 Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the 16th meeting of 2023 of the economy and fair work committee. I received apologies from Colin Beattie and John Mason as attending in his place this morning. Our first item of business is a decision to take items 3 and 4 in private and also I'm seeking agreement to consider two LCMs in private at a future meeting. Is that agreed? Thank you. Our next item of business is an evidence session with Consumer Scotland. Consumer Scotland was set up by the Consumer Scotland Act 2020 as the independent statutory body for consumers in Scotland and is accountable to Parliament. This is the committee's first open news day to hear formally from Consumer Scotland. I welcome David Wilson, the board chair, Sam Gabaldon, chief executive, Susan Pomfrey, director of operations who is joining us virtually this morning, David Isard, director of analysis and Douglas White, director of policy advocacy, all Consumer Scotland. As always, if members and witnesses can keep their questions and answers as concise as possible, I will invite David Wilson to make a short opening statement. Thank you, convener, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for the opportunity to attend today and give you an outline of the current activities of Consumer Scotland. I'm joined today by the senior executive team of the organisation, and I'll introduce their key roles during this opening statement. As you've said, we're set up following the unanimous passing of the Consumer Scotland Act 2020, the board, which includes myself, Angela Morgan, Nick Martin and James Walker. We're appointed in July 2021. We've taken the organisation through to its initial vesting in April last year, and we now feel that we are up and running and active as an organisation. The act provides us with a clear set of functions, duties and powers, and as a body corporate of the Scottish Administration it provides a framework to build a statutory consumer advocacy organisation, which, as you've said, is independent of Scottish ministers and accountable to this Parliament. We've made strong progress in building the organisation, and we're very pleased to appoint Sam Gabaldin as our first chief executive in May last year. One important function of Consumer Scotland is our role as the statutory consumer advocate in gas, electricity, postal and water sectors in Scotland—a role that had previously been performed by Citizens Advice Scotland. One aspect of our set-up was a transfer of staff and responsibilities from CAS to the emerging organisation, a process in which we're pleased to deliver it effectively for staff and for both organisations involved. We've continued a strong partnership with CAS since then, and I've developed a memorandum of understanding with them. I'm pleased to take questions on aspects of the set-up of the organisation, but I just briefly want to set out some of our key activities over the last year and forthcoming. During last year we published an interim strategic plan and consulted in some detail on it, and we've now published a four-year strategic plan and a work plan for this coming year. Those documents set out our approach in some detail, including our activities and details of our work plan. The strategic objectives build on the key themes and expectations set out by the Parliament, and we are conscious and take into account the discussions during the committee stage of the bill. The objectives set out in the strategic plan cover firstly our aim to promote understanding of consumer issues in Scotland. A really important design feature of the organisation has been the need to build a broad evidence base on consumer issues through research, economic analysis and intelligence, and that work within the organisation is led by David Iser. Secondly we seek to encourage other organisations to focus on the needs and aspirations of consumers. This involves the active engagement and collaboration with other organisations in both the private and the public sector, and collaboration with enforcement bodies in Scotland and as part of the UK Government. That focus on policy development is led by my colleague Douglas White. Thirdly, we seek to enable consumers active participation in the economy through access to unbiased and fair information and support. The legislation enables consumer Scotland to be a provider directly of advice to consumers, but at least for the moment we have chosen to act to support the existing landscape of consumer advice and advocacy to help them to achieve and maximise their impact. In our remit we seek to take a broad definition of consumers where active in the area of consumers in vulnerable circumstances and we are delighted to share you in any aspect for the details of our work going forward. I hope that that was a helpful overview and I am happy to take questions and answers. I should say that my friend, my colleague Sue Bumfrey, who is our director of operations, has been a central part of development of the organisation and she is online and will be able to answer questions particularly on finance and HR aspects of the organisation. Okay, thank you very much Mr Wilson. First of all you have described the creation of consumer Scotland coming into a general landscape where there are a number of different bodies involved in consumer issues, both at UK and at the Scottish level, so when it came to bringing forward your first annual work programme and the longer term strategic plan, what kind of work did you do with them in terms of identifying what the priorities of the organisation would be and do you want to maybe briefly set out what the key priority for this coming year is planned to be? I think that there are two aspects of consultation where we sought to take views from a wide range of organisations. The first was consulting on our interim strategic plan, which I mentioned, and we had constructive discussions and written comments and discussions with a number of organisations as part of the development of the overall plan and likewise we consulted on the more specific annual work plan, which initially covered the focus on the levy funded areas, the water, energy, gas, energy and post areas, which we have now subsequently broadened out, but it was really important as part of the development of that work plan that we consulted and engaged with the companies involved but also with consumers and other bodies as part of that. I think that that was a constructive level of engagement. I think that one thing that I want to draw out is that as part of that engagement, it is clear that there is a very broad remit for the organisation if we define consumers broadly and the scope for potential consumers facing harm broadly. I think that some rigorous prioritisation is required to make sure that we have a clear work plan and that is why we were so keen to consult on it and publish our work plan in some detail. In terms of priorities, clearly cost of living has been at the heart of our work and it has clearly been a major theme for the activities of all consumer advocates over the last year, and that we expect to continue. Cost of living has been the first of our core areas, but we have kept a focus on the longer-term objectives rather than the immediate issues of cost of living around the transition to net zero and the area of particular importance to us, which is addressing the issues facing consumers who find themselves in vulnerable circumstances. We describe those three areas—cost of living, transition to net zero and consumers of vulnerable circumstances—as three cross-cutting issues, which have been the heart of our strategic plan and our work plan this year. Could somebody say a bit more about the cost of living? What are the examples of the work that you are focused on that would be direct to supporting consumers through cost of living or looking at the cost of living issues to impact on consumers? Certainly. I will pass on to my colleague Douglas to finish off on some of this. We have undertaken a number of aspects of work already on the cost of living. In particular, the crisis that has revolved around or developed from energy pricing and we have put in place a quarterly energy tracker that is allowing us to understand in depth some of the impact on consumers of high energy prices and we have seen a very significant impact on consumers. Around about two-thirds of consumers say that they are having to reduce their energy consumption around about 40 per cent say that they are struggling to heat their homes comfortably. Obviously, there are some significant issues in that space. We have fed that information through a number of forms. We have had that survey. We have also pulled together something called SEAC, the Scottish Energy Insights Coordination Group, which was in response to a demand that was identified at the First Minister's Energy Summit last year. That group pulled together the different advice bodies to bring together the collective insight of the real life or the real-time experience of consumers in that space. There were particular issues identified, I suppose, in common through that and through the energy tracker research that should be fed into Government, regulators and the companies. For example, the particular issues that consumers on prepayment metres were facing, the experience of disabled consumers who are finding this particularly challenging. We have a report on disabled consumers coming out in a couple of weeks' time. We have achieved some success in that work, so we engaged very heavily in off-gems review of their code of practice on prepayment metres and put a number of different things into that space, including, for example, the concept of a precautionary approach before the involuntary fitting of prepayment metres, the inclusion of financial vulnerability in the criteria that companies have to take into account before they are fitted, and ensuring that, once consumers have paid off a metre, they are able to move away from a prepayment metre. We feel like we have had some impact in that in our relatively short existence. We have also begun work on general affordability work that looks at future models in the energy industry, the water industry and other essential services in relation to how those can be structured in a way that ensures that those consumers on low incomes are able to access those services. I can add a couple of points to what Sam has said already. Sam has talked in some detail about our work in the energy market specifically. We have also been looking at the cost of living issues in the other statutory sectors that we operate in. For example, in the water market, we have raised some issues around where consumers are eligible for council tax reduction but are still liable for a portion of their water charge but may not always be aware of that. Therefore, there is a risk that they might fall into debt, which could cause significant issues around paying that in affordability. We have raised some issues and concerns around that. We are now engaging in a process to try to seek some improvements and to improve some outcomes for consumers in that space. In the postal market, we have commissioned a significant body of research during our first months of operation to understand key issues for consumers in the postal market. That research includes questions around how consumers experience the affordability and cost of key postal services and will be looking forward