Scottish Parliament, 26 June 2019

303 contributions from 74 members. The official report.

Fuel Poverty

Gil Paterson (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

1. To ask the Scottish Government how it is tackling fuel poverty. (S5O-03431)

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Our Fuel Poverty (Targets, Definition and Strategy) (Scotland) Bill, which passed stage 3 earlier this month with unanimous support from across the chamber, requires us to publish a strategy for tackling fuel poverty that will set out the approach to tackling the four drivers of fuel poverty: use of energy, energy efficiency, income and energy prices.

We are already making progress. The latest figures show that Scotland’s fuel poverty rate was at its lowest since 2005-06, and we are continuing to invest significantly to support households. By the end of 2021, we will have allocated over £1 billion since 2009 to make homes warmer and cheaper to heat. That money has attracted hundreds of millions of pounds more in energy company contributions and funding from local authorities, landlords and individual householders. Through our award-winning home energy Scotland service, we are providing households with advice and support including benefits checks and energy supplier switching, where appropriate.

Gil Paterson (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

I thank the minister for that very full answer.

Will the minister join me in congratulating Knowes Housing Association, in Faifley, Clydebank, which received a visit from the board of the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets this week in recognition of its exceptional work in reducing poverty and embracing the use of renewables? It has installed solar roof panels on most of its properties.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I

am delighted to join Gil Paterson in congratulating Knowes Housing Association on the great work that it has done in helping its tenants to pay less for their energy and in tackling climate change. It has been ahead of the game in its use of solar energy to decarbonise and reduce bills for its tenants, and I am glad that that is being recognised.

Along with confirmation of our new energy efficiency standard for social housing, details were provided earlier today on the second round of our decarbonisation fund. A further £3.5 million is available to social landlords to invest in projects that will improve energy efficiency and reduce the carbon footprint of buildings. Those are projects with outcomes just like those that Mr Paterson mentioned in relation to Knowes Housing Association.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The £1 billion of investment that the minister mentioned is not to be scoffed at. However, the Existing Homes Alliance Scotland has stated that the Government’s committed funding

“falls well short of what is required for a National Infrastructure Priority, and to meet climate change and fuel poverty targets.”

I acknowledge the investment that has been made, but does the minister accept that, if we are going to tackle fuel poverty, we need to see much greater investment?

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

As Mr Rowley says, £1 billion is not to be sniffed at. We need to use all the resources at our disposal to get the biggest bang for our buck in energy efficiency. I am very pleased that, today, we have announced another £3.5 million for decarbonisation, which will be available to social housing landlords.

This is not just about the amount of money that the Government is spending; it is also about using money from other sources to get the best possible outcomes for energy efficiency not just in the domestic sector but in the commercial sector.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

As the minister will be aware, I warmly welcome the passing of the Fuel Poverty (Targets, Definition and Strategy) (Scotland) Bill. Achieving its ambitions will, of course, be driven very much by the fuel poverty strategy. Will the minister update Parliament on the timing of the completion of that strategy? Will he explain how Government resources and resources that are leveraged in will be used to target extreme fuel poverty in remote and rural and island areas?

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

We will publish the fuel poverty strategy in 2020, and it will set out how we will work towards our target by taking actions across all four drivers of fuel poverty. In the meantime, we will continue to provide significant levels of support through our home energy efficiency programmes. As Mr McArthur is well aware, Orkney and the islands benefit to a greater degree per head of population than anywhere else through those programmes, and rightly so. We do not have to wait until the strategy per se is in place. As we move forward, we need to look at how we target those who are in extreme fuel poverty, as is outlined in the bill as passed, to ensure that folks such as Mr McArthur’s constituents benefit as soon as possible from the resourcing to tackle that.

Empty Homes

Alison Johnstone (Green, Lothian)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to reduce the number of empty homes. (S5O-03432)

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Long-term empty homes are a wasted resource at a time when we need more homes across Scotland. We will therefore continue to fund the work of the Scottish empty homes partnership with more than £1.2 million across three years to provide advice and support. Last year, the partnership brought 1,128 homes back into use, which was a rise of more than 300, thanks to the work of dedicated empty homes officers. It is essential that all local authorities see and adopt the benefits of that approach.

More can be done. We are reviewing our empty homes policy to maximise the number of homes that are brought back into use. In that review, I will carefully consider the Local Government and Communities Committee’s inquiry into empty homes.

Alison Johnstone (Green, Lothian)

Since 2010, only 4,340 homes have been brought back into use. At the current rate of progress, we will have to wait 173 years until all the empty homes in Scotland are in use. Local authorities have a role, but surely the minister must recognise that national leadership is key, that legislation might be required and that current funding may be insufficient to address the fact that more than 83,000 homes in Scotland lie empty and unused while we have a homelessness crisis.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

As I said in my initial answer, 1,128 homes were brought back into use last year thanks to the successful partnership that the Government has with Shelter Scotland and local authorities. I pay tribute to Shaheena Din, who has been at the forefront in dealing with the issue. My disappointment lies with local authorities that have yet to bring empty homes officers into play. In Ms Johnstone’s region, Lothian, we have seen little progress being made by councils. The councils that have made the investment in empty homes officers, from Dumfries and Galloway to Orkney, are seeing huge benefits from their work. I appeal to all local authorities to put in place empty homes officers.

In terms of national versus local responsibility—

Kenneth Macintosh (Labour, West Scotland)

Succinctly, please, minister.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

We will look at national versus local responsibility during the review, and I will continue to keep the Parliament updated.

Local Authorities (Engagement with Community Councils)

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to encourage local authorities to engage with community councils. (S5O-03433)

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Local authorities have statutory oversight of community councils under the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 and are responsible for engaging with the community councils in their local areas. To support that work, the Scottish Government engages collaboratively with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Improvement Service and community council liaison officers to support community councils and ensure that their voices are heard.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

In my constituency, East Dunbartonshire Council rarely engages with community councils, and their membership is declining in several areas due to the perception that community councils are not heard. Does the minister agree that local authorities should make every effort to work with community councils, which are representatives of grass-roots matters in every constituency, and that community councils should be valued much more than they are?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I am aware of some of the local issues in Strathkelvin and Bearsden, but I understand that East Dunbartonshire Council’s community planning team is working with its community councils to resolve some of those issues. I agree that community councils have a really important part to play in local democracy—they bridge the gap between local authorities and communities and help to make sure that public bodies are aware of the opinions and needs of the communities that they represent.

As I said, local authorities have statutory oversight of their community councils and are also required to consult community councils about planning applications and licensing matters, so community councils are absolutely fundamental for local democracy. I hope that the community planning team helps to resolve some of the frustrations that Rona Mackay described. If she requires it, I am happy to engage with her further on the matter and, more generally, on the local governance review to make sure that we hear the voices of community councils through that consultation work.

Fife Council (Town Centre Regeneration)

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with Fife Council on the action that it is taking to regenerate town centres across Fife. (S5O-03434)

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The Scottish Government has regular discussions with Fife Council about what action it is taking to regenerate town centres across Fife. That has included its recent allocation of town centre fund investment of £4.3 million across towns in the authority area.

We want our towns and town centres to be vibrant, creative, enterprising and accessible. It is essential that we support town centres to become more diverse and sustainable, as they face the challenge of changing and evolving retail patterns. We will invest to deliver inclusive growth so that town and neighbourhood centres can be thriving places for communities to live in, work in and enjoy.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

Several funds are available to councils and communities to be used for community projects, regeneration and conversion of retail properties to living accommodation. Will the cabinet secretary clarify whether any thought has been given to a multiyear central fund that would encompass all those initiatives, and which would include capital and revenue elements?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I absolutely agree about the importance of multiyear funding in offering security to organisations. That is the approach that we have taken through our new investing in communities fund. I am happy to engage with David Torrance on his ideas for the funding model that he described, and to explore imaginative ways of converting retail properties into living accommodation. We understand that the multiyear funding model for communities is absolutely essential. Although there are no plans for a model such as he described, I am certainly happy to take on board his ideas and to build on the work that we have done through the investing in communities fund.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

In its report, “Hollow high streets: empty council owned commercial properties”, the TaxPayers Alliance found that Scotland has 1,146 “vacant council-owned commercial properties” that cost £31.8 million to maintain. What measures will the Scottish Government put in place to encourage councils to bring those properties back into use, so that they can stop haemorrhaging precious funds that they require, because that is the highest number in any region of the United Kingdom?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

We continue to work and engage with local authorities in partnership. I have outlined some of the funding that we have given to local authorities through the town centre fund investment.

Ultimately, I think that we agree across all the political parties that we want our town centres to be vibrant. If there are things that we can do to ensure that gap sites in town centres can be filled, we will absolutely continue to have that engagement. We know that everyone, regardless of where they are in the country, wants their high streets to be vibrant, flourishing places for people to enjoy and spend their money in, in order to create the good places in which we want to live.

On top of the town centre fund that I outlined are a huge number of other funding streams that we work with local authorities on delivering. There is the regeneration capital grant fund and a whole host of other means by which we want to ensure that we have good places and spaces to live in.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Business improvement districts are needed to regenerate our town centres, but we see too many BIDs being controlled by big businesses that are making controversial decisions

on projects such as the landtrain in Stirling or, in the case of Dunfermline, shutting down the bid completely.

Does the minister share my concern that BIDs do not always act in the wider community interest? What reforms to membership can be put in place to make them more genuinely representative of the communities that they serve?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I am aware of some of the BID issues in the Mid Scotland and Fife region. However, we should not look at BIDs in the negative way in which Mark Ruskell has contextualised them. BIDs continue to be key platforms for promoting local economic development, which is why we continue to support the good work that is moving forward.

Work is also being done on evolving the BID model to ensure a much more community-based focus, so that the views of people and businesses in a district can be fully represented. There are lots of great examples of people, communities and businesses working together to ensure that we create the thriving town centres that we all want across the country.

Mark Ruskell can write to me with ideas that he would like to take forward as we further evolve the BID model. We want to ensure that we receive representative viewpoints through the BID process and support people who continue to champion BIDs in town centres across the country, so that we create flourishing and vibrant town centres.

Population Shift (Housing)

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of reports of a shift in the population from the west coast to the east over the next few years to access better housing. (S5O-03435)

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The Scottish Government has established a ministerial task group to consider Scotland’s future population challenges, and to develop new solutions to address demographic and population change. The task group will look at a number of factors, including housing.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The cabinet secretary will know about the forecast long-term depopulation trend for Argyll and Bute. Given that the recently announced task group, which the cabinet secretary just mentioned, is made up of only Scottish ministers, will she reassure members that the group will consult widely and seek expert external opinion?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I am glad that Donald Cameron welcomes the fact that we are looking at the issue that he described. He is right to point out population movement from the west to the east.

The task group is chaired by Fiona Hyslop. I am sure that, as it evolves, it will ensure that people and organisations can contribute their thoughts and views. The work that Fiona Hyslop is doing is aligned with the work that I am taking forward on developing a new housing system after 2021.

We will ensure that we are very consultative. We have already engaged with a huge number of expert groups and with the whole housing system, in its fullest sense. If Donald Cameron wants to raise particular issues in relation to the area that he represents that he thinks should be fundamental to the housing review, he should get in touch with me. I am happy to engage with him to ensure that our housing system works for Scotland in its widest sense, and that it addresses population issues such as he has articulated.

