I am happy to address that, too—but local authorities that host those who arrive on the family scheme do not get that support.

We all know that, regardless of how someone arrives from Ukraine, the resource commitment that will be required from local government will be the same. I can reassure Highland Council and all local authorities that the Scottish Government is doing absolutely everything that it can in its conversations with the UK Government to get certainty about funding and parity of funding.

The second point about funding is that, at the moment, we have certainty only about funding for this first year. We have not been given a commitment from the UK Government about what will happen in the second and third years of the three-year visa.

On the point that you made about housing and the fact that people are feeling vulnerable about the fact that the initial six-month period is coming to an end, I can understand that feeling. The communication from the UK Government was that the arrangements would be for at least six months, if people could commit to that, but I am not going to state that I expect those who are hosting to go beyond what they feel would be appropriate.

We are already planning and have been doing a lot of work to make social housing available. We have provided local government with £11 million in order to repurpose properties and bring void properties back into use. As you would expect, given your previous employment, we are in conversation with registered social landlords, and they have been doing a good job of helping us to ensure that social housing options are available. We are working in a number of areas to ensure that we can give people the safety and security that they need and deserve. That work involves the social space but, of course, as people find employment, there will be opportunities for people to transition to their own arrangements, particularly if they are looking to stay here for longer.

I can understand the concern that you have expressed about the situation in Edinburgh. That is why we are keen to ensure that we have a full-Scotland approach that includes all 32 local authorities, as was the case with the Syria scheme. That is to ensure that, given the natural inclination of people to wish to be near or around Edinburgh, it is articulated that there are opportunities beyond Edinburgh. We have colleagues here from the Western Isles, Argyll and Bute, Mid Scotland and Fife, North East Scotland and Central Scotland, who would all articulate the various merits of their areas and the opportunities that are available in those areas to find employment, put down roots and find homes. I hope that we all continue to articulate the opportunities that are available across Scotland to ensure that the particular pressures in Edinburgh that Ms Boyack has articulated can be avoided in the long term.

Local authorities are expected to cover all areas of wraparound support that they have responsibility to deliver, including social work, education, housing and all manner of other areas of responsibility. I am concerned that the £10,500 is not sufficient, and I do not believe that it has parity with the numbers for support in previous resettlement schemes. I have repeatedly articulated to the UK Government those points about the overall quantum and about parity between different routes to the UK, and my colleagues, right up to the First Minister, have done so as well.

There is sympathy for our position. Particularly on parity between the visa routes, I think that Michael Gove and Lord Harrington have expressed sympathy. However, at the moment, that sympathy has not extended to the Treasury extending support. My call today is that, if we are not talking about the overall quantum of £10,500, we should at the very least ensure that there is parity of support, regardless of how people arrive.

Absolutely—that should go without saying. To be fair, from the conversations that I have had with local authorities, I think that they are looking to do everything that they can. Dr Allan is absolutely right. He represents a community that has suffered depopulation and has challenges in that regard, but it also has many opportunities. The area is a beautiful place to live and work and a good place to raise a family.

We must understand that people arriving from Ukraine will probably have as much understanding of Scotland as we do of Ukraine. We know about Kyiv, but we know only what we have seen on television. It is incumbent on us all to ensure that we articulate the opportunities that lie beyond Edinburgh and Glasgow. They are wonderful cities, but there are opportunities beyond the central belt.

Some of those who arrive will want to find employment very quickly, while others will be in a different situation. There is no pressure, but there are employment opportunities beyond the central belt for those who want to find work. Dr Allan has articulated that well in talking about the community that he represents, and I see Ms Minto nodding her head, given the community that she represents in Argyll and Bute. I hope we can ensure that people enjoy the whole of Scotland and that the pressures on Edinburgh and Glasgow can be released a little as a result of that.

I certainly hope so. There will always be a need for people to move in Scotland. As I have already articulated, Edinburgh is the arrival point for the vast majority of people who arrive from Ukraine. Whichever country they arrive from, they arrive predominantly, although not exclusively, in Edinburgh, and it is clearly not sustainable for people to stay in the Edinburgh area for a long period, because of the accommodation pressures that Ms Boyack has articulated. Therefore, there will always need to be a move or a couple of moves for people to put down their roots. I want to limit that as much as possible and ensure that there is communication so that, at all stages when there is a move, it is voluntary and people from Ukraine understand the process that they are going through.

I will put my answer in the context of all the challenges that we have already set out for local government. However, we are working in partnership with local government on the issues. On access to childcare and the issue of school catchment areas that Mr Mankovskyi raised, I ask local authorities to use their flexibility and discretion to the absolute maximum to make people’s arrival in Scotland as warm, supportive and understanding as possible.

I am very alive to that situation. Discussions have been going on with the UK Government about the seasonal workers who are here from Ukraine. I am very conscious of the fact that their status here is precarious. As Mr Ruskell said, it is linked to employment that is seasonal by its nature and is therefore temporary. Those people’s ability to bring family members here is also limited. The supersponsor scheme may well be helpful in relation to their being able to bring people here, but their immediate accommodation situation may not be suitable or make that possible.

We continue to urge the UK Government to ensure that there is parity between people from Ukraine who are already here under the seasonal scheme and those who are arriving via the current resettlement programmes, so that the seasonal workers have the security and certainty of the three-year position that others are arriving with. We will also be looking to make sure that we continue to work with our partners to provide whatever support we can to those who are already here, alongside those who are arriving or are soon to arrive, such as family members.

Mr Ruskell is absolutely right. This is a very serious situation for the seasonal workers. However, we are alive to it and we are continuing our discussions and engagement with the UK Government, which we hope will be able to step up and provide parity of security for those people in Scotland.

Again, we are keen to get the data on the supersponsor scheme as quickly as possible. I note that the previous witnesses were very complimentary about the fact that we have established the supersponsor scheme and that they understood it to be, as we intended, a humane and swifter approach to ensure that we get people here as quickly as possible. For the scheme to work, we are still reliant on the UK immigration system working as quickly as possible to approve initial visa applications so that people can get here. That is why, initially, we wanted visas to be waived; that was our preferred approach.

We are pleased that we have managed to put in place the supersponsor route, and we are now gearing up to ensure that we have a co-ordinated response. Having a clear and live data flow is crucial to that. That will ensure that we are aware of how people are applying and when applications are approved, so that we can tailor our response accordingly.

The answer to the first part of Mr Ruskell’s question is yes, that is under consideration. I pay tribute to colleagues round the table who have been working on it.

On the second part of Mr Ruskell’s question, we are in constant dialogue on the matter, and colleagues in the committee will be aware of the statutory instruments that were laid this week in order to ensure that people arriving from Ukraine have access to public funds in Scotland, including social security. We have moved at pace on that work and, to be fair, the UK Government has done likewise. I am hopeful that, from a financial perspective, people will have access to the support that they are going to need. On the public transport side, we are considering all the options.

Absolutely, convener. Conversations are on-going on all those aspects.

Yes, we have; I have had a number of meetings with Yevhen Mankovskyi. He is involved in the partnership approach that we are looking to take and is helping us to ensure that we are tailoring our response appropriately, understanding the linguistic and cultural differences that there may be and ensuring that we are mindful of those and sympathetic to them. Our local authority partners have experience of delivering education for people who have arrived from other countries such as Syria. I mentioned the success of that scheme and I know that our local authority partners are already working on replicating that model to ensure that we are providing appropriate support for children in our schools. We are also working very closely with the Ukrainian consul to ensure that we are mindful of those issues, that we approach the experience for children as sympathetically as possible and that we understand their needs as well as possible.