to publishing the outcomes of that work in due course. As Sam touched on, we are looking at some of those issues in a cross market way. I think I want to emphasise that one of our privileges at Consumer Scotland is our ability to do not just deep dive intrinsically valuable work in each of the markets in which we have a statutory responsibility and other individual markets that we operate in, but our ability to look at those issues in a cross market way and draw common patterns and learnings and lessons across those different markets. We have identified the cost of living in affordability as a key area where we want to focus some attention to that over the next year. We have begun that piece of work looking at how different markets deal with offering more affordable prices to different groups of consumers, how they address who those consumers should be, what is the level of discount or reduced prices that are offered and how those systems are protected for consumers through legislation, regulation or through other models. That is some work that we have already begun this year. It is important that we draw those lessons across markets to pull together overall best practice for consumers and how we get good outcomes for consumers in the round. Just before I bring in Fiona Hyslop, just to make you aware, the committee is doing a bit of work around royal mail. We are taking evidence from royal mail at the end of June. I do not know if you had said that the publication was going to be soon. If you were able to share any information with us prior to that meeting, that would be helpful as well. I will hand over to Fiona Hyslop, who is followed by Graham Simpson. With the committee's indulgence, just to pick up one point about looking at energy and cost living, et cetera, the net zero energy and transport committee's energy price inquiry last year, one of the things that they identified was that people were having to pay for the privilege of having pre-payment meters taken away. Have you, as an organisation, been able to have an impact on that? It is something that we have raised in discussion with both OFGEM and the UK Government and the UK Government has put in place a proposal that should mean that people on pre-payment meters do not pay more per unit of energy than those on credit meters or usual meters. The issue is that, if you do not want one any more, you have to pay to get it removed. That is something that we have directly taken up. In the OFGEM code of practice review, we explicitly raised, and this is now included, the point that it should be easy for consumers to switch away from a pre-payment meter. There are particular issues with what are called dumb meters, old-fashioned smart meters, where they have to be physically removed, because that is more complicated, but that should not be a punitive burden on the consumer. Smart meters are easier in that sense because they can be switched over remotely, and they do not involve infrastructure change, if you like. Others will go into specific issues. I am still on the range of how you do your work and, in terms of collaboration, are there any practical examples of collaboration with other consumer organisations in your planned work so far? You have touched on some of the areas, but are there any actual organisations that might be helpful to get a sense of who you work with? I will give you some examples. As I mentioned, Citizens Advice Scotland is clearly an important stakeholder. We have worked very collaboratively with them through the setup phase, which we expect to be working on on an on-going basis. They have very clear strengths in terms of local advocacy. The bureau network is a pillar of Scottish life in many ways, and that is something that we are already working with. We see that as a key part of the landscape. More broadly, in a Scottish context, we have, at the invitation of the Government, taken over the convening and sharing of the consumer network, which is a group that brings together the key advisory and advocacy organisations such as Advice Direct Scotland and a range of public organisations. That provides a forum and a mechanism to engage and to share good practice, common interests and to do joint work, where we think that that can be mutually benefit. The consumer network in Scotland is our umbrella mechanism to engage with others, but we are very open and keen to engage as broadly as possible. I think that thirdly, I would perhaps say a bit more about engagement with the enforcement organisations. I think that one key thing that we are keen to stress is that our role as an advocacy organisation. Enforcement powers are powers that lie elsewhere, but working very closely with trading standards within Scotland in terms of local government enforcement, but also working with the UK-wide regulators is an important contribution that we can make as that interlocutor between Scottish issues and devolved Scottish matters, but clearly consumer issues range wider and range into the wider UK space. We have very closely had discussions and worked with competition markets authority, financial conduct authority, with the utility regulators such as Ofgem. I think that that sense of working with the wider UK government is also a key part of what we do. Perhaps I can come back to the detail of this a bit later on, but particularly as we develop our investigations function, that is an area that we work very closely with the competition market authority on. It would be interesting how your work develops with trading standards in Scotland to do in viable but probably unsung work. Therefore, some of the issues that are there in terms of advocacy are going to be really important because the impact that it has on consumers is pretty wide. The consumer network for Scotland then brings together both areas that you might see in the devolved sector but also in the reserve sector. When are you next likely to meet and what are its priorities? Is the network's priorities the same as yours or are they steering you in a different way? UK bodies also include the CFA and financial conduct authority. It seeks to bring together those organisations across the consumer space, whether it is devolved or reserved and in a wide range of areas. For example, our remit does not formally cover transport consumers but transport focus is now joining that group just to act as a conduit into the wider consumer matters. As Douglas has said, we see one of the key contributions that we can make that is not being a sectoral interest. We are not just interested in energy consumers or water consumers or financial services consumers. We are trying to take a view across the board and the consumer network is a mechanism to do that. On your point about whether the consumer networks interest is different from ours, the whole point of groups is to try to work through those issues. While not formally through that mechanism, the Scottish Energy Insights and Coordination Group that we have developed in parallel with the consumer network has drawn together a range of similar bodies and has done very active work on the cost of living side. That is a good example of collaboration across the piece. We will shortly publish that report, which was led by Lewis Chan Smith on our behalf. That is a good example of a report that summarises the activities and interests of a wide range of groups. It is not our report, it is the group's report, and that is where we can resolve if there are any differences, but make sure that we have a concerted single point of view where that is in the consumer interest. Finally, I will ask about how you reconcile what might be competing tensions between delivery of net zero, which is imperative for all the organisations that you have been talking about, but the immediate impact on consumers. Is that something that you have thought through as an organisation is how you position yourself in that? Your drive to help and advocacy for individual consumers may work against what might be the wider issue around trying to make sure that we can deliver for net zero? I have a very good question on that. Clearly, it is a key challenge at the moment during a cost of living crisis, but that is where, as I described it, our broad definition of the consumer is so important. Our interests are both current and future consumers. We also wish to recognise that there is no such thing as a representative consumer or an average consumer. There are different consumers in different areas, whether in vulnerable circumstances or with vulnerable characteristics. I think that we see our role as further development of almost a consumer literacy of understanding the different pressures and challenges facing consumers and to bring that to bear on the key topics and issues, whether it is challenges of energy efficiency, electric vehicles. There is a whole range of different areas that we are doing work on that we try to bring to bear that intensive look at the broad balance of consumer interests, rather than thinking that there is one single consumer interest. Thank you. Graham Simpson is to be followed by Gordon MacDonald. Thanks very much, convener. You called consumer Scotland, so consumers should be at the heart of everything that you do. How many consumers have you helped in the past year? I think that the first thing that we are very upfront about saying is that we are not a frontline consumer support organisation. There is a range of bodies that we work with and support that are very active in engaging directly with consumers. I am sure that you will be aware that a number of them, whether it is Advice to Act Scotland or Citizens Advice Scotland and the Bureau Network, have seen a huge increase in both the need for that direct support and the support and help that they are currently providing. We see a role as complementing that indirectly rather than being a direct support and advisory service to consumers, but we think that we can make a real difference by complementing that work through the analysis, the wider national advocacy, the support and encouragement to find solutions that can help a range of consumers in a broad sense. I could not give you a number of how many specific consumers we have helped because that is not the nature of this organisation, but we are very clear that we are already making a positive impact on the broader consumer landscape, working with other organisations in a complementary way. Do you see yourself more as a research organisation? I think that we are very proud to be a research organisation built on economic and social intelligence. Again, that is something that can complement the work of the frontline advisory agency, who in many of the conversations that we have had with them is one of the things that they are looking for from us. Building the evidence base through sound research is something that is very positive about that, but it is not enough just to do very strong research, although we will clearly do that. The important thing is to share that, to advocate the conclusions of it and to make sure that that feeds through to potential policy improvements and to a more consumer-orientated focus among companies and businesses that are engaged with consumers across Scotland. If I have problems with my energy provider, maybe I am struggling to pay my bills and I cannot get that resolved with them, I might just pop down to my local citizens advice bureau that would be a natural thing to