Inverclyde Council (Housing)

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

6. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met Inverclyde Council to discuss housing provision. (S5O-03436)

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Scottish Government officials’ last meeting with Inverclyde Council to discuss housing provision was on 5 June. Scottish Government officials meet local authorities regularly throughout the year to discuss housing provision.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

Does the minister agree that, given that there is already strain on local infrastructure, as well as genuine safety concerns from the public, Inverclyde Council should reconsider its local development plan proposals to grind Kirn Drive, George Road and Larkfield Road to a halt? I would be more than happy to show the minister the proposals, if he wishes to visit Inverclyde in the summer.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Given that Inverclyde Council’s local development plan is before Scottish ministers, it would be inappropriate for me to comment on it. However, generally speaking, Scottish planning policy states that development should be aligned with transport infrastructure, and plans and decisions should

“take account of the implications of development proposals on traffic, patterns of travel and road safety.”

Third Sector (Public Services Contracts)

Iain Gray (Labour, East Lothian)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the third sector regarding the impact on it of the findings of the report, “Handing Back Contracts: Exploring the rising trend in third sector provider withdrawal from the social care market”, and its ability to contract a range of public services from local authorities. (S5O-03437)

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

We know that change is needed in social care support. That is why, on 12 June, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport launched a national programme with Councillor Currie, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities’ spokesperson for health and social care, to support local reform of social care support. The programme is being jointly led with COSLA, whose members are responsible for delivering and procuring those vital public services.

The Scottish Government is in regular dialogue with the Coalition of Care and Support Providers in Scotland and Scottish Care on a range of issues, including contracting, and they have had a central role in shaping the work that is required to improve the support and care that people require.

Iain Gray (Labour, East Lothian)

It is good to talk, but perhaps the cabinet secretary will tell us exactly what measures the Government has in mind to address that growing trend, which threatens the sustainability of the social care model around our country.

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

It is good to talk, but the Government is absolutely not just about talking. We have followed reform of social care with coherent action. Integration authorities manage £9 billion of funding that was previously managed separately by health boards and councils. We have increased our package of investment in social care and integration so that it exceeds £700 million, which underlines our commitment to supporting older people and disabled people, and supports the commitment for the living wage to be paid.

We are committed to attracting and retaining the right people, and to raising the status of social care as a profession. I could go on to list a host of other actions that the Government has taken to support social care and the integration process, which are backed not just by warm words but by significant investment and significant progress.

The Presiding Officer

I will squeeze in question 8.

Council Services (Use of Reserves)

Alison Harris (Conservative, Central Scotland)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to “Local Government Revenue Provision Outturns and Budget Estimates”, which records councils using reserves to keep services running. (S5O-03438)

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The Scottish Government has provided local government with a real-terms funding increase in 2018-19 and 2019-20. We welcome the fact that that is reflected in the provisional outturns and budget estimates, which confirm that net revenue spending by local authorities increased by £292 million—or 2.4 per cent—in 2018-19. Net revenue and capital budget estimates have also increased by £497 million and £730 million respectively in 2019-20. Decisions to use reserves are—rightly—councils’ responsibility to take, when it is prudent and sustainable to do so.

Alison Harris (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I think that we can all agree that, if councils have to spend from their reserves to provide everyday services, something is wrong. What assistance will the cabinet secretary offer local authorities to ensure that everyday services are funded through sustainable means and not from reserves?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

How it manages its day-to-day business and allocate its resources best is up to each local authority. The best advice that I can give to local authorities is that at least it was this Government, and not one that is led by Alison Harris’s party, that took the budget spending decisions. If we had followed the Conservatives’ tax plans, Falkirk Council’s budget, for instance, would be £14.4 million less. The Government’s decisions are going a long way to support the policies and processes of local authorities across the country, which are better off for it.

Devolved Benefits (Face-to-face Assessments)

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what progress has been made in developing new face-to-face assessments for new devolved benefits. (S5O-03439)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The consultation on disability assistance in Scotland, which closed on 28 May, set out the Scottish Government’s proposals on face-to-face assessments. The process of designing Social Security Scotland’s assessment service is under way and will be shaped by consultation analysis, engagement with experience panels and input from stakeholders.

We are committed to providing individuals with person-centred assessments that are delivered by suitably qualified assessors. Individuals will have greater choice and control over their assessment and will be treated with dignity, fairness and respect throughout.

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

Will the Scottish Government give an assurance that the recruitment of mental health specialists for face-to-face assessments will not adversely impact on recruitment streams for other policy areas that require such specialists? Will every effort be made to avoid any such adverse impacts?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

As we move forward with our workforce planning for Social Security Scotland and for the assessments, we are mindful of the need to work not just for social security but across the Government and of the need to discuss such matters with the health directorate and with professional bodies, such as those for medicine. That work continues and I assure John Scott that we will be mindful of such issues as we undertake the final phases of planning for the disability assistance packages.

Maureen Watt (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen South and North Kincardine)

Many of us are aware of the often cruel and unnecessary assessments that the Department for Work and Pensions carries out. We have a chance to do things differently in Scotland with our new social security powers. Will the cabinet secretary confirm that, when assessments are needed, they will be delivered through Social Security Scotland and never through the private sector? Will assessments be flexible and be offered at a time and in a place that suit claimants?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I am happy to confirm again that the assessments and any case management will be delivered by Social Security Scotland and that there will be no role for the private sector in that. It is very important that, as we develop our system, we listen to the feedback from those who have gone through the United Kingdom system. They describe it as having created stress and trauma sometimes for those who are the most vulnerable in our society. That is exactly why we have to listen to that feedback and ensure that we do not repeat the same problems in our system. We are very clear that we will have a system that will allow people to be seen at a place and time that is convenient for them. That is the very least that they can hope for, but I reiterate that we are determined to reduce significantly the requirement for face-to-face assessments by using our case managers to ensure that we get the right decision with the right information before having to get to a face-to-face assessment at all.

Disability Assistance (Children and Young People)

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what progress it is making with preparing to commence the delivery of disability assistance for children and young people. (S5O-03440)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We have made significant progress with the preparations for commencing the delivery of disability assistance for children and young people and are on track to deliver by the summer of next year, in line with our commitments. The development of the application process is well under way and it is being designed with the people of Scotland who are engaging in testing our designs on a frequent basis to ensure that it is as easy as possible for people to apply for disability assistance in Scotland.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The motability scheme currently provides people who have disabilities with more independence and employability opportunities and it reduces social isolation. If we are creating an equivalent Scottish motability scheme, what plans are in place to ensure that there will be the necessary numbers of cars, scooters or powered wheelchairs in place for those who need them?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Murdo Fraser has raised a very important issue and I am pleased to have the opportunity to provide reassurance on that aspect. We are ensuring that the motability assistance that is known through the United Kingdom system will be available. It is important that we do that, because the system has, as Murdo Fraser detailed, significant positive benefits for the individuals involved. We need to ensure that the same level of service that those people have been used to under the motability system is available to them once we have the devolution of the disability assistance benefit in Scotland. I hope that that provides Murdo Fraser and members in the chamber with some reassurance that we are determined to provide that service as the benefits are devolved.

Universal Credit (Payment of Housing Element)

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the Social Security Committee’s recommendation that the housing element of universal credit should be paid directly to a landlord by default, with the option for a tenant to opt out. (S5O-03441)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

As part of the development of the universal credit Scottish choices in 2017, we worked directly with people in receipt of universal credit. The feedback from that was that people wished to have a choice about whether or not to have the housing costs in their universal credit award paid directly to their landlord. The evidence so far shows that almost 50 per cent of the people who have been offered the choices have taken up one or both. In other words, they have decided for themselves whether it works better for them to have their housing costs paid directly to their landlord.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

The cabinet secretary will be aware that the Scottish Association of Landlords welcomed the report last week and, in particular, backed the move to pay the housing element directly to landlords as the default. The cabinet secretary knows that that can reduce the risk for landlords and can secure tenancies by preventing arrears, and that it was backed overwhelmingly by those who gave evidence to the Social Security Committee and by the committee itself. Will the cabinet secretary support that recommendation and commit to allowing the money to go straight to landlords to ensure that Scotland’s powers are used to the maximum effect to support and protect tenants?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I appreciate where Jackie Baillie is coming from on the issue. However, as I said in my original answer, when we asked people who are directly in receipt of universal credit what they wanted to happen, they asked to have the choice. It is important that, as we build a system that works for the people who receive a service, their asks and requests are taken on board. I fully appreciate that the Scottish Association of Landlords and others, including the Social Security Committee, have asked us to look at paying the money directly to landlords.

As I said to the committee when the Scottish Government’s response was being produced, it is important that we listen to the requests of individuals—not just those of landlords—and try to balance such judgments. We took that decision to ensure that the choice lies with the individual initially. A review of UC choices is coming up at the end of this year, which it might be useful to look at. However, when we initially developed the project, the direct response was that people wanted to make that choice themselves.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

T

he report also showed that the five-week delay in claimants’ receiving their first payments of universal credit has greatly increased rent arrears. Ineffective communication and poor exchange of information on the part of the Department for Work and Pensions has inevitably had a human cost. Does the cabinet secretary think that that is yet further evidence of the mishandling of universal credit under the Tory United Kingdom Government? Does she agree that it is unsustainable for the Scottish Government to continue to mitigate that Government’s welfare cuts, which will reduce social security

spending ability in Scotland by £3.7 billion?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Shona Robison is right to highlight again the impact of the delays—which I may say are of a minimum of five weeks—in UC claimants receiving their first payments. As she also pointed out, that greatly increases rent arrears and has a severe impact on people, in terms of not only the lack of money but the stress that they go through at a very difficult time. Research conducted by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities suggests that, between March 2016 and March 2018, rent arrears increased by an average of 26 per cent across all UC full-service local authority areas, which is highly concerning—not just for the individuals who are involved but for the landlords, too.

The Scottish Government is doing all that we can to mitigate the worst excesses of the UK Government’s policies—for example, in 2019-20 we will spend more than £125 million in doing so. However, as Shona Robison rightly pointed out, the scale of the challenge—some £3.7 billion—is such that it would be simply unsustainable for any Government to be able to mitigate it fully.

Carers Allowance Supplement (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn)

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn)

4. To ask the Scottish Government how many carers are in receipt of the carers allowance supplement in the Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn constituency. (S5O-03442)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Figures are not available for individual constituencies, but I can say that 13,475 carers in Glasgow are currently in receipt of the

carers allowance supplement. This week, the third payment of the supplement since we introduced it in September 2018 was made to carers in Scotland. As a result of the supplement, carers who are eligible for both payments in 2019-20 will receive an extra £452.40, in recognition of the significant contribution that they make.

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn)

I am pleased that the Scottish Government will also be providing extra financial support for young carers in Scotland, which will be the first of its kind in the United Kingdom. How will the cabinet secretary ensure that all those who qualify for the young carers grant will receive it? Does she agree that it is important that they do so, given the huge contribution that young carers make?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I absolutely agree with Bob Doris that young carers make an invaluable

contribution to our society, which is why we are determined to do all that we can to maximise the take-up of the young carers grant. As is the case for all payments made by Social Security Scotland, bespoke communications packages will drive the take-up strategy for the grant. Those communications will have to be balanced for the purposes of the grant, to ensure that we target them directly at young carers themselves and their families and friends who support them, and the application form will be available in multiple formats to cater for all disability and accessibility needs.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

Carers and their organisations would like to see changes being made to the carers allowance, such as the removal of the restriction on studying, and changes to the earnings threshold and the restrictions on the number of people being cared for. Will the cabinet secretary s

et out the Government’s ambition for changes to the carers allowance when the agency arrangements with the

Department for Work and Pensions

come to an end?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We will ensure that we will hold a full public consultation to discuss all the possible changes that could be made and that people want to see to the carers allowance.

We are delivering that through an agency agreement with the DWP. Again, the reason for that was to ensure that the first action that the Scottish Government took through the new Social Security Scotland agency—within its first couple of weeks of opening—was to deliver the carers allowance supplement directly to carers, ensuring that we got money into carers’ pockets as quickly as possible.

Wave 2 Benefits (Cost of Delivery)

Gordon Lindhurst (Conservative, Lothian)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what reviews it has carried out of the cost of delivering and implementing wave 2 benefits. (S5O-03443)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The social security programme-level business case is currently being reviewed and will be finalised shortly. We recently completed an internal review of the finance function of the social security programme, the focus of which was on ensuring that our financial arrangements are evolving in line with the complexity of the programme. An update on implementation costs will be provided to Parliament in due course.

Gordon Lindhurst (Conservative, Lothian)

Could we have a more precise timetable for when the update will be provided to Parliament?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

As I hope that Gordon Lindhurst appreciates, we have only very recently closed the consultation on disability assistance. We need to analyse the responses to that consultation, because the policy decisions that will flow from it might have implications for the reviews that he spoke about. It is important that the analysis work is completed so that it can feed into the review work, which will ensure that the update is as comprehensive as possible.

Older People’s Services (Dumfries and Galloway Council)

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that services for older people in Dumfries and Galloway are facing an in-year deficit of £6.85 million. (S5O-03444)

Christina McKelvie (Scottish National Party, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

That is a matter for Dumfries and Galloway Council. However, working with Dumfries and Galloway integration joint board and NHS Dumfries and Galloway, the council is committed to developing a recovery plan that systematically reduces the deficit without reducing capacity by redesigning services and delivery and investing in quality, sustainable care.

It is not unusual for integration joint boards to begin the year with a variance against budget and for that to reduce throughout the year as savings plans are developed and expenditure patterns become clearer.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

Over the past 20 years, Dumfries and Galloway’s population of people aged 75 and over has risen by 43 per cent. Over the next decade, that population is projected to rise by a further 28 per cent. With demands for services increasing and major problems with the recruitment of the required staff for the region, how will the Scottish Government support Dumfries and Galloway’s health and social care partnership in laying out its plans to continue to provide and protect vital services and to make them on a par with those of the rest of Scotland?

Christina McKelvie (Scottish National Party, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

That is a really interesting question, which, as Minister for Older People and Equalities, I take a huge interest in. We have an ageing population that will demand more services as we move through the next few years.

On the specifics of Dumfries and Galloway and the progress that has been made in the integration of its health and social care services, all health and social care partnerships completed a self-assessment on their current position on 15 May 2019, and those assessments will go some way towards helping us understand what the pressures are.

Ensuring that individuals at home and in homely settings get quality, sustainable care requires a whole-systems approach, and we are working really hard to ensure that that happens. The self-assessment approach that is being taken by joint integration boards will provide us with information that we will plug into the work that we are doing on the older people strategy and other strategies that work alongside it so that, in the future, we can ensure that we provide the best care for all our older people and the best support to their representative organisations.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

In Finlay Carson’s constituency and around Scotland, tens of thousands of Scots who are over 75 will be left worse off as a result of the United Kingdom Government scrapping the free television licence. Does the minister agree that, after years of Tory austerity, the last thing that our older people need is more money being taken out of their pockets by the Tories?

Christina McKelvie (Scottish National Party, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

Annabelle Ewing will not be surprised that I totally and utterly agree with her. When I attended the Scottish Pensioners Forum conference just two weeks ago, that was a hot topic on the agenda.

The UK Government has shirked its responsibility to support older people and pushed it on to the BBC, which is an absolute abdication of its responsibility in regard to a welfare policy. The plan to link the TV licence to pension credit will fail to help many vulnerable people, because many do not claim it. The policy is an attack on our older and most vulnerable people, many of whom are already socially isolated. Perhaps the two prime ministerial candidates should make the commitment to reverse the disgraceful decision that was taken on TV licences for over-75s.

Loneliness Among Older People (Support)

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to support third sector groups to help address loneliness among older people. (S5O-03445)

Christina McKelvie (Scottish National Party, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

I am delighted to tell Miles Briggs—no doubt he will have already realised how delighted I am—that we have launched a connected Scotland, our national strategy for tackling social isolation and loneliness and building social connections. The strategy recognises the vital contribution of the third sector in supporting all vulnerable groups, including older people, in tackling these issues.

There are a number of third sector organisations on the national implementation group, which I am chairing. The group meets this week and we are looking forward to working on the strategy at that meeting. Many of the organisations that deliver those services, including the Scottish Pensioners Forum and Age Scotland, will be part of the implementation group. We are also supporting a number of third sector organisations that do vital work in this area, including through giving funding to Age Scotland for its Silver Line Scotland service and its shed effect scheme.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I welcome the publication of the connected Scotland strategy. Can the minister outline to Parliament how local groups can help to build capacity? Here in my region of Lothian, for example, we have groups such as Vintage Vibes, Health in Mind and Contact the Elderly. How will the strategy work to help them to reach out to more people who are affected by loneliness?

Christina McKelvie (Scottish National Party, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

That is a key theme of the work of the implementation group. When we compiled the strategy, many local groups gave us their thoughts on how they can take part in the process. We know absolutely that none of this will work out there in the community unless the community is involved and has been brought into it. We have invited them all to take part. I have been on loads of visits in order to understand what those groups think about this.

The member will understand how important that is.

I also chair the older people’s strategic action forum. Alongside the social isolation and loneliness strategy, we have the older people strategy, the key themes of which are about how we ensure that communities can provide and sustain services, and that services are made by communities for those communities. A perfect example is the football memory scheme, which celebrated its 10th anniversary recently and which I visited last week. It has gone into partnership with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to network all the work that it does on football memories, which has a great impact on older people.

If Miles Briggs has organisations in his area that want to talk to me about the issue, I ask him to please let me know, because the more ideas I hear, the more we can reflect them in a policy that meets the demands of the people.

The Presiding Officer

My apologies to Liam Kerr. We do not have time for any more questions on that portfolio.

Glasgow Airport Ltd (Meetings)

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government when the finance secretary last met Glasgow Airport Ltd to discuss the economy and fair work. (S5O-03447)

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

I had a telephone discussion with Glasgow Airport Ltd on 7 May to discuss matters relating to my role as Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Economy and Fair Work. I also attended a meeting with Glasgow Airport Ltd on 17 June, in relation to constituency business.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

The cabinet secretary will be aware of the on-going industrial action at Glasgow airport, where hundreds of workers, many of whom are our constituents, are striking for fair pay and to stop the closure of their pension scheme.

Unite the union members are understandably frustrated that an airport that is posting pre-tax profits of over £90 million will not invest a fair share of those profits in its workforce and bring this dispute to an end. They are also concerned about reports in the

Sunday Post

that the use of strike-breaking labour is putting public safety at risk, with 95 suspicious items slipping through security on each of the first two days of strike action.

What will the Scottish Government do to help to resolve the dispute and to ensure that airport workers and the travelling public are kept safe?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

Safety and security in aviation are absolutely paramount; there should be a focus on that and no standards should be lowered.

Mr Bibby is aware, of course, that the Scottish Government does not have a role in the dispute. I understand that there have been talks. I hope that those talks will continue and that a resolution can be found, to the satisfaction of all, not least the workforce, so that operations can return to normal and issues can be addressed. Although the Scottish Government does not have a role in this and is not a party to the dispute, I am happy to engage as cabinet secretary if and when that is appropriate.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

If Glasgow airport is to grow at the rate at which it plans to and employ the increased number of people that it wants to, that will put severe strains on infrastructure. Airport connectivity must be improved. The cabinet secretary will be aware of the Glasgow connectivity commission’s recommendations. Will the Scottish Government reply formally to any of those recommendations? How will the cabinet secretary help to support growth and jobs in the Renfrewshire area and beyond?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

Of course, that will be done within the bounds of the decent standards of politicians and the ministerial code of conduct. Glasgow airport is in my constituency and resources will be allocated as appropriate rather than the airport being given preferential treatment because the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Economy and Fair Work represents the area.

I agree with the underlying premise of the comments and questions. Do I agree that we should ensure that the airport has the best possible connectivity and infrastructure? Yes, I agree. The city deal partners are considering the issues in relation to the best form of surface access. The resources from the city deal are still there and there is still a timetable that can be delivered on. The work of the Glasgow connectivity commission is also interesting.

To do all that work would entail rather a substantial price tag. As such,

what can be delivered should be considered methodically. Some of the recommendations are different from projects that are under way. Proper analysis is required, but it is more appropriate for transport and infrastructure ministers to respond than the finance secretary. Nonetheless, I of course want to ensure that the infrastructure is there to grow our economy and to ensure that the airport has a dynamic and successful future. I certainly pledge to undertake that role.

Shared Prosperity Fund

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

2. To ask the Scottish Government whether the United Kingdom Government has provided it with details about the shared prosperity fund, which it claims will replace European structural funds, post-Brexit. (S5O-03448)

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

Despite pressing the UK Government on its proposals for the shared prosperity fund, and stressing that any new arrangements must be co-designed with the devolved Administrations, no details have been provided. As such, we continue to develop our own thinking on future funding arrangements, and we will engage with lead partners, delivery bodies, individuals and communities across Scotland to inform our thoughts. To enable that, I confirmed this morning that we will undertake our own consultation—which will be overseen by an external steering group—to develop a coherent and robust position to ensure that the best interests of Scotland are met.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

In response to a question from Patricia Gibson MP, the Prime Minister said that European structural funds

“will indeed be replaced by the shared prosperity fund ... The Government will be consulting before the end of the year”.—[

Official Report

,

House of Commons

, 5 December 2018; Vol 650, c 890.]

That referred to the end of last year. What are the implications of a delay in taking forward that new fund?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

The Scottish Government has not been consulted on the issue. The lack of consultation and subsequent delay have the potential to have significant social and economic impact on local communities and projects, including third sector groups across Scotland that receive support through the current European structural funds programme. The Scottish Government, Wales and Northern Ireland must be equal partners in co-designing any system to replace European funding after Brexit. The UK Government must not impose a system on the nations of the UK.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

The Industrial Communities Alliance said that the allocation of the funds within devolved nations should be a matter for devolved Governments. Will the minister share with us what the allocation formula would be were the Scottish Government in charge of that fund?

Ivan McKee (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Provan)

The Scottish Government’s position is that the amount that comes to Scotland under the new shared prosperity fund should be absolutely no less than what we currently receive under UK programmes. That is our position, and we are pushing the UK Government to confirm that there will be no detriment or loss of funding for Scotland under the shared prosperity fund.

Apprenticeships

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what progress it has made since August 2018 on increasing the number of foundation, modern and graduate apprenticeships that are offered and taken up. (S5O-03449)

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests regarding apprenticeships.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

Official statistics that were published on 11 June 2019

show that there were 28,191 new apprenticeship starts in 2018-19, including 921 graduate apprenticeships. That was an increase from 2017-18 when there were 27,145 modern apprenticeship starts, which represented an increase from the year before when there were 26,262 such starts and 278 graduate apprenticeship starts.