do. If I do that, what is going to happen? Are they going to say that we cannot deal with it anymore? If consumers are facing chances of paying their bills, of course the first recourse is to their company provider in the first place. One of the things that we have done in some of the advocacy work that we have been doing, the first point should be that the companies, the energy retailers, are providing a quality service to customers who find themselves for whatever reason facing challenges in terms of paying their bills. There is something very important about the duty of care on the companies themselves to provide that. We will advocate and we do advocate to make sure that that is as strong as possible. Where that does not find a full solution, there is a range of other alternatives. They can go, as you said, to citizens advice Scotland. There are other advisers and support as well. What we have been very supportive of is set out in the report that we will publish in the next few days. We support those organisations to provide the best quality advice to individual consumers, particularly during the cost of living crisis. We have supported initiatives that have been made to provide additional funding that the Government has taken forward to make sure that the citizens advice Scotland and other bodies can provide that advice. I am sorry, I am just trying to work out how the system works now. If I go down to my citizens advice bureau and say, will you help me, are they still able to help me? Yes, absolutely, yes. They are not going to say, we cannot help you, you must go to consumer Scotland. Definitely not. We have a very clear understanding with them that that is not the case. So, if I am needing help from someone to represent me, you are not the body? Yes. We do not see ourselves as a front-line consumer support organisation that is within a remit to ensure the provision of advice, support and providing information to consumers. However, the legislation that has set us up and the range of organisations that are already active and working well in this field is that we are not a complaints organisation and we are not a direct consumer-facing organisation. Okay, well that is clear that up, but you get some money. There is a levy that companies are paying, which I think amounts to about one and a half million a year. Does any of that go to the citizens advice bureau? Yes, I can give you a bit more information about that. The levy is in total probably more than that because it is split into different bits. There is the consumer advocacy bit, which we receive, and there is a consumer advice element of that, which goes to Citizens Advice Scotland and Advice Direct Scotland and also something called the extra help unit. If I can explain some of the structure of that, Citizens Advice Scotland and Advice Direct Scotland are, in essence, first tier. If they go there with an issue, they will try and resolve that and engage with the company. If they find a particularly thorny issue or something that is particularly problematic, they will refer you to the extra help unit, which is effectively an expert organisation, which is also managed by Citizens Advice Scotland and it is UK-wide, and they can engage directly with companies or whoever they need to try and resolve the issue. The levy funds both that advice element and the consumer advocacy element, which is what we receive. In answer to my question, this has been a final question for me now, are those bodies getting any of that levy money? Yes. They are. I should have mentioned Advice Direct Scotland, of course, because they also directly help consumers. I want to ask you about a couple of areas. The first one is about your investigations. David, you mentioned earlier that you are continuing to develop the investigation function. Can you tell us where we are with that? Has any investigations begun or where are we? A key part of the legislation that was set us up included a set of powers to conduct investigations into businesses, sectors or practices that have the potential to cause harm to consumers. This is a key part of our activities and a key innovation, if you like, or a new aspect of work. What we have done is scope out the nature of what would be involved in conducting an investigation. We have taken advice from the Competition and Markets Authority, which is clearly a UK Government organisation with a major investigatory and enforcement function. They were good enough to second a member of staff from their investigation side to help us to develop a set of processes and procedures to enable us to conduct an investigation. That is something that we now have further developed and put in place. One of the key lessons that the Competition and Markets Authority and a number of other organisations, including Trains and the Thand of Scotland, for example, were keen to impress on us was that conducting an investigation is something that is really important to be clear on remit, to be clear on process. There is a due process with a start, a middle and an end. If we are using statutory powers of investigation, we need to be very clear at the start on how that will be taken forward. That is what we have focused on so far. In terms of an actual investigation, we have not commissioned or initiated an investigation yet. We intend to at least initiate a preliminary stage of investigation during this year, but the first criteria that we want to assess is identifying a particular area where we think there is a potential or likelihood of consumer harm. We think that there is a need for greater understanding and greatest awareness and intelligence about it and that there is the potential for us to develop an investigation that can deliver a real difference and that can ultimately lead to either policy change or potentially enforcement action by other organisations that once it has been completed. In a nutshell, we have completed a preparatory stage. We are looking into taking it to the next stage of commissioning and initiating an investigation, but we feel that it is very important that we are clear about processes before taking it early on. You have not carried out any investigations yet. You are about to possibly consider one. What triggers an investigation? Can the number of consumer complaints to partner organisations trigger them? Do you have an area that you are penciling in for investigation later on this year? That is one of the areas that we have taken advice on. We would be looking for an investigation that is not into a particular or single complaint. Again, that is not the sort of organisation we are in, but there is a generic set of issues. If it comes to the fact that there is a business sector or a business practice or some particular set of activities that are causing harm, that is where we want to focus our action. We do not have a short list yet. We are not in that business. In many ways, the challenge is not finding an investigation. It is honing it down from a long list into a short list, but just to reiterate, it is vital in terms of an investigation that we make sure that we have the processes and we get our initial investigation on the right topic during the right process. That is why we are taking a considered approach to it rather than rushing to do it too quickly. In order to take that considered approach, you have highlighted that you believe that you are a research organisation, so you have data gathering powers. What have you done with them since you were a stylist? Perhaps I will ask Sam and perhaps David to say a bit more about that, but I suppose that the one thing that I just want to distinguish, I was very specifically talking about our investigation function under section 4 of the legislation, perhaps talking about investigation by the capital I. We do a large number of investigations perhaps with a small I in research on a wide range of topics, and that is very active within the organisation. An investigation under the powers is a slightly different thing. Sam, do you want to pick up? In essence, I suppose our key point in investigations is to make sure that we are doing this really effectively and thoroughly, and we will take information from a number of sources, from complaints data, from economic data, from a range of things, and we will effectively use that to boil down a short list. That is some work that we are looking at at the moment. David, do you want to add to how we are going through that process of understanding how we need to do this? We are very clear that to be effective our investigations need to be very robust and thorough and considered. I think that the main points have been considered. In terms of information, I would reiterate the points that David has made. There is a distinction between the types of information that we can ask for as part of a formal investigation. As my colleagues have said, we are in the process of finalising our scoping work. We have done a large part of scoping work working very closely with partners like the CMA to give us a sense of what our investigations function will look like in broad terms and how we will resource that. We are about to begin a pointing head of investigations to take that forward. We are in the process of finalising that scoping that is looking in much more detail about how do we go from a longer list to a priority list of topics for investigation. There is then a question of what information will we seek using our legislative powers when we undertake an investigation. In terms of information, that is one part of the story. However, if your question was more generally about information and how we access that, we are using a vast range of information and evidence as part of our broader research programme. That includes developing economic models so that we can assess the impact of economic trends and different tariff policies on consumers. That includes a lot of our large-scale survey work to understand the views of consumers' attitudes of consumers towards issues such as net zeros that we have been talking about. That includes data-sharing agreements with organisations such as Citizens Advice Scotland and Advice Direct Scotland so that we get a real-time picture of the issues that consumers are bringing to those organisations and that we can use that picture to inform our wider work and our prioritisation of our investigations function. Before I move on to the other issue, I want to ask about what is the capacity of the organisation to carry out an in-depth investigation? Is it one-a-year or a couple or what is the situation? That is something that we have taken a lot of advice on, again, to be part of our consideration working with the CMA. The approach that we are deciding to take is to build up so that we carry out an investigation. We learn from that. We use that to understand more about the skills and the type of evidence that we are dealing with. I think that, for the first few years, we will probably do one or two a year. Obviously, we can then develop and build on that as we understand more, but it is part of that considered approach. What are the type of skills? What are the type of people you need? What is the type of data you are dealing with? The other issue will be the amount of resource that we have, because that is one of several functions that we have, but we will be recruiting into that area in the very near future. The other area that I wanted to ask about was the duty that you