Work is under way to expand the offer by providing 29,000 new starts in 2019-20, including up to 1,300 graduate apprenticeships. In 2018, 2,600 foundation apprenticeship opportunities were made available across 12 frameworks, and 5,000 opportunities are available for 2019.

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

I thank the minister for that answer.

Last month, the Scottish Conservatives set out our policy to introduce a skills participation age, which would make it law that everyone up to the age of 18 has to go to school, college or university, or, if they want to start work, to do so through a structured apprenticeship or traineeship. The think tank Institute for Public Policy Research Scotland backs that policy to close the massive worker shortage by 2030. Will the minister clarify whether the Scottish National Party Government will support such a policy?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

We will do what we are continuing to do in delivering success for young people. In the labour market in Scotland, we now have record levels of employment, a record low in unemployment and better performance in relation to youth unemployment. We have the upward trajectory of modern apprenticeships, to which I have just referred. We have record levels of positive destinations. That suggests to me that the system that we have is working well. Of course, we seek to refine and improve it and we will continue to do that through the developing the young workforce agenda, the Scottish learner journey review, the future skills action plan and the national retraining partnership, which I will be taking forward.

The Presiding Officer

Question 4 was not lodged.

Income Tax (Higher-rate Threshold)

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what implications would arise under the fiscal framework if the United Kingdom Government made a significant rise in the threshold for the higher rate of income tax. (S5O-03451)

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

The net impact on the Scottish budget will depend on how any tax cut is funded. All else being equal, a reduction in income tax receipts for the rest of the UK would result in a positive adjustment to the Scottish block grant. However, if it was funded through spending cuts, there could be a negative knock-on effect through Barnett. I strongly caution the incoming Chancellor of the Exchequer against using any reserved tax increases in Scotland to fund tax cuts for the rest of ther UK rich.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Its advocates have promoted that policy on the basis of the spurious concept of fiscal drag, which ignores the fact that people will be paying more tax only if they are earning higher incomes. If it is implemented, it will inevitably lead to more pressure from people with a similar mindset calling for reductions in taxation for high earners in Scotland.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that we must be resolute in saying that we will not move one inch in that direction? For example, any MP or MSP who advocates that policy could be fairly accused of naked self-interest.

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

MPs will make the decision on national insurance contributions and the RUK income tax system. Because of the fiscal framework, the UK fiscal and tax policies will impact on ours. However, I agree with Patrick Harvie that, at this or any point in time, it is perverse to focus on tax cuts for the richest in society in order to stimulate the Tory membership rather than to stimulate the economy. We set out four tests on income tax policy, which I would apply to future decisions. They will not listen to us on any matter but I urge any incoming Tory chancellor to resist the urge just to pander to the Tory membership and, instead, make tax decisions that are right for the country. Surely, such decisions would support a more progressive regime with a fairer system of income taxation that could also invest in the public services and in the fairness of our country.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The cabinet secretary talks about the Tory membership, but

today, according to the Fraser of Allander institute, the Scottish National Party’s £500 million tax raid on hard-working Scottish families has not raised an extra penny for public services. It has all disappeared into the black hole that has been created by income tax receipts growing more slowly than was expected. What will the cabinet secretary do about that problem? With the powers at his disposal, how will he fill that gap?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

I have addressed the issues that we have and the figures that must be reconciled at committee and through the medium-term financial strategy. Whether it is cyclical or structural, deepening inequality across the whole UK is driving faster wage growth for those at the top of the system. Even under that circumstance, it is perverse for a prospective Tory Prime Minister to be looking at how to give further tax cuts to the richest in society.

In relation to the figures that have been outlined, the benefit of having a devolved income tax system is that we can make income tax fairer, as we have in Scotland, where 99 per cent of people are paying less tax in the current financial year than they were in the previous financial year. Fifty-five per cent of taxpayers are paying less in Scotland than they would pay if they lived south of the border. If we had followed the previous tax position of the Tories, it would have cost public services half a billion pounds, whereas our tax policies will raise that extra half a billion pounds.

Half a billion pounds would have been taken from Scotland’s public services to pay for the most recent round of tax cuts that the Tories proposed, never mind the next round of tax cuts for the richest in society. As always, I will balance Scotland’s finances in a competent and prudent way.

James Kelly (Labour, Glasgow)

Given the shortfall in tax revenue of £1 billion that the Scottish Fiscal Commission has forecast and the potential impact on the Scottish budget, it is disappointing that the cabinet secretary’s medium-term financial strategy has been described as “inadequate”. Does he not think that it is time that he rewrote the financial strategy to take account of the tax forecasts and to outline how the Government will meet the key policy targets of funding public services, tackling poverty and reducing climate change emissions?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

The medium-term financial strategy takes account of the SFC’s taxation forecasts, and it will do so again at the next fiscal event—the Scottish budget—at which point we will set out how we will approach the reconciliation issues and some of the other issues that James Kelly referenced.

I gave evidence to the Finance and Constitution Committee on the medium-term financial strategy. I think that I was there for about two hours, and I would happily have stayed longer if members such as Mr Kelly and Mr Fraser had had further questions.

James Kelly (Labour, Glasgow)

What about answers?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

I know that Mr Kelly and Mr Fraser liked the answers so much that they will be able to hear them again at some point in the future, but I probably do not have time to do them justice here and now.

I have outlined that the options that we have in relation to income tax reconciliation include looking at the wider financial envelope, which is driven by UK tax and fiscal policy—the Barnett settlement for Scotland still makes up the majority of the funding that the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government have—and the borrowing powers for forecast error. Members should bear it in mind that the income tax reconciliation figures are about forecast error. Going forward, we look at how we can grow our economy. The SFC’s report and the Fraser of Allander institute’s commentary say that the greatest challenge and threat to Scotland’s economy at the moment is Brexit. If we are to grow our economy, Brexit needs to be averted. That would lift the overall economic forecast for Scotland.

We will take a range of other spending decisions, not least on inequality and poverty. We are getting on with the day job while others are totally misdirecting their efforts towards the Brexit catastrophe.

Third Sector (Value)

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what the value of the third sector is to the economy. (S5O-03452)

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

The Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations estimates that the third sector contributed more than £5.5 billion to the Scottish economy in 2016-17. The sector employs more than 107,000 people. In addition, the value of formal volunteering is estimated to be around £2.2 billion per year.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

Given the third sector’s significant value to the Scottish economy, which the minister has just noted, how is investment in the third sector evaluated? Does she agree that further investment in the third sector would be cost effective and would further benefit the Scottish economy?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

I agree that we need to support and fund the third sector, and the Scottish Government is already doing that—the budget for the third sector in 2019-20 has been set at £24.9 million. New investment is necessary because of the great work that the third sector does in tackling poverty and mitigating United Kingdom Government welfare changes, which has been particularly important over the past few years.

We will continue to invest in the third sector, we will continue to commit to providing multiyear funding and we will continue to invest in the investing in communities fund. We will do that because of the growing inequality, which, of course, tax cuts at the top do nothing to address.

Publicly Owned Energy Company (Budget Allocation)

Dean Lockhart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

7. To ask the Scottish Government how the finance secretary determined the budget allocation for its proposed publicly owned energy company. (S5O-03453)

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

The allocation of individual portfolio budgets is a matter for the relevant portfolio ministers, and each of those budgets is subject to consideration by the relevant committee as part of the budget scrutiny process.

Dean Lockhart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The establishment of a publicly owned energy company was first announced by the First Minister almost two years ago. However, according to the most recent update from the Scottish Government, that energy company has not even passed a feasibility assessment. Is this another example of the Scottish National Party overpromising and underdelivering on a flagship policy?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

On the contrary, this is an example of the SNP thinking innovatively and trying to tackle some of the deep-seated issues that affect our society. We recognise that a new energy company could do a lot to tackle fuel poverty, promote consumer engagement in energy matters and, over time, contribute to economic development opportunities, which, I think, Dean Lockhart supports.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I hope that a publicly owned energy company

will show a commitment to the Scottish supply chain that will support companies such as Burntisland Fabrications. Is the minister seeking a meeting with EDF, and does the Government intend to involve the trade unions in that meeting?

Kate Forbes (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

I know that Derek Mackay, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Economy and Fair Work, has met EDF.

Citizens Assembly of Scotland

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

The next item of business is a statement by Michael Russell entitled “Progress on Establishing the Citizens Assembly of Scotland, Scotland’s Constitutional Future.” The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

On 24 April, the First Minister announced a range of actions to take forward consideration of Scotland’s constitutional future. I updated the chamber on progress on 29 May and I am pleased to honour the commitment that I made at that time to do so again before recess.

Events over the past two months indicate that the questions over our constitutional future are becoming ever more urgent. In April, Donald Tusk urged the United Kingdom Government not to waste the additional time that had been agreed by the EU 27. However, that is, of course, precisely what the UK Government has done. It is 11 weeks since the House of Commons last voted on Brexit; two months since it last looked at a Brexit statutory instrument; and four weeks since it heard a Brexit statement.

The reality of this Brexit chaos is still being denied. That is a denial that led, inter alia, to European elections in which many thousands of our fellow European Union citizens were denied their democratic right to participate. Only after her party’s historic drubbing in those elections did the Prime Minister face up to the clear, unavoidable truth—the truth of her being completely incapable of delivering Brexit.

However, Tory truth is not infectious, and those who are now vying to replace her are indulging in the very same fictions and fantasies. Boris Johnson is determined to keep a no-deal exit from the EU, regardless of the consequences, on the table, and Jeremy Hunt insists that he can secure changes to the Irish backstop. However, none of the solutions that is being offered by this tiresome twosome is in any way real. All of them have been ruled out again and again by the EU itself. There is no doubt—no doubt at all—that the withdrawal agreement will not be reopened. Against that backdrop of chaos and the threat to Scotland’s interests, I assure the chamber that we will continue to consider whether the Referendums (Scotland) Bill should be accelerated and, if required, we will return to that issue after the recess.

It is clear that a growing number of people in Scotland are seriously considering the issue of independence in the light of the Brexit disaster and the Tory leadership debacle. This Government was itself elected on a clear mandate that was triggered three years ago when the people of Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the European Union—a mandate that was endorsed by a vote in this Parliament. This Government—like the majority of parties in this Parliament, of course—will continue to do whatever we can to halt the rush towards the catastrophe of a no-deal Brexit. Working with other parties, we will continue to campaign for a people’s vote on EU membership, with the option of remain on the ballot, which is a step that the people of Scotland overwhelmingly supported in the EU elections.

In her statement on 24 April, the First Minister invited all the parties to work with the Government to explore what common ground there may be between us on changes that are needed to equip Scotland with the powers that it must have for the future.

Essentially, that gives all the parties in the Parliament the chance to say what solutions to the current constitutional crisis they would bring forward short of independence. We continue to engage seriously with the UK about such matters, too. For example, we do so through the very unsatisfactory medium of the joint ministerial committee, which will meet again this Friday in the margins of the British-Irish Council in Manchester. I am grateful to the three parties that have indicated their willingness to undertake exploratory discussions to put forward their views. I regret that the Liberal Democrats have declined the opportunity so far, but it remains open and will always do so.