have to establish and operate a publicly available database of recalled products. I was struck by the figures that you had in your work programme for 23.24, which says that between April 20 and April 21, 69 per cent of consumers in the UK experience consumer detriment, 36 million consumers experience, at least one problem with a product that they bought are used in that period. What has happened with your duty to produce a database for recalled goods? That is, again, an active workstream that we are developing. We are still obviously growing as an organisation, but since the Consumer Scotland Act placed a duty on us to secure or ensure that a recalled database was available, since the act was passed, the Office of Product Safety and Standards has been established and that has created a recall database that is a UK-wide database. Food Standards Scotland has created a database covering their areas. We are currently working with them on quite what the scope is in the sense of whether we try to provide more access and links to their work. We have direct links to our website at the moment, or is there scope to provide something that is perhaps more consumer-friendly? We have also been engaging methodically with the key people behind the amendments in the first place, the Electrical Safety First organisation in Douglas, who may want to say that he spoke at the conference last week. Thank you very much for your question. I was pleased to speak at the Electrical Safety First conference last week in Edinburgh about some of those issues. I think that the first thing to say, as you rightly highlight in the question, is that the issue about recall products is a really important consumer issue. Further background, one of the things that we are doing as we develop our work over our first months is to think about what is the principal framework that we use to say that these are consumer issues. Obviously, evidence-based is critical to informing our recommendations on what we mean when we talk about good consumer outcomes. As you will know, there are an internationally long-established set of consumer principles that cover a range of things around access, choice, information, safety, redress and so on. We are looking at how we apply those. We can make sure that those are applicable to our work and use them to frame a lot of the work that we do. In terms of a recall database, that aligns very closely with key consumer outcomes around safety and redress—how consumers get something fixed if it has gone wrong. It is also an important piece of work in terms of another part of our legislation, which is about increasing consumer confidence. One route to increasing consumer confidence is to give consumers certainty that if they know that there is a difficulty or a problem with a product that they purchase, there is a way to have that resolved and for them to be alerted around that. It is critical from a safety point of view, but it is also back to our earlier discussion about cost of living when consumers are short on money and have a lot of things and pressures on their budgets. Knowing that having some confidence that there is a problem with a product and that they can get some resolution to that is important. As Sam Smith said, there have obviously been a number of changes in the landscape around what already exists in terms of recall databases since the Consumer Scotland Act was passed in 2020, and the OPSS database was launched around the same time as Consumer Scotland was set up last year. Part of our work has been to scope out and to say what might we do that would be additive in this space. It is obviously really important. It is a public body that we think that what might we additionally do about the space that adds value to the work of others since it does not duplicate or waste resources in a way that is unnecessary, but ultimately achieves good outcomes for consumers. Engaging with the ESF and the part of the conference is a really good listening opportunity for us to begin to hear more from others about what we could do in this space, and that is going to be an important conversation for us to continue for the next year and really flesh out what those options could look like. As a consumer, I sat yesterday and tried to find a product recall database, and I found one, which is trading standards, and it highlighted 22 items that were listed yesterday from an air fryer, storage, foodstool to a battery charger. That was only three of 22 items that were listed yesterday. What the public need, in my view, is one point of contact. They do not want to know those 14 databases or how many it is. They want to go to one place, and it has got to be consumer-friendly. Two things I would say is that you mentioned other databases. Typing product recall into Google does not highlight those databases that you highlighted, and secondly, they are not consumer-friendly at all. If you are going to add value, that is the two areas that I would suggest you to add value, but the important thing is for consumers in Scotland is when you are going to decide what your plan of action is, whether it is links to other databases or your own database, and when is that going to happen? You are entirely right on the points that you raise. A key issue for consumers in this space and in many other areas around the landscape is simplicity. How do you find what you are looking for easily and how do you access it easily? We are working, as we say, with OPSS and others, and we will take that work over the next year. We do not have a timetable of it will be decided by X, but it is a significant priority and it is something that we are working on urgently. Before I bring in Maggie Chapman, I have a brief question about online sales. We are talking about product recall or about the investigations. As an organisation, is there a difference in how you approach online sales or does that bring any added complications to the system for consumers, or is it pretty straightforward? I will take that. It is one of those areas that we need to explore. I cannot give you an answer to that. It is definitely a factor. As we move towards a circular economy and as we move towards people using eBay and Gumtree and all those things, one of the key bits of functionality that a recall database needs to address is how can people easily and simply check what they are buying is not recalled. In a way, the online sales element of it is that people should be able to check easily. If you are buying from a established retailer, you would expect that they will have drawn from sale anything that should have been recalled. If you are buying on Gumtree or on eBay, that is much more problematic. There is certainly something in that space that I think is really important. Obviously, with the kind of reuse, recycle agenda, we would expect more of that type of activity, so that is something that a recall database needs to be able to do in terms of consumer accessibility. That is helpful, but in terms of online sales, apart from recall, just as a way of consumers buying things, whether it is services or whether it is an issue around tickets for events and all that type of things, about how consumers are treated in an online space. Is that something that you are looking at as an organisation? Is that different from the traditional way? It is something that we could look at as an organisation. I suppose that, as David mentioned at the beginning, we have, in some ways, the Consumer Scotland Act gifted us an incredibly large remit, so we cover the entire public, private and third sectors and consumer actions in that space. We have to obviously prioritise it because we are a small organisation, and we go through a process for the work programme each year. We did it for the first time this year, and we will learn from that and develop it more next year about drawing on the types of information, and Douglas can tell you some more about the prioritisation process. Online sales is certainly something that we can feed into that process and certainly could be part of it as we try and identify whether there is a particular issue or a particular need we should be investigating. Certainly there are no any issues in that space. One of the ones that has come up recently, for example, is dynamic pricing on websites. Sorry, I have a real issue with dynamic pricing. I tried to buy Bruce Springsteen tickets, and I was not very happy about that. Douglas, could you mention more about that? That is something that competition and markets authority have looked at. It is where the reserved and devolved data is crossover and what is in the capacity of Consumer Scotland to do, but that is an area of ticket pricing that has moved on to the mainstream ticket providers who are now, in my view, exploiting fans with dynamic pricing. We will move on to Maggie Chapman, and then I will take Michelle Thompson. I want to explore the issue around vulnerable customers and vulnerable consumers a little bit more. Obviously, it is the statutory focus of your work and you have very clearly identified it as a cross-cutting theme and spoken a little bit about some of the challenges or some of the issues. You said that you took a broad definition of what a vulnerable consumer was, and the act has the definitions around fewer or less favourable options, being at greater risk of harm. How do you define vulnerability? How are you identifying who may or may not be a vulnerable consumer? That question, as I said earlier, is a key part of our work. In terms of definitions, the definition that we use is very much built on the detailed and far-reaching definition that is in the legislation. It provides a really helpful intellectual framework to thinking through the challenges of consumers' and vulnerable circumstances, including consumers' characteristics or circumstances. That is an important distinction, and that leads you down a number of different areas to look at. In terms of definitions, we use the definition that is set out in the legislation. In terms of putting that into practice, the way that we like to think of that is that we are potentially or in reality, we are all consumers who, at some point or other, are likely to find ourselves dealing with a particular business practice or circumstance that puts us in a vulnerable that is almost a bedrock of why we have consumer legislation or why we have organisations like ourselves or competition markets, authority and others. That is not either a minority of consumers or a fixed minority. It can be a moving picture, if you like. That said, there are clearly a range of different representative types, if I can use that phrase, of consumers who find themselves in vulnerable circumstances for much of the time. That is where we want to develop a particular area of focus and make sure that that is systemically part of the whole organisation's activities. When we look at a cost of living issue or when we look at a net zero issue, the interests of consumers and vulnerable circumstances must be at the heart of doing that. That is why one of the first things that the board did was we asked Angela Morgan, who is one of our board members, to lead a process and put together a short-life working group of people with expertise in that area to help to develop her thinking and our approach to consumers and vulnerable circumstances. That is currently being further developed into an expert advisory group. That will be a mechanism that we