Let me focus on the third initiative that the First Minister announced: the establishment of the citizens assembly of Scotland. Citizens assemblies are becoming an established way for mature democracies to engage with complex and contested issues on an inclusive, informed and respectful basis. That is what we want for Scotland. I was delighted that, last week, we were able to hold a series of events in the Parliament to talk about the issue. I again extend my thanks to Art O’Leary and Sharon Finegan, the secretaries to the constitutional convention and the citizens assembly in Ireland, and to Anthony Zacharzewski from the Democratic Society, for making the time to share their knowledge and expertise with us. I was sorry that I was not able to be present, owing to illness.

The Parliament is rightly proud of the first 20 years of our reconvened existence, but democracy does not stand still and we have to keep innovating in order to keep moving. When we see, in the Brexit issue, a complete breakdown in trust between politicians and people, surely it should inspire all of us, no matter our political allegiance, to find new ways to bring politicians and people together to resolve deep-seated division.

The Government is determined to ensure that the people of Scotland are supported to make choices about their future with full access to the facts that they need. We want to encourage people to listen to and learn from one another, including those with whom we might otherwise profoundly disagree, and that is what citizens assemblies can do. However, we are also learning about the whole process, so it is right that we should move forward a step at a time.

It is important to establish at the outset a clear set of principles that will underpin the work of the assembly, and I can confirm those principles today. The first is independence from Government, which will be achieved through the appointment of impartial and respected conveners, an arm’s-length secretariat and expert advisory groups. The secretariat will be located outside Scottish Government offices. In addition, we intend to establish a politicians panel for the assembly to call on as it wishes, so that all the parties in the Parliament and not just the Government are a resource for the work of the assembly.

A second principle is transparency. That will apply at all levels of the operation of the assembly, from the framing of the questions, to the selection of members and expert witnesses, through to proactive publication and live-streaming of deliberative sessions and clarity about what the outputs will be used for.

A third is inclusion, which will extend not just to who is invited to take part as members but to the operations of the assembly itself.

A fourth is access. The wider public must be able to see and comment on the work of the assembly, and stakeholders must feel that they and their interests have a route into the assembly.

A fifth is balance. The information that is used to build members’ and the wider public’s learning must be balanced, credible and easily understood.

A sixth is cumulative learning, which will be embedded into the design of the assembly to ensure that members develop a rich understanding of the issues considered and have time to do so.

Finally, there is open-mindedness. The assembly will be a forum for open-minded deliberation between participants, ensuring that the public see it as a genuine process of inquiry and to help ensure that it receives an open-minded response from the Parliament and the Government.

I have touched on the role of conveners. The Government is determined that the assembly will be led by people who are trusted and respected across the political spectrum. I say “people” because I am committed to having more than one person undertake the role in order to ensure gender balance and to bring a richness of skills and experience to the role. The conveners will be responsible for stewarding, convening and representing the assembly.

Having spoken to a wide range of people about the role, including seeking views of MSPs and suggestions from across the parties in the Parliament, I am delighted to be able to confirm today that David Martin has agreed in principle to take on one of the roles. David is one of the most widely respected members of the European Parliament, not just in Scotland but across the European Union. His long service in the European Parliament has been widely recognised and praised. Discussions are continuing with other individuals who are interested in serving as the co-convener, and I will make a further announcement, including updating MSPs, in due course.

At the heart of the assembly are its members. On 14 June, we launched the invitation to tender for member recruitment. One hundred and twenty members of the public will be randomly selected to serve. The tender will ensure that the membership will be broadly representative of Scotland’s adult population according to age, ethnic group, socioeconomic background, geography and political attitude.

Members will be drawn from those who are eligible to vote under the new franchise and able to attend all the formal assembly sessions. I hope that serving as a member of the assembly will be seen as a privilege, but it is also a responsibility and a commitment. The assembly will meet over six weekends from late autumn to spring, which is in line with practice elsewhere.

We are also doing all that we can to ensure that the assembly is as accessible as possible. That includes our meeting all reasonable expenses that are incurred, including caring expenses. However, we can do more. Learning from the experience of other assemblies and in line with the advice that we have received, in recognition of the time and effort that it will take to be involved, we will also offer a small honorarium for participation.

I turn to the remit. The First Minister set out in her statement three broad questions that the assembly should consider. What kind of country are we seeking to build? How can we best overcome the challenges that we face, including those that arise from Brexit? What further work should be carried out to give the people the detail that they need to make informed choices about the future? In our engagement with experts and practitioners, we have heard a range of views on the remit that is required to take those questions forward. We have also heard about the importance of leaving the assembly sufficient space to determine its own path while also being clear to the assembly about where decisions are for this Parliament and for the wider public to take. I think that it is fair to recognise that the conveners, working with the assembly members, should and will reflect on those views as part of the process. It is important that the assembly is clearly seen to be independent when reflecting on the debate that Scotland needs. That work will be completed with the co-conveners and a remit will be published over the summer. I will ensure that members are kept informed at all stages and, as always, my door is open.

We need to establish the citizens assembly of Scotland carefully, thoughtfully and progressively. Over the summer, we intend to engage widely, to promote the assembly and to encourage those who are invited to participate. A dedicated website for the citizens assembly will go live this afternoon and it will grow to contain all the information regarding the assembly and its work. It can be found at citizensassembly.scot.

However, more important than anything else is that, within the remit that will be set out and with expert support, members of the assembly, once they are in place, will be free to explore the matters that are entrusted to them as they see fit. It is right that the assembly will set many of its rules and procedures and decide how to operate.

I know that politicians in this Parliament and beyond will respect not just a fair process but those who are engaged in the process. We must also ensure that, as far as is practicable, we respect the outcome, so I confirm that, when the first citizens assembly for Scotland concludes, the Government will ensure that its recommendations contribute to—and are seen to contribute to—positive steps towards a better collective future. That commitment extends to reviewing and learning from the process and considering whether citizens assemblies should become part of the next 20 years of Scotland’s story.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in his statement, for which I will allow about 20 minutes.

Adam Tomkins (Conservative, Glasgow)

I thank the minister for early sight of his statement and I welcome him back to his seat. I know that he has been unwell and I wish him a full recovery. I also thank him for the arrangements that he made last week

for engagement with Art O’Leary, Sharon Finegan and others with direct experience of citizens assemblies in Ireland. That was a useful process.

My view is that there is a role for citizens assemblies in Scotland. Wherever possible, we are governed by representative parliamentary democracy, but there are some issues of public policy that parliamentary democracy has failed or is struggling to address and resolve in Scotland. Effective preventative spend is one and long-term social care for the elderly is another. Critically, there is cross-party agreement or, probably, all-party agreement that those are massive and pressing issues of public policy that we as a Parliament struggle with. Were such matters to be handed to a citizens assembly, that might well be an innovation that was worthy of support. Sadly, however, that is not what the SNP proposes. What it proposes is yet another national conversation on Scotland’s constitutional future. We have heard it all before, and here we go again.

Last week, we learned that one of the lessons from Ireland is that, to be effective, citizens assemblies need cross-party buy-in at the beginning of the process. This one does not have that. This is not a genuine attempt at a citizens assembly in Scotland. It is a nationalist stunt to kick-start the conversation about independence. As such, I am afraid that we will have nothing to do with it, and I urge all unionists in Scotland to see it for what it is and give it a wide berth.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Was there a question, Mr Tomkins?

Adam Tomkins (Conservative, Glasgow)

No, Presiding Officer.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Your call, cabinet secretary.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I regret that remark from Adam Tomkins—it is entirely contrary to what I have said and the information that has been provided. I hope that, in time, the Scottish Conservative Party will realise the importance of looking at this issue.

It is a little rich for Adam Tomkins to condemn the Scottish National Party for some sort of constitutional obsession, given that it was the Conservatives who encouraged the European referendum to take place three years ago, which has led to the most extraordinary constitutional crisis in my lifetime. It is not enough for Mr Tomkins to pretend that that crisis does not exist or to try to brush it under the carpet. In my statement, I gave some statistics on how the House of Commons has been paralysed by Brexit. There is also the extraordinary spectacle of two people who, to be frank, I would not send for the messages vying to be Prime Minister. Given all those circumstances, I think that Adam Tomkins has taken the wrong view. I hope that he will change his mind, because the citizens assembly is designed to help Scotland not hinder it, which I hope the Scottish Tories would see as their aim too.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of his statement. I welcome the appointment of David Martin as one of the co-conveners of the assembly and wish him well in his role.

I welcome the principles for the assembly of autonomy from Government and open-mindedness. However, to have announced a citizens assembly at the same time as a referendum bill has certainly created the impression that the Government has already provided the answer. How will the Government ensure a genuine process of inquiry when it has already framed the process within its desired referendum?

I welcomed meetings about the Irish experience last week. However, there has been no meaningful parliamentary scrutiny of the announcement here, unlike the way in which legitimacy was achieved in Ireland through a parliamentary vote and the ability to amend. Would it not be in the interests of the citizens assembly to work to a more realistic timetable and allow for parliamentary scrutiny after recess?

Given that context, we will offer a degree of support, provided that the Government can prove that the citizens assembly is free from its ambition for another referendum and that Parliament has an opportunity to scrutinise the terms of reference and the assembly’s remit.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I welcome that more positive response. I am happy to continue to provide evidence that the assembly is a free-standing independent initiative. I was glad, for example, that my old university friend Gordon Brown recently welcomed it. I am grateful for that, and I know that he has views about how the citizens assembly should go forward. I make the offer here today that, if he wishes to discuss it with me—along with Claire Baker or on his own—I am very happy to have that conversation.

The important thing is to get on and do things. I stress—I know that Claire Baker recognises this—that we are in the midst of an extraordinary constitutional crisis. The Scottish Government is trying to provide a variety of ways in which we can engage parties in the chamber in that regard. One of those ways is, of course, the passage of the Referendums (Scotland) Bill—and so it should be, given the urgency of the issue. The second way involves cross-party discussions. I have had a detailed letter from Richard Leonard about the Labour Party participation in those discussions; a response has been made and the process is moving forward, as I hope that it will continue to do. The third way is the entirely independent business of the citizens assembly of Scotland, and I am happy to continue to prove that to the member in any way that I can.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We move to the open questions. I stress that a lot of members wish to ask questions.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

The Greens welcome the fact that most of us, at any rate, see positive value in this kind of open participative process. In Ireland, for example, Green proposals ensured that the citizens assembly there could address climate change, which is a demand of the growing wave of environmental activism in Scotland. Will the cabinet secretary tell us how, in the absence of a legislative basis for the citizens assembly here, he sees positive opportunities for the relationship between the assembly and Parliament to operate? If, for example, the assembly chooses to address questions such as where energy policy sits as part of a response to the climate emergency, will it be completely free to do so?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

It will be absolutely free to do so. I see the relationship between the conveners of the assembly, the assembly members and this Parliament as a constructive one. I hope that the conveners, in helping to formulate the remit, will be happy to discuss that with anybody who wishes to discuss it with them, in the Parliament or outside it.

It is wrong to see the assembly as some sort of threat to the Parliament. I think that one of the Tory party leadership candidates who did not make it to the final two described citizens assemblies as being the creatures of Venezuelan tinpot dictators, even though another person in that race wanted to see citizens assemblies. Let us be open about the contribution that our fellow citizens can make to addressing very serious difficulties and problems; let us be open to them making that contribution; and let members support them to make that contribution.

I am grateful for the Green Party’s support, which is well received. The citizens assembly will be all the stronger as a result of that.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

We are not participating in this latest SNP exercise, which has been set up simply to patch up its case for independence. Taxpayers’ money should not be used for that party-political process.

If the assembly begs the SNP Government to abandon independence, will it do so?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I commit myself to listening to the assembly, being public about what it says, and ensuring that whatever it says is

reported. If it were to say that, Mr Rennie would know it—as would Mr Burnett, if he stopped talking long enough to listen. There would be a conversation.

The trouble with Mr Rennie’s position is that he will not allow the citizens of Scotland to have that opinion; they are to have no opinion, because he would not allow them to meet. That is not liberal or democratic.

It speaks volumes to me that the two parties in Parliament that have set their faces against involving the ordinary people of Scotland in addressing the worst problems we have had since the Parliament was created are the Tories and the Liberal Democrats. I am not surprised about the Tories—although I am disappointed by them, because I think that Mr Tomkins is more open than that—but I am surprised and disappointed by Mr Rennie, because it seems to me that, for him, the matter is far more about competing for a tiny hard-line audience than it is about trying to take Scotland forward.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The past three years of Brexit chaos have demonstrated the damage and harm that can be caused by an ill-informed headline-chasing approach to fundamental constitutional change. Will the cabinet secretary confirm how a citizens assembly would be able to do things differently?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

If the current Prime Minister had said to herself at any time over the past three years that she really needed to listen to other people and to think about the other options that exist, she could have convened a citizens assembly. The University of London and others convened a citizens assembly on Brexit. That would have been a useful thing for her to do.

It is very important that we have an open mind on how opinion is formed in Scotland and how debate takes place. That was one of the important things about the foundation of the Parliament 20 years ago. Perhaps it is not surprising that the Tories opposed that, too.

Donald Cameron (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

How will the Parliament and its committees be able to scrutinise the work of a citizens assembly, its output and its costs?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

All those matters will be open and transparent. If I remember correctly, Mr Cameron supported a Tory party leadership candidate who wanted a citizens assembly to be established. I am glad about that.

As everybody else will, the committees of Parliament will be able to see the work of the citizens assembly and what takes place. Once that work is concluded, the outcomes of the assembly will come to Parliament for action. There will be absolute openness: transparency is the key to that.

I have no difficulty in saying that whatever the citizens assembly does and whatever it spends should be totally open and transparent, and that those things should, of course, be subject to scrutiny.

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

The citizens assembly is just one strand of the Scottish Government’s approach to charting a distinctive path for Scotland’s future. I note that the cabinet secretary has previously encouraged views and contributions from across the political spectrum. We have heard negativity and criticism today. Have any productive steps or positive suggestions been brought to the table by Opposition members?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I am aye hopin, as they say. I would have thought that, if members of any party in the chamber looked around, at this particular juncture, and saw the enormous mess that has been created by the UK Government and the Tory party, there is no doubt—[

Interruption

.]

Graham Simpson is laughing, but it is not funny. The governor of the Bank of England, too, think that it is not funny. He has drawn attention today to the severe economic damage that the Conservative Government is doing, which is no laughing matter. Severe damage is being done to businesses in the region that Mr Simpson represents.

In the circumstances, the correct reaction is to try something different that does not divide people but brings them together. The measure of parties in Parliament is whether they are flexible enough to support that. We know that the Conservatives are not, because they want to continue the narrow division of Brexit. As we have seen, that will be disastrous for them—they are at 11 per cent and falling in the polls.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

In many ways, the party-political systems in the United Kingdom and across Europe are breaking down, so we should not fear involving citizens in big questions. We should be willing to see how the citizens assembly goes.

However, I do not want the process to be rushed, and there seems to be a bit of a rush, which brings risks.

Will the cabinet secretary assure those of us who believe that setting up the citizens assembly is the right thing to do that he will take whatever time is necessary to get it right?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I will. The timescale for establishing the first attempt at such a body in Ireland was roughly the same as the timescale that we expect, so there is no rush, in comparison with best practice. I am happy to assure Mr Rowley that the assembly will take the time that it needs, and that it will be run in the best way we can run it.

I hope that Mr Rowley, whom I have known for a long time, will accept my word that that is what we intend to do, and to do well. If he and others want to talk about how we should do that, we are open to that. As I said, we will set up a politicians panel, to which we will ask political parties to nominate members, so that the parties can give their views.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

What work has been undertaken to learn lessons from the successful use of citizens assemblies in Canada, Australia, Poland and Ireland, that could be applied in Scotland?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

Rona Mackay makes the important point that there are examples of such assemblies being used in different ways and in different circumstances. I understand that citizens assemblies are used in Oregon to define referendum questions and the arguments on both sides, so they have an interlocutor role. British Columbia had a citizens assembly on electoral reform, which did not produce a result that was eventually translated into law. Two referenda were held on reform—one narrowly succeeded and one narrowly failed.

Experiences have been different and mixed. People who attended the event that the Irish assembly organisers held last week will know that Ireland had a valuable experience in relation to the eighth amendment to the Irish constitution. Like most people in Ireland thought, many of us thought that it would be almost impossible to resolve that question, given the depth of feeling and difficulty on both sides, but it was dealt with in the assembly through people listening to arguments that they had never heard before.

As I have said, those who are against a citizens assembly are against debate and discussion and against ideas being put forward and considered on their merits.

If the Presiding Officer will forgive me, I will finish on this point. In the eighth amendment process in Ireland, one of the citizens assembly’s five sessions was given over to 17 advocacy organisations that brought information and views to bear. They all had to submit papers that were peer reviewed and fact based. One assembly member said that they heard things that they had never heard before.

I hope that members of the citizens assembly in Scotland will hear things about how Scotland should go forward that they have never heard before, because that means that Scotland will hear them, too. That will be a valuable contribution.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

A few members still wish to ask questions. Brief questions and answers will be required if we are to fit everyone in.

Mark McDonald (Independent, Aberdeen Donside)

The cabinet secretary alluded to the briefing that Irish officials gave last week, for which I thank him. Art O’Leary made the point that one of the things that defined the initial constitutional convention was that members of Parliament were involved through membership of that convention. That created a sense of ownership of the conclusions, which perhaps has not existed in other places, such as British Columbia and Iceland, where there has been seen to be a disconnect between the conclusions of assemblies and what parliamentarians put into practice. Does the cabinet secretary take a view on whether it is worth exploring such an approach with the citizens assembly, at least in its initial stage?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I thank Mark McDonald for making that very important point. The difference between the convention and the citizens assembly was that there were 33 politicians and 66 other members in the convention, whereas there were no politicians in the citizens assembly. The experience was that the second model worked better, but there was an issue about how outcomes were implemented. In the citizens assembly, there was a commitment that that would be done by parliamentary committee. In other words, when the citizens assembly came to a conclusion, as it did on the eighth amendment, that would become a subject for a parliamentary committee.

I will ask the assembly and the committee conveners to consider what they think the best way of plugging into Parliament would be—I am open to ideas about that—so that their outcomes can contribute in a clear and positive way.

It would be utterly wrong to ask 120 people to spend their time being involved in a citizens assembly without saying to them that what they do will have positive consequences. We need to find the right way of allowing that to happen.

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

To address any concerns about the select number of people who might serve on the citizens assembly, will the cabinet secretary set out how the wider public and organisations will be able to contribute their views to the assembly, to ensure that others can be involved in the important conversation about Scotland’s future?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I do not want to tie the hands of the citizens assembly, but examples from elsewhere suggest that it will call for evidence and want people to submit evidence. In the past few weeks, a large number of people have contacted me to say that they want to be involved in the process. I am grateful to all of them for having done so.

It is now up to the citizens assembly, as it formulates its remit, to ask for contributions from the length and breadth of Scotland, including from individuals and civic Scotland.

Sometimes, the numbers are large. There were 13,000 submissions to the Irish citizens assembly on the eight amendment, and they were all put on the website for people to see. Assemblies on other subjects, such as fixed-term parliaments, have received only a handful of submissions.

People will have the opportunity to provide information. The website is now open, so people can begin to register their interest. I hope that it will become a dynamic process.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

The cabinet secretary wants the 120 members who will be appointed to the citizens assembly to work out what kind of country we want to build. Why does he think that the 129-member, democratically accountable, elected Parliament that Scotland already has cannot fulfil that task?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

There is a different type of debate to be had. That criticism has often been made in a variety of countries in the early stages of establishment of a citizens assembly. Politicians say, “We’re here—we can do this.”

The nature of the debate is different. I can demonstrate that by referring to the debate that we are having here. We have had exclusivity from Willie Rennie, who wants to stay out of everything, and we have had condemnation from the Tories, who do not want anything to do with the citizens assembly.

The reality is that the facts are presented to a citizens assembly in a way that is meant to be impartial. A range of information is available, and people have the opportunity to deliberate and to come to conclusions. That strikes me as what a Parliament might aspire to do, but hardly ever achieves, whereas it is at the heart of the work of a citizens assembly. I hope that that will become clear very quickly.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I know that the cabinet secretary is not a fearful man, but it seems to me from his statement that he is a little fearful of parliamentary scrutiny of the citizens assembly’s remit. As Patrick Harvie said, the climate change issue was considered by a citizens assembly in Ireland as a result of an amendment in Parliament. The parliamentary scrutiny that was evident in the Irish example gave the citizens assembly legitimacy. Will the cabinet secretary give the Scottish Parliament the final say on the assembly’s remit?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

The final say on the assembly’s remit must come from the assembly. It would be completely ridiculous if we said, “We’ll tell you what to think.”

I will give Jenny Marra the guarantee, however, that full-hearted participation of, engagement with and scrutiny of the citizens assembly will be very important. Jenny Marra should stop waving that piece of paper, because I am trying to answer her question. We want the parties in Parliament to engage closely with the citizens assembly. This is an experiment in democracy for Scotland. Let us be open to that experiment: let us not find ourselves trying to close down parts of that experiment before we have even started.

Tackling Child Poverty (Progress Report)

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

The next item of business is a statement by Aileen Campbell on the tackling child poverty delivery plan first-year progress report. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her

statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Twenty years ago, when this Parliament was reconvened, it was because the people of Scotland wanted their own Parliament to make their own decisions on the priorities of the Scottish people. Reducing child poverty is a clear example of where we can do that.

When the UK Government decided to remove the child poverty remit from the Social Mobility Commission and abandon its child poverty targets, this Government did not agree. We withdrew from the commission and introduced the Child Poverty (Scotland) Bill to set new statutory targets for reduction of child poverty. The bill was passed unanimously and was followed by the first tackling child poverty delivery plan. That is devolution in action, and that is where, collectively, we can make a difference.

Today, I have published a first-year progress report on that delivery plan that shows that we have been working hard to build the foundations for transformational change. The most recent poverty statistics, for 2017-18, show that almost a quarter of children in Scotland live in relative poverty. Those figures, though lower than the UK figures, are totally unacceptable. They predate the delivery plan, but the challenge that we face is clear and this Government is determined to tackle it.

Our progress report shows that, after the first year, 48 of the 58 actions in the plan are already in progress or are being delivered. For example, we launched our new devolved employability service, fair start Scotland, in April last year. Job outcomes are encouraging, and service users are positive about their experience. Our programmes do not penalise people through sanctioning benefits, which is a real divergence from the UK Government’s work programme.