will ensure that the whole organisation and the board will have access to expert advice in this particular area. That will also ensure that we can bring in not just expert advice but lived experience and the more immediate focus of what consumers and vulnerable circumstances are saying is in their interests based on the lived experience. That is the mechanism for doing that. As we will publish before the end of next month for a scoping study, we have undertaken a literature review on all things around consumers and vulnerable circumstances. As an example of that particular work, we will be taking forward some work on issues around consumers with disabilities that I find themselves involved in those circumstances. Douglass can give you a bit more detail on that. As David Morgan mentioned, we have been looking at the structure and the focus of the organisation. David Morgan spoke about that, but we are also looking at it in the particular markets that we work in and how the nature of vulnerability that people experience plays out differently in different markets. As David Morgan mentioned, we have imminent reports from our energy market work looking at the particular experience of disabled consumers during the energy crisis and some proposals and recommendations around what more can be done to support that group of consumers. We also have other work in our work programme this year to give you a flavour of some of how that plays out in practice in our post-op services work, where we have a plan piece of work this year looking at how to improve access to postal services for consumers who have no fixed address, so a different type of vulnerability that people are experiencing. We also have a plan piece of work to engage with the changes that are forthcoming around legal regulation in Scotland, and that takes a much broader definition or understanding of vulnerability, understanding that very many, if not all, consumers are likely to be in a position of some degree of vulnerability when they engage in legal services because it is often in a circumstance that may be upsetting or difficult for them, a particular point in their life where they are needing to engage that type of service, so there is a degree of vulnerability that very many consumers will experience in engaging with that service and so that is something that we think about as we take forward that work as well. Thank you for raising the legal services issue because I think that that is going to be increasingly something that we need to consider. You talked about vulnerability by characteristic or by circumstance, and I think that there are quite often intersecting compounding factors within that. Douglas, you mentioned that different people will have different vulnerabilities depending on the market that you are looking at, hence the importance of the cross market work that you do, but I am just wondering how you interpret intersecting vulnerabilities potentially and where that leads in terms of policy change or advice change or that kind of thing. I think that it is really good and a helpful question. It is something that we will continue to build up as we develop our work as an organisation. If we take, for example, the work that we are doing around the energy market at the moment and looking at the energy crisis over the past six months, the energy tracker survey that we commissioned and we run breaks down that demographic data by different groups of consumers and looks at the different experiences that they have been having in relation to the crisis. One of the things that we are doing and are looking to bring together is how does that intersection between consumers who are disabled and consumers who are on low income play out? That is something that we are going to do some more further analysis and work on to understand what that looks like. There are also in that particular context places where there are characteristics and circumstances interplay, so one of the things that we will be looking at in that piece of work is consumers who rely upon energy to charge medical equipment so that the circumstance of high energy costs has an intersection with the particular circumstances of the individual consumer and then bringing out some points in relation to that. I definitely want to reiterate the point that I was making earlier, that as a cross-sector consumer body only a year in setting up a programme, one of the things that we are really conscious of is as we set up individual pieces of work, making sure that we have the internal process in place that we can draw up and out the learning from different markets so that we understand how those intersectionalities play out in different markets and then make points and recommendations across those. The affordability piece that we are looking at across markets is an example of that. How do different markets decide which groups of consumers might benefit from reduced costs? How is that determined? Why might that vary between markets? What are the reasons for that? Actually, are there learnings that can be drawn between those different markets so that you are addressing that kind of intersectionality as you are taking a consumer first approach rather than a market first approach to answering those questions? No, that is really helpful and really interesting. I suppose that there is a key role there for some of the discussion that we had earlier on collaborations and partnership working and the connection between the expert advisory group and drawing and lived experience in that. For example, if advice director at Scotland would they come to you and say, look, we are seeing an increasing number of calls or queries or complaints or questions on this specific issue, would that then allow you to track into either the expert advisory group with lived experience or your wider policy? I think that that is very much the approach that we want to take to have those collaborations that can feed information to us and vice versa. I think that one of the things that has come through both the advisory group on consumers' available circumstances but also the consumer network I think is a strong appetite from the sectoral regulators and organisations that are perhaps more in the energy sector or the, I mentioned transport earlier on financial services, to recognise that the consumers that they are interacting with have a complex set of needs and it is probably they need to develop the mechanisms to be able to interpret those needs and act on them. I think that increasingly, for example, the FCA or seeing financial services as much broader, most scams relate to money in some way or other and most challenges that other regulators face, whether it is energy bills, as it was mentioned earlier, is in many ways a debt or a money issue that might escalate into wider financial services challenges or make people more vulnerable. I think that there is an appetite amongst the sectoral regulators and the sectoral interests to learn from that wider experience and to, as Douglas said, look at that from the consumer and vulnerable circumstances point of view as opposed to from their sectoral and business point of view. I think that that is very positive and we can greatly assist with that. I could add my picture up to tickets and the recall database that Gordon was. Just around refunding of money in credit with energy companies, I think that that is something that I have had an extraordinary number of pieces of casework about that and it just seems incredibly difficult. As to Maggie Chapman's point, Audit Scotland, as an organisation, consult with MSPs about their work programme. They do it through the audit committee and we ask for their views on the work programme. Is that something that Consumer Scotland would consider doing in the future? I would be very happy to do that. We put the work programme out for consultation in January. I think that we should have sent that to the committee, but we would be happy to find out perhaps a more either formal or informally way of doing that. That might be helpful. I think that MSPs have a lot of knowledge on areas where consumers have an approach through the committee in a similar way in which Audit Scotland might work. It is something that we are determined to be as an organisation that is evidence-led and we have touched on in discussions so far that we draw a lot of data and information from advice bodies. We have met MOUs in places of assistance advice with advice direct Scotland, close working relationships with the ombudsman services, for example, Home Energy Scotland and we are getting data and information from that type of body. Douglas Davies may wish to say more about that, but the type of caseload that you have will also be important in that as well as the economic analysis and the actual consumer research that we do. Our key thing is that we try to bring all of those things together in deciding what should be in the work programme, so it is a kind of triangulation. I do not think I have anything more to add on that other than to say that the more sources of evidence we have, the better. Very welcome to hear ideas for further sources of evidence on any of these issues. We meant to talk about the extra help unit earlier on, which is the second line, I suppose, of referral. Consumers cannot go directly to the extra help unit, they have to be referred to. I am almost certain that I would have to check that MSPs are one of the group of people who can refer cases to the extra help unit. Good morning. What do you think is the first thing that I noticed about you when you came into the room this morning? You're all men. Off the back of that, I thought, well, I'll just check how representative the organisation is. We have, as you know, 20 per cent of the people here today are women, and Susan is not at a chance to speak yet. I looked at the board to see that it is 25 per cent representation by women. Then I went and looked at the committees, which I can see the risk and audit committees are most active, of which it has 70 per cent men. Then I looked at your strategy and kind of searched that by sex, gender, women and so on. No mention, and I looked at your work plan. There were three mentions in the passing. My question to you is, are you completely or just mostly gender blind? I think that I'd be the first to acknowledge the attendance here today. Likewise, I acknowledge the gender imbalance on the board. We're acutely aware of that. A couple of points in response. Firstly, the Government will, shortly, with our support and my participation, start the recruitment of a fifth board member. The legislation allows for that full complement. Certainly, one of the things that we are actively seeking and will encourage is the applications from a wider, more diverse group than the current board. That's an opportunity and that's something that we'd want to work hard to achieve. In terms of the advisory groups, you're correct about the audit committee, in terms of the board members who are inevitably on that group. What we've actively sought to do under Angela's leadership in that group is to make sure that the short-life working group and the expert advisory group bring in a greater diversity into the organisation. That's something that's been a key part of our consideration of how we identify people to be a part of that group. We've brought in that wider diversity of view in an active way, which won't be visible from the