The progress report also demonstrates the great package of support that this Government provides for families throughout childhood—from birth to school and beyond—all of which helps to reduce costs for families. One example of that is the fact that, in partnership with local government, we have set the national minimum school clothing grant at an increased level of £100 from the start of this academic year and backed it with joint annual investment of £12 million.

In November, we launched our new financial health check service through Scotland’s network of citizens advice bureaux. That service provides families with the help that they need to maximise their incomes and beat the poverty premium.

Since the publication of the delivery plan, through our new social security system, we are now delivering new benefits to low-income households.

All three elements of the best start grant are now open to families across Scotland, backed by £21 million this year. The unprecedented number of applications that we have received shows that, if we take away barriers, remove stigma and encourage people to apply, people will take up the benefits that are on offer.

On Monday, the third carers allowance supplement was paid to increase financial support for carers, meaning that £452.40 a year more is going to each carer here than goes to carers outwith Scotland.

The Poverty and Inequality Commission has welcomed the activity that is under way and has advised us that our investment must match the scale of our ambition. We agree. The progress report provides a first estimate of our direct spend on low-income families—£527 million in 2018-19 alone.

Of course, that is not the whole story. That estimate does not include the social contract that delivers the universal services that we all enjoy and from which our society benefits. A multibillion-pound package of additional investment is in place in key areas to help all children and parents, whether or not they are on low incomes, to realise their full potential.

As a Government, we are proud of what we have achieved, and we will keep on delivering. Over the next year, we will build on a number of key areas—for example, progressing the delivery of our massive investment in universal early learning and childcare, which will save families £4,500 per child, on average. On Monday, I launched a new £3 million fund to support the delivery of accessible and affordable community-based childcare and experiences for school-age children. By the end of the year, we will launch our new programme of parental employment support to help parents to return to work and progress in their careers.

The Government is taking action in challenging times. This week, the United Nations special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights is at the UN to set out the damage that is being caused by the United Kingdom Government’s policies. His reports make for shocking reading. Professor Philip Alston has said that the social security safety net is “being systematically dismantled”, he has called out the two-child limit for the despicable policy that it is, and he has railed against the four-year benefit freeze. Those disastrous UK Government policies, which are driving increases in child poverty, are rightly described by the rapporteur as

“punitive, mean-spirited and often callous”.

The Scottish Government does not have the powers to reverse or scrap UK reserved policies. We have previously estimated that welfare cuts since 2010 would amount to £3.7 billion annually by 2020-21. Professor Alston has said that it is “unsustainable” for devolved Administrations to mitigate everything, and I agree. For those who do not want such policies, instead of being content with mitigation, why not join me in calling for full powers over areas such as employment and social security, so that we do not have to tackle disadvantage with one hand tied behind our backs?

Our commitment to work towards introducing an income supplement for low-income families in the lifetime of the delivery plan is a flagship policy that is designed to shift the curve of child poverty. Over the past year, the Scottish Government has undertaken a thorough assessment of a range of options, in line with the original two tests that were set out in the delivery plan. In line with the first test, we looked at how to target families who need the additional income most to lift children out of poverty. That analysis of costs and impacts has been published today. In line with the second test, we considered how to ensure that there is a robust and viable delivery route that protects the safe and secure transfer of the devolved benefits. Those analyses are brought together in a position paper, which has also been published today.

A year ago today, the First Minister appointed me as the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Local Government and Shirley-Anne Somerville as the Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and Older People. She gave both of us the responsibility for tackling poverty, and we have worked closely together on the income supplement policy. Reducing poverty and achieving a fairer Scotland are why we came into politics. We do not want to live in a country in which we have to mitigate against the policies of another Government; in which children go hungry because their families have had to wait months for their first universal credit payment; in which 85 per cent of benefit spending remains under the control of another Government; and in which we cannot change the minimum wage to tackle in-work poverty. The majority in this Parliament do not want that either.

However, although we do not yet have all the powers that we need, we are not content to sit blithely by and allow the children of Scotland to bear the brunt of Tory austerity. Our ambitions require bold action. We must use the powers that we have to deliver on our commitment to tackle poverty, and I am delighted to confirm that we will use our new social security powers to introduce a new benefit to tackle child poverty. The new financial support will be delivered by Social Security Scotland and will be called the Scottish child payment. By the end of 2022, the payment will be for all eligible children under the age of 16. The payment will be made monthly and uprated annually in line with inflation, and all children in eligible families will be entitled to the support. There will be no cap on the number of children for that or for any other social security policy in Scotland.

The payment will be based on qualifying benefits including universal credit, jobseekers allowance and child tax credits. However, as universal credit is not due to be fully rolled out until 2023 at the earliest, many families will still be in receipt of legacy benefits. That would make automation of the service, which is always complex and time consuming, particularly challenging. Therefore, in order to deliver the new payment, Social Security Scotland will manage an application-based process. As with all benefits that are delivered by us, we will work hard to get maximum take-up.

Although we will introduce the Scottish child payment by the end of 2022—at a time when we are delivering a suite of complex devolved benefits—we have listened to the voices of front-line poverty campaigners, including people with lived experience who are facing the impact of United Kingdom Government welfare cuts now, and we have looked carefully at what is deliverable within a shorter timescale, considered the effects on other aspects of our social security programme and sought an approach that will have the biggest impact on children living in poverty.

I am delighted to announce that the outcome of that work is that we will introduce the Scottish child payment for all eligible children under six by the end of this Parliamentary session—which is much, much earlier than our original commitment. The approach on which we have decided is informed by these two facts: almost 60 per cent of all children in poverty live in a family with at least one child under the age of six, and we know that making a difference in the early years of a child’s life has the biggest impact on long-term outcomes.

We must shift the curve on child poverty, and the provision of direct support to parents can do just that. I announce today that our new Scottish child payment will be £10 a week. For a two-child family, the additional financial support of over £1,000 a year will make a major difference.

The Scottish child payment is a significant turning point in our action to tackle child poverty, which will benefit hundreds of thousands of children. The decisions that we have taken to enable early delivery from next year will benefit 140,000 households with 170,000 children through a substantial investment in families in Scotland. When the policy is fully rolled out, by the end of 2022, 410,000 children—more than a third of Scottish children—will be eligible for the payment.

We expect the Scottish child payment to lift 30,000 children out of relative poverty altogether and to reduce the relative poverty rate by three percentage points, as well as increasing the family incomes of many tens of thousands of families. The payment will help to prevent poverty among families who are on insecure incomes just above the poverty threshold, who face UK Government welfare cuts, and it will help children who are at risk of material deprivation—they are another of our targets.

A payment that prevents deprivation and protects people who need our support is something that this Government and this Parliament can and should be proud of. The Scottish Government is today making a conscious and deliberate decision to prioritise action to tackle child poverty for the remainder of this parliamentary session and beyond. However, doing what we know is right, and doing so early, means tough decisions and choices. Tackling child poverty will be central to the budget and spending review in the coming months, and there will be implications for the delivery of other aspects of our social security programme.

In its recent report “Social security: Implementing the devolved powers”, Audit Scotland noted:

“it is difficult to see how the programme could progress more quickly.”

It is therefore clear that we will need to make the necessary space to deliver the new payment early and successfully. It is important to be open with the Parliament from the outset. We have already carried out extensive work to ensure that we can deliver the payment. We are aware that we will need to actively manage the delivery of the payment within a highly complex and challenging existing programme. Over the summer, officials will carry out further formal assessment of the challenges and develop a clear plan for how to mitigate them. The work will include consideration of issues that relate to information technology systems, staffing, supplier management and our enabling services.

I can say now that we absolutely will deliver disability assistance for working-age people—our replacement for the personal independence payment—in early 2021, as we outlined to the Parliament in February. We are on track to deliver our first disability benefit—disability assistance for children and young people—next summer, as announced. However, our expectation is that the launch of our new claims service for disability assistance for older people, which is the devolved form of the Department for Work and Pensions attendance allowance, might need to take place in 2021 rather than in 2020, as was originally planned. There might also be an impact on the launch date for new claims for Scottish carers allowance, which might need to move back a few months, to early 2022, and there could be an impact on the date on which we expect to complete the transfer of benefits cases from the DWP to Social Security Scotland.

Today, the Scottish Government has responded to an initiated question on our plan’s implications for social security delivery. The Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and Older People will update Parliament with more detail in the autumn, following completion of the impact assessment. We are having to make difficult decisions, but we are making them for the right reasons. After all, the risk of not delivering on the ambition of the payment is that we will not shift the curve on child poverty in the way that we know we have to. That is why, given the commitment across the Parliament to tackling child poverty and the collective agreement on the targets that have been set, the support of all members is crucial in enabling the early introduction of the payment.

Our progress report sets out the first year of action and the clear steps that we have taken towards making genuine reductions in child poverty. Those actions demonstrate our commitment to eradicating child poverty and offer a glimpse of what is possible when we have the powers and the will to act. On its own, the Scottish child payment stands to be one of the most progressive policy proposals since devolution. It will be backed by significant investment, and Scotland will be the only part of the UK that is making such a serious commitment to reducing—and ultimately eradicating—child poverty. The plan to introduce a Scottish child payment of £10 a week is bold and ambitious—and it will reduce child poverty, which is vital. Tackling such poverty head on is the only way in which we can make Scotland the best place in which to grow up.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement; I will allow around 30 minutes.

Michelle Ballantyne (Conservative, South Scotland)

I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement and I look forward to engaging with the Government on the development of its content.

I have two questions. First, I note that the statement contains no numbers. Will she tell us what the estimated delivery costs for the Scottish child payment will be, for the interim period and when it is fully rolled out? Secondly, I am concerned that I again find myself hearing in the chamber that there will be delays in the management of some of the devolved benefits. Will the cabinet secretary assure me that there will be no further delays on those benefits?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

In my statement I clearly set out the significant numbers that are associated with the policy. The most significant of those is the 30,000 children who will be lifted out of poverty by that action alone. Another is the three percentage point shift in the child poverty curve that we have needed to achieve for such a long time—an aim that has been made all the more difficult by Michelle Ballantyne’s party’s UK Government actions.

However, it is important to recognise that we will invest significantly in the delivery of the payment. In the first full year of early payments for under-sixes, the costs will be around £70 million. In the first full year of all payments for under-16s the costs will rise to £180 million.

Given that the Child Poverty Action Group has today published a report about the impact of the two-child limit, today really does tell a story of two Governments. The Scottish Government is committed to tackling child poverty head on, while people in the rest of the UK are bearing the brunt of the UK Government’s callous and punitive actions that are destroying lives across the country.

Elaine Smith (Labour, Central Scotland)

I thank the cabinet secretary for early sight of her statement. Scottish Labour will, of course, require to scrutinise the supplementary papers and the progress report in due course.

As we have consistently put the case for interim measures prior to the income supplement implementation date of 2022, we welcome the fact that the Government has responded with proposals to put in place, during this parliamentary session, payments to families with children who are aged under six years. However, the cabinet secretary must recognise that the ambitious target to reduce child poverty significantly, which was set by the Parliament in 2017, will not be met by this new measure alone. We remain concerned for all other children who are living in poverty right now.

In 2017, when Parliament considered the Child Poverty (Scotland) Bill at stage 3, the Scottish Government said that we needed to

“find ways to do more than just mitigate austerity and welfare reform”—[

Official Report

, 8 November 2017; c 63.]

Since the cabinet secretary has mentioned the two-child policy, I ask her why she will not take steps to mitigate the so-called “rape clause”, which, in her statement, she called a “despicable policy”.