report, so I'm not trying to say that you've picked up things wrongly. In terms of the conversations of staff, I've discussed that with Sue. Yes, Sue is the best place to give you a more detailed answer in terms of the structure and diversity of the organisation itself. I'll probably best cover that, and then perhaps we can come back to the point about the strategic plan and others, but can I pass to Sue to give you an update on the organisation? Yes. Thank you, David. As David said, we know that we have some issues, as I think most organisations do, in encouraging it to be a place that values diversity of thought and characteristics and all the value that that brings to the organisation. Our executive team identified that I'm the only female. On our next level down our senior leadership team, it flips. Again, we've got 86 per cent of females, so we have six females and one male. More broadly across the organisation, we're a roughly 53 per cent female to male. I think that diversity across all of the underrepresented groups and protected characteristics is equally important. We have monitoring systems in place to make sure that we, as an executive team and board, understand the make-up of our staff body. We can also constantly challenge ourselves. Are we, as an organisation, attracting a diverse range of applicants to our roles? We use the civil service recruitment service to manage all of our recruitment, and that's quite helpful. Obviously, it operates in line with the civil service principles and includes what's the sort of inclusive and accessible processes, including reasonable adjustments. We're signed up to the disability confidence scheme and other things like the guaranteed interview scheme for veterans. I think it's never something that we can sit back and say we've done it. We need to constantly focus on that and keep our minds on that as we go through the processes. Thank you for that. I'll stay on you for the time being. In terms of women's organisations specifically, given that often women are the most vulnerable of a variety of groups, and we talked about vulnerable consumers earlier, which specific women's organisations have you consulted with to get those unique insights? Therefore, what specific policies have you developed to make sure that you're targeting 51 per cent of the population effectively? Perhaps you could talk me through both of those. In terms of the policy making and the evidence I'll defer to Douglas and David, if they're involved in that evidence gathering, certain as a recruitment perspective, we've challenged ourselves to think, are we advertising in all the right places? I can see your title as director of policy. That's incorrect, I'm not sure. You're a director of operations, so there's a bit of a mix-up with the... All right, I do apologise. That's why I was wondering you were passing it back. You're not going to worry at all. From a recruitment perspective, organisations are certainly one that we would advertise in front of chief exec. We went to organisations like Good Moves that will appeal to a different range of people to perhaps using an executive search agency as well. However, certainly in terms of the research and policy work, I'll defer to Douglas and David for their expert views on that. Perhaps it's good to... Perhaps Sam to cover a bit more about the policy side, but just maybe complete the point about recruitment. Again, I fully acknowledge and I'm not seeking to deny some of the key points you made, but in terms of the development of the organisation and the build-up in terms of selection panels for the chief executive and forthcoming for the board, I think we have followed best practice and we've sought to encourage a wider range of applicants, as we possibly could. In terms of gender balance of the executive team, we were acutely aware of that in making the appointment. We've got further work to do in terms of both the board and making sure that the diversity issues are taken full and across the organisation, but it's something that we're acutely aware of. Certainly much further to go from my point of view. I wanted to move on and talk a little bit before I get on to my main bit about your research. In a similar theme, and David may be able to come into this, what consideration have you given thus far for how specifically your research in whatever area you're focusing on will make sure that it pulls in unique insights of women. For example, routinely disaggregating your data set by gender, I take it you're doing that as a matter of routine. That's heartening to know. I wanted to ask a few more questions about how your approach differs for small businesses, who I know you offer a service to. In some respects, the issues experienced by small business owners are similar to other consumers of light, and we've already touched on some of them today. Where it gets more interesting is where small business owners are considered to be of equal to large organisations and don't have the same power. I'm thinking in that example in issues of commercial contracts in financial banking, where a micro business is considered in law to have the same weight as that west, should there be anything. I'd like some insights of how the similarities and the service that you offer for small businesses and where you see some of the advocacy differences are. I'll maybe start with that and pass on to Douglas. First, we have started legislation here. The legislation gives us a definition of consumers, which includes small businesses. As you'll know, small businesses are generally anything up to about 49 employees. One of the key reasons included in that definition is often that small businesses will have similar behavioural characteristics to an individual consumer for exactly the reasons you identify, which is that they don't necessarily have the legal clout or the other aspects of big businesses to help them engage in. Their purchasing is often very similar as well. In essence, they are included in our approach to our work programme. I work, for example, on the affordability of postal services and parcel surcharging. It will be very relevant to small businesses, and that's thinking about their needs and their characteristics in that as part of that work programme. We will also particularly focus on them in terms of the review at the moment of the energy market, electricity market arrangements, and again, their requirements and their needs will be part of our approach to that. We also have, as you know, a levy role in the water industry in Scotland and the non-domestic activity in the water market in Scotland, which is carried out by licensed providers, licensed by the Water Industry Commission for Scotland. There are around about 150,000 non-household customers in the water industry in Scotland. We are playing an active role in the water industry commission in trying to develop a code of conduct. We are chairing a working group on that, in which the various sector players are involved in trying to develop a code of conduct for the non-domestic market, so that small businesses—and I love the businesses—can get the standards of service, billing and quality that they require. We are working actively with the Water Industry Commission on that, and we are looking to develop a market health check process alongside the code of conduct, so that the progress of the non-domestic companies and licensed providers can be scrutinised as we go. Douglas, is that something? I think that you've covered most of the points on that. To relate that to your question and thank you for that, I think that Sam describes as examples of where, as you put in your question, the experiences of small businesses are very similar to those of domestic consumers that our work covers. As you highlighted in your question, the market operates differently for small businesses and what are being a good example of that. We need to make a differing intervention to look at the needs of small businesses. Our approach in many ways has to think about what are the circumstances in that particular market and therefore what is the intervention that we are operating in and how well is that serving the needs of small businesses. At a slightly more collaborative or strategic level, we have talked a few times today about the consumer network for Scotland, which we have reconvened since we were established. Members of that could be the UK-wide regulators, so people like Offcom, Offgem, the FCA, the CMA, as well as advice agencies like Citizens Advice Scotland, Advice Direct Scotland and enforcement bodies such as Trading Standards Scotland and Local Trading Standards Services. One of the areas that we identified and noted was the gap in membership around some specific small business representation. We approached the Federation of Small Businesses and invited them to join the network. We are delighted that they have done so. In formulating that network, one of our key initial steps before we even had our first meeting was to have bilateral conversations with all members and to ask them to shape their priorities about what they would want the network to achieve. We are trying to bring other key stakeholders into conversation. That way is going to be a key part of our strategic approach. I just want to confirm my understanding before we move off this point. It is a consumer-first approach. Then you are thinking about where are the linkages, where they bring in similar issues for small businesses, and that is how small businesses are getting brought in rather than the other way round. Have I got that right? The way that we approach it is the consumer-first, but the consumers are individual consumers and small businesses. In essence, what we are seeking to do is to get organisations such as regulators, companies and governments to think of the products, services and markets that they operate in from the outside in. To look at them from a consumer perspective and say, is this working? If I am a consumer, how do I interact with this? How easy is it for me to engage with this? Does this provide me with the support that it would require? That is a really important task for us, which is that, in essence, thinking about consumers has been on a journey now for 60 years. JFK first talked about consumer rights in the 1960s. In the 70s, consumer protection was the zeitgeist, if you like, of consumer thinking. In the 1980s, it was consumer choice, and issues such as vulnerability have become much more to the fourth sense. One of the things that consumer Scotland can do, and the way that the Parliament has positioned us by giving us this remit across all three public, private and third sectors, is that it enables us almost to be in a position of being part of a move to a new evolution in consumer thinking. Having been playing a passive role in markets or services, it has been active in shaping them. Very much a key aspect for how we see our role is to go to consumers, carry out consumer research, look at the economic analysis and then go to regulators or to government or to companies and say, this is what you are doing looks like, this is what it is experienced like by consumers, and this is where we think you need to change. Absolutely, small businesses must be central to that. Two further bodies, as my last point, convener, have you consulted, is one of the financial ombusments services for SMEs? Although that said, they were largely considered not to have done a great job in representing SMEs against the power of the banks, but they should still be consulted. The other body, just to finish off, is women in enterprise, who have a unique data set of the challenges of women in business and women generally. That might be another useful body. I think that they are both very helpful suggestions. Good morning to the panel. The 2020 act creates the consumer duty—obviously a duty—on public bodies to have regard to the impact of strategic decisions on consumers. Today, ministers have not yet designated what those public bodies are. They have obviously consulted on that list, but could you give the committee an update on the development of the consumer due to the likely timescale for its implementation and say a bit more about what your role will be in overseeing that? I'll maybe start with that, and I'll pass the Douglas, because he's been involved in direct discussions with the Scottish Government on that. However, as you say, the Government has yet to designate on me, but I think that we're expecting that in the next few months. It's obviously up for me to set timescales for the Government. Our role is very much to do that, which is set out in legislation, which is to issue guidance to public bodies on the way that will operate. There are obviously considerations in that for us in the sense of we will issue that guidance. We've been through a process and we've had somebody scoping out how that should work, and we've been looking at other similar duties such as the Ferris Scotland duty and how the guidance on that has been developed and how public bodies have needed the support or the advice and the help that public bodies have needed to implement that. We've got a context for us to develop that guidance in, so we're not making it up from nowhere. We're taking a evidently and considered-led approach to that. We will shortly begin developing that and writing that up. As part of that process, we will be engaging with some of the public bodies concerned. Douglas, do you want to add some more? Yes, thanks. I think that you've covered most of the key points. I think that the key thing for us is thinking about how we can affect our role most efficiently effectively to enable public bodies to deploy the consumer duty in a way that will help to improve outcomes for consumers. Our role as a set out in the Consumer Scotland Act is that we may provide guidance to public bodies to help them to do that. A lot of our thinking that we have done today has been to understand what, if we are providing guidance, what are the types of guidance that are likely to be most useful to public bodies when taking those decisions. As part of the detailed scoping work that we have been undertaking that Sam mentioned, we have been looking at how the implementation of other related or relevant duties has worked in practice, so things like the Fairer Scotland duty. I have spoken to those who have been involved in that process to understand how they have approached the lessons that they have learned, things that they would recommend, things that they would suggest doing differently. One of the key things that we are thinking about as we approach the development of the guidance is how do we really involve public bodies in that process so that we are testing as we develop the drafts to make sure that this is something that will work for them, that will be useful for them. We want to consult widely on that guidance once we have developed drafts already in discussion with the public bodies who will be applying it, and then refine and improve that so that it is really focused on how do we help the guidance to enable public bodies to achieve a better outcomes for consumers. We have been really thoughtful about how do we make the guidance as useful and as practical as possible for public bodies, recognising the range of other questions and challenges and pressures that they already have upon their time and resources when taking strategic decisions. Is that guidance likely to be statutory guidance? Is it guidance that is set in statute as a statutory function of us to provide that guidance? The statutory duty is for you to provide that guidance, but I am just one on how enforceable that specific guidance will be. There is a very much of difference there. We will issue guidance. It has to be approved by ministers. The duty is to have regard to the interests of consumers in taking strategic decisions. We do not have an enforcement role in that space. That would be very much in the sense that public bodies will need to—if they are not following the guidance or if there is a view that the guidance is not being followed appropriately, they will need to justify that. It would be very much that Parliament, Government and ourselves will collectively make it clear that the public bodies should be expected to apply that. We could have a long debate about having regard for it in Scots law. How do you as a body though avoid this being a tick box exercise? I think that you have identified very much the process that we are going through. A duty or an obligation on public bodies to complete a tick box exercise, as you called it, we do not think that that is what the aspiration or the ambition of this actually is. I do not think that many public bodies would welcome having to complete something like that. There is not a mechanism for enforcement set out in the legislation or we would not have the power for enforcement. However, if we go through a process of consulting on the meaning of a consumer duty, set out guidance on how organisations should respond to it and make that something that is in tune with best practice across public bodies, we are aiming to use our influence such that others can act even if it is an informal sense to be an enforcement or an encourager of public organisations to make sure that they respond to it. There is an awful lot that we can do without formal enforcement powers. Will you report on the implementation of that duty? I am not going to say name and shame people that are failing to do it, but will you report on how effective that is being? Presumably that will be one way to encourage stronger enforcement. The legislation does not specify that, but we would welcome a role if we are the organisation that is providing guidance to other organisations and we want to see that as a constructive role so that we can help to develop organisations to think through those issues. We would likewise welcome a role to be monitoring the implementation of that duty and to report on it. It is not specified in the legislation and we have not been asked to do that by the Government as of yet, but we are there to ask that we would welcome doing that. I think that another point that builds on your question that I would be keen to make is that consumer duty has the potential to be a really important addition to the public service landscape in Scotland. As Douglas Douglas has said, we need to make sure that people understand how that fits with the fair of Scotland duty and the duty of best value that local government has. How they interrelate is important and I would expect the senior leadership of public bodies to want answers to those questions and that is one of the things that the guidance will cover. Very much building on what we have discussed this morning about the broad definition of consumers, whether it is consumers of vulnerable circumstances, whether it is small businesses, encouraging and empowering public bodies to ensure that, in their strategic decisions, they are really thinking through how their services and strategic decisions are impacting on small businesses, a variety of different consumers, is a really powerful discipline and enabler. If that is done right, we think that it can be a really major enhancement and for the development to ensure effective public service reform and public services in Scotland. On the points that have been made there, Sam, you said that the consumer Scotland has a large remit, so you have to prioritise. Is the remit too large? Is it too broad? I think that you could look at that in two ways. It is certainly a very broad remit and we do have to prioritise, but I think that the breadth of that remit actually gives us real advantages because consumers operate in the private sector and the public sector and the third sector, they are by energy, they are by water, they go shopping for food and all of these things intersect. Certainly, if you think about energy policy, for example, there is a lot of public policy in that space in terms of energy efficiency, in terms of development of regulation, market issues in terms of companies and regulation and actually us being able to have a picture of how consumers are able to journey through that and how all of those different aspects affect consumers is really important because, as I say, there is an overarching perspective of that. No, I do not think that the remit is too broad, but I do think that it means that we have to be very clear about how we prioritise because we have touched on consumer duty, we have touched on investigations, we have touched on recall. In addition to the function of consumer advocacy and advice, which we are doing a lot of research economic analysis, how we bring all those things together is really key and our approach is to build and develop and grow. We are not running at this really, really fast, we want to get this right, we are taking a very considerate approach to the way we develop building our evidence base and that evidence base will help us to prioritise. We will be able to identify the key issues that need to be investigated. There will always be an element of judgment in that and we hope that our expertise is that develops and grows will help us to reach those decisions. You are talking about growing there and obviously given the circumstance of how there is demand in a wide variety of areas, how do you see that growth happening? How do you think you will resource it budget wise, people wise? Do you see that being an increasing burden on how you do things? I think that I will be a very brave person to say at this point that we would expect more funding given the current public finance context. We have funding about 2.4 million from the Scottish Government and we also have about 1.3 million from various levies and that is sufficient for where we are, I suppose. As we talked about the investigations function, that should enable us to carry out that baseline of investigations. If that was to grow in the future, we may need more funding or take a decision that we do less of something else. Similarly to the consumer duty, we have some baseline resource for that. If that grows into a very, very large task, that might be different if we carry on getting into that evaluation and monitoring space as well. There are other areas, for example, in the current energy security bill before Westminster. There is the creation of a heat networks levy. If we were to move into that space, of course, that would be another area where we would have some additional funding. I think that we may grow. I do not expect massive growth, but it is certainly something that the more we know about our role, the more we can make sure that we are growing appropriately and not growing for the sake of growing. There is clearly an important factor here in achieving best value for the public person. One of the concerns when we were considering this bill going through was the potential for duplication areas where, as my colleague Graham talked about, there was already advice being given my impact on that. Have you seen a contraction in other parts of the sector, the advice sector, where some of their responsibilities are now with you? How is that going to impact on the wider sector? We are deliberately, for the very reasons that you say, there are lots of other bodies, advice, direct Scotland, systems advice Scotland—we have mentioned some of them today—home energy Scotland who provide advice and information. We have taken the view, following consultation in our interim strategic plan, that we should not duplicate that work. We should not get into direct advice provision to consumers. There are other bodies that do that very effectively. We will try and work with them to ensure that consumers are getting the information, support and advice that they need, identify any gaps and look at where we can help the sector to collaborate to improve the quality of advice, for example. That is one of the outcomes of the network we have. Are you confident that you have brought something new to the sector, what you offered in one year and looking forward to offer something new and different that would not have been there without yourselves? Absolutely. I think that we are becoming a stastry focal point. We have the stastry authority in the reach across the sectors to bring together information data. We have developed a very new data unit—the analysis unit, the analysis research and investigations unit and directorate—which is bringing economic analysis into this space really thoroughly for the first time and making sure that we have that expertise in-house so that we can apply it to issues that we need as and when they come up. We have been doing the same with consumer research and data intelligence and analysis. I know that you are not a public facing, but public awareness is important. Do you think that there is a public awareness of the organisation and understanding of the role that you do? Do you get that contact from individuals, which you then have to put to other people? Is there still it? Gordon talked about the multiplication of databases. Is there an understanding of what you offer and how you offer that for them? I think that we are early days in terms of public understanding. I think that the recall deep database is a very interesting point because depending on how we develop that, that may become a point of public contact or public focus. We also support a number of other organisations to engage with the public. For example, we funded at the end of last year the Trading Standards Scams Awareness campaign, which is currently out and about and there are videos and adverts on that. We also support and fund the Citizens Advice Scotland's big energy network and the big energy winter campaign, for example. We are in that space, but we are not the front line. However, the recall aspect might be different. I am a substitute member of the committee, and I might be less familiar with some of those than some of my colleagues. However, it is interesting that, having listened to the questions, I am in some of the same space. The particular question that I was going to ask you was, if you had not existed for the last year, what would the difference be? I am also open to hearing from you that that is an unfair question because I should really be waiting for 10 years and then maybe saying what difference have you made. Is that an unfair question? No, it is not an unfair question. It is a question that comes with a qualified response, might be a way of putting it. I have been involved in various different consumer roles for a while and often change does take time. Five or six years ago, I was involved in some research around the way consumers are able to access the vulnerable consumer registers that are operated by organisations such as Scottish Water or the energy companies. They have lists of vulnerable consumers that are contacting emergencies or need to provide particular support to them. The process for getting registered is quite complex. One of the recommendations from that piece of research was that there should be a single point of registration across all the different utility companies so that consumers only had to register as a vulnerable consumer once. That was actually really well received by the different sectors, by the Scottish Government at the time, but it took only in the last couple of years that that register, that website exists. It can take time to achieve change. I think that you can also see in some of the work that we have done this year that we have begun to achieve change. Our input into the off-gen code, for example, and prepayment meters is an example of that. We have also had some early positive signs that some of the issues that we have been advocating for in terms of the way consumers and debt in the water sector are being treated will be addressed, but that is not yet finalised. We can see that we are starting to make quite a significant impact, but that will grow over time. I hope that in a year's time we will be able to point to a lot more so that we should be able to point to the fact that we have an investigation under way. We will be publishing in the next small number of months our first significant net zero research, for example, and we very much want to be in the space in there where the net zero, in essence, consumers are essential to the net zero transition because so much of it now is about consumer behaviour and the way that people interact with their energy systems, homes, transport, food and choices that people make. For the net zero transition to succeed, it needs to be easy and accessible for consumers to engage in and they need to support the information that they require to do that. A key role for us, and I hope that you will start to see that developing during the next year and some of the research that we will publish in that space. As I understand it, you are working on having a performance measurement framework and we are going to see that in the autumn, is that the case? Really, that will be when we can start measuring how you are doing it. Is that fair? Indeed. I think that that is right. As Sam Scott rightly said, we are confident that we are making an impact already, but there is clearly more to come. I think that we have set out a number of those areas this morning. One of those areas is publication of a more detailed set of key performance indicators and measures of our impact. I think that if you spend a bit of time thinking about measuring the impact of an advocacy organisation, it is not entirely straightforward, which is why we are taking advice. The citizens advice can say that we have saved people 21 million this year because here is a definite figure. We have dealt with ex-phone calls and we have dealt with this. We probably do not have their powerful and important measures, but we do feel that we are making that impact. There are mechanisms for measuring that impact, which is why we are taking forward that approach. I think that the additional thing that I would add is that, just to think through your point about 10 years, the Parliament rightly set us an objective sooner than that in that one of the parts of the legislation is that there will be a formal performance review of how we have performed and what our impact has been after three years. It is in the legislation that we should commission and procure an independent assessment of our performance. Partly because of that, we would be doing it anyway. We want to be in a position that, after that three-year period, as in when an independent assessment is done, it can actually evidence and document the impact that we have had. That is perhaps the horizons that we are thinking about building on our initial impact. Alongside that, something that we have not had the chance to mention this morning is that the legislation also sets out that we will publish what is described as a consumer welfare report, which we are describing almost as a state-of-the-nation report about the experience of consumers in Scotland, what the challenges are and what the evidence is of whether the situation is getting better or worse. That will very much be the culmination of much of the research and evidence work that we are taking forward and that is on a similar timetable. In part, we have spent a lot of time creating the organisation and making this initial impact, but we very much have that three-year horizon of a performance report and a consumer welfare report to make sure that we are absolutely clear that we are making an impact on that timetable. I am a great believer and we take long-term views and things, not just short-term. I mean, I was looking at your website and you have done these a couple of reports, I think, on the cost of energy and how that is impacting. I just feel as if that is quite a crowded space. I mean, there are so many people commenting on the cost of living and the price of energy. Like my colleague, Gordon MacDonald, I was looking on Google, so I looked for pre-payment metres Scotland and, just under that, I got off-gem, I got citizen's advice, I got money supermarket, I got end-fuel poverty coalition, I've got which magazine which comes into me every month. It just seems an incredibly crowded space. Maybe I should say that I've got a pre-payment metre, I think a pre-payment meter is a good thing, it helps people budget when there are unlimited incomes, which is why I started with it, but I mean, I appreciate you've been pushing to get it dealt more fairly. People don't pay more, but, I mean, just my colleague, Anne McLaughlin, just so many people are in that space, I'm struggling to see what you are adding to that. So, I think you've raised a useful and important point and it goes, I think, to stress a couple of things. The first switch is that, well, I should say that in terms of energy, obviously, we have specifically funded work in the energy space and the energy consumer space through the living and we have a statutory role in that regard. But it's very much a space in which we work jointly, we need an evidence base and actually, as you identify, there are a number of organisations, CAS, which, and we'd actually draw evidence from all of those in developing our reports and that's one of the things that we did in the Scottish Energy Insights group, which is that we drew evidence from all of those organisations and we became the focal point for some of that work. It also goes to the point that, effectively, Jamie was making about duplication. It isn't in the interests of consumers for us to duplicate things that have been done elsewhere to a perfectly adequate role and we are very mindful of that in setting our work programme. In some of the issues that we have been raised this morning, we are aware of other people doing some of that work. One of the criteria in our prioritisation framework is, are there other people in this space? Is there something that we can usefully add or not? It's certainly one of those things that we take into consideration. Thank you very much. That brings us to the end of this morning's session. I'd like to thank all the witnesses for the evidence that they have provided us with. I'm sure that the first of possibly more sessions we'll have together. Thank you for your time this morning. I will now move into private session and briefly suspend the meeting.