Given that the Resolution Foundation has predicted that child poverty is on course to continue rising over the next five years, and that it is on course to hit a 20-year high of around 29 per cent by 2023-24, what further substantial measures will the Government put in place to ensure a dramatic reduction in child poverty over the next year?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I would have thought that the measure that I have announced would have been welcomed by Labour, given that it asked for it and that we have made substantial efforts to tackle child poverty through that action alone. It is a game changer. Other poverty groups have welcomed it, and it is a shame that Labour will not get behind it.

What a pity it is that we cannot raise the debate, given the kind of actions that we can deliver when we have the powers, the political will and the resolve. Imagine what reach the policy could have if we did not have to mitigate the disastrous policies of another Government.

I welcome Elaine Smith’s proposal to scrutinise the rest of the documents that we have published today, but I ask her to scrutinise “Every child, every chance: the tackling child poverty delivery plan 2018-22”, in which we give an undertaking to look comprehensively at all our policies across the Government, not just those in my portfolio or Shirley-Anne Somerville’s portfolio. Collectively, we have committed to tackling child poverty head-on, and that document includes a range of actions that will complement the delivery of the Scottish child payment to ensure that we can reach our interim targets.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

I am absolutely delighted that the new payment is being introduced, because it will provide substantial support to people in my constituency and across Scotland. What will the annual investment be in the new benefit?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I thank Rona Mackay for that question, because it gives me a chance to underline the investment that we are putting into the policy. In the first full year of our early payments to under-sixes, that is, in 2021-22, costs will be around £70 million. That figure will rise to £180 million in the first full year of all payments to under-16s, which is 2022-23. That represents a significant investment in children and families, and it should be seen alongside the more than £0.5 billion that we have invested in the past year alone in supporting low-income families across a wide range of policy areas.

Alison Johnstone (Green, Lothian)

I thank the cabinet secretary for providing advance sight of her statement.

Across the board, means-tested payments have lower rates of take-up than universal payments. Child benefit, which is a trusted and well-known source of support, is claimed by around 95 per cent of eligible families. The Scottish Government’s own analysis suggests that it would achieve better coverage through child benefit. If it is not going to use child benefit as a route to boost family incomes, what assurances can the cabinet secretary give that every low-income family that is eligible for the Scottish child payment will receive it, especially given that the gateway benefits that the cabinet secretary mentioned are underclaimed?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I explained that we will make sure that we maximise uptake. The qualifying benefits will be universal credit and universal credit legacy benefits, which include child tax credit, working tax credit, income support, housing benefit, income-based jobseekers allowance and income-based employment and support allowance. That will be a huge way in which we will be able to target those who need the support most.

It is important to recognise that almost two thirds of the children we expect to receive the payment live in the poorest 30 per cent of households with children, and that almost a quarter of the children we expect to receive it live in the poorest 10 per cent of households with children.

The Child Poverty Action Group has said that our new measure will be a “game changer” in tackling child poverty. It will lift 30,000 children out of poverty, will shift the curve by three percentage points and will make sure that the families who need it most get the payment into their pockets, which will lift the children who need support out of poverty.

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I give an absolutely unequivocal welcome to the measure. The fact that it will be implemented before the end of the parliamentary session is to be particularly welcomed.

We all know the reasons why there has been a substantial rise in child benefit claims—it is a result of the major cuts in social security benefits that have been imposed by the United Kingdom Government.

Will the cabinet secretary look again at the policy on the living wage as we move towards some kind of Brexit decision? One of the problems that we have is that, under European Union rules, we are not allowed to make it compulsory for companies gaining public sector contracts to pay the living wage. Given the new circumstances that are likely to arise over the next year or two, will the cabinet secretary look again at whether we will get to a position in which we can make that a requirement, as NHS Health Scotland has shown that that, too, would be an effective measure in dealing with child poverty?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Alex Neil is absolutely right

to point out that link. One of the drivers of poverty is low income. Alongside the payment, we have to ensure that people who are working get a fair remuneration for their effort, and we have to tackle in-work poverty. That is exactly why the work that is being done across Government to ensure that more employers pay the living wage is critically important. Even though we do not have all the levers at our disposal, Scotland has proportionately more people in receipt of the living wage than elsewhere in the United Kingdom. That shows that, with the will and the resolve, we can influence some of those decisions, despite not having the relevant powers here.

I would also point out to Alex Neil that “Every child, every chance”, the report that we are publishing today, contains a host of other ways in which we are providing parents with the support that they need to ensure that they get access to jobs and that they progress through their employment. That comes with significant investment to ensure that we can enable parents to get the right jobs to lift themselves out of poverty.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I thank the Government for the content of today’s statement and offer the full support of these benches. I will ask about uptake, in the same vein as Alison Johnstone.

Last week, Willie Rennie revealed at First Minister’s questions that only a third of families that are affected by poverty and which have two-year-old children are taking up the free childcare places that are available to them. We know that the uptake of Government initiatives is not always great. Will the cabinet secretary undertake to report to Parliament on uptake as we proceed with the implementation of the policy?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Shirley-Anne Somerville has to report back, anyway. I mention some of the things that I said earlier about the best start grant. That received unprecedented numbers of applications, which, again, points to the fact that, if you take away the stigma and encourage people to apply, people will take up the benefits on offer. We will certainly ensure that we use and explore all avenues that are open to us through the new payment and the delivery partner, Social Security Scotland, to maximise the impact of that, and we will work alongside those who want to be part of what we are doing to maximise the uptake so that the people who need this important benefit the most get access to it.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I, too, warmly welcome today’s announcement. The UN special rapporteur said that, for devolved Administrations, mitigation was not sustainable. Does the cabinet secretary agree that having full powers over all social security, employment and other areas would ensure that we could use all available levers to pull more people out of poverty and not have to use resources to protect people from another Government’s policies?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I agree. What strikes me as puzzling is why there are groans coming from the Labour benches as a very legitimate question is asked.

We are not content simply to mitigate or to tackle these issues with one hand tied behind our back. We are not just going to sit back, which is why we are using the powers that we have to deliver the benefits for those who need them most. We are not content simply to mitigate, which seems to be what Labour is content with. Why would we be content to mitigate when we are working up against a Government that has been described as “harsh and uncaring” and whose politically and ideologically driven decisions on welfare are consigning thousands of children to poverty?

We will use the powers that we have, and we will mitigate where we can. However, the UN rapporteur said that it was not sustainable to mitigate all the actions of the UK Government. We will continue to ensure that we can have all the powers that we need to ensure that we can tackle poverty more generally, in the way in which this party and this Government want to.

Alison Harris (Conservative, Central Scotland)

As the cabinet secretary stated, on Monday, the Government announced funding for impact assessments of community-based out-of-school care, which will commence in April 2020 and will take two years to complete. A framework will be published at the end of this summer, but when will new systems be put in place to deliver on the Government’s commitment to out-of-school care for school-age children from low-income families?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The £3 million fund that we announced this week was designed to test new approaches to focus the care and support that is required to enable parents of school-age children to access work and training. It is important that we test the flexibility and the different ways in which that care and support can be delivered. I launched the fund with Maree Todd in order to complement her work in driving forward the transformational change in early learning in childcare. We will make sure that Alison Harris is kept informed of the progress and framework for that. It is a critical part of ensuring that parents get the support that they need to access work, which should be paying the living wage.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

We welcome the fact that the Government has listened to Labour and front-line poverty campaigners, who have consistently called for the early introduction of the income supplement.

Given the fact that the cabinet secretary said in her statement that children often go hungry because families have had to wait months for their first universal credit payment, does she share concerns around using universal credit as a qualifying benefit? I ask that on a completely constructive basis. Universal credit has been roundly and rightly criticised. Can the Government not find an alternative way of delivering the payment?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

We have set out a comprehensive analysis of why we have taken the approach that we have, which is the same approach that we have taken for the best start grant. The analysis makes the point that we are using legacy benefits to ensure that we target the families who most need the support. Although there were groans and moans around mitigation and not wanting us to call for the powers that we need, we have to deal with the world that we are in. This is the world that we are in and that is why we are taking this approach. There is a comprehensive analysis of the reason why we are taking it, which is to make sure that, in the best possible way, we get to the right people and families who require the support.

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

Today’s announcement should be welcomed across the Parliament. What support does the cabinet secretary expect to get from other parties to ensure that the new benefit is introduced in the right timeframe, so that it can start working for children and families in Renfrewshire South and across Scotland?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I underline what I said in my statement: this stands to be one of the most progressive policy proposals since devolution. Given that we are about to celebrate the 20th anniversary of our Parliament being reconvened, that is fitting. Alongside our statutory child poverty targets and the wider actions that we are taking, the policy sets Scotland apart as being the only part of the UK that is taking such concerted action to reduce and eradicate child poverty. We are pleased that, despite the grumbling, in general, there seems to be a degree of support. Given that we collectively signed up to the Child Poverty (Scotland) Act 2017 and

to hitting the targets to shift the curve on child poverty,

it is incumbent on all

MSPs across the Parliament to welcome and support the new benefit and give their assurance today that, if they ever reach Administration, they will seek to continue its payment.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Can the cabinet secretary confirm whether the new regulations for payment of disability assistance to people with a terminal illness will be introduced in the summer of 2020, or will that benefit also be delayed?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Nothing has changed on that matter.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

I warmly welcome the statement and the substantial measures in it, and I am sure that my constituents in Greenock and Inverclyde will, too.

Can the cabinet secretary highlight other key priority areas where we can tackle inequality and reduce poverty?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

We will continue to work hard across the whole of Government in recognition of the fact that a whole-Government approach is required to tackle child poverty. We will continue to concentrate on the work that we are doing to support employment opportunities and actions on the living wage and to provide support through the financial health check and a range of other things. I note that Maree Todd is here. In relation to her portfolio, we will continue to focus on the flexible delivery of early learning and childcare in order to ensure that families get the support that they need to access employment and training opportunities without facing a burdensome cost.

A range of actions require our diligence and our commitment across Government to enable us to reach the interim targets and, ultimately, the targets that we have set out for 2030.

Gordon Lindhurst (Conservative, Lothian)

Will the Scottish Government introduce primary or secondary legislation as a basis for the new Scottish child payment? If so, when might we expect to see that?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

We will take the matter forward through secondary legislation. Over the summer months, we will have an opportunity to explore all the things that we will need to ensure that we continue with the safe and secure delivery of social security payments. My colleague Shirley-Anne Somerville will update the Parliament on that work and outline the ways in which we will take forward regulations to deliver the payment.

Iain Gray (Labour, East Lothian)

As we have heard, the Scottish child payment, which all my colleagues have welcomed this afternoon, will be both demand led and means tested. Can the minister confirm that the budget figures that she gave a few minutes ago were calculated on the basis of a notional 100 per cent take-up?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

We have looked at and analysed a number of different approaches, and the analysis and projections are being published today in the open and transparent way that is required. The payment will be demand led, and that is what we have based the figures on. The analysis is there for Iain Gray to look at, and if he comes back with further questions, I will be happy to answer them. However, it will be a demand-led service that is delivered in the way that I have outlined, through the qualifying benefits, and it stands to lift 30,000 children out of poverty. That shift in the child poverty rates is important if we are to hit the child poverty targets.

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

I add my voice in welcoming the cabinet secretary’s announcement of the Scottish child payment, and I look forward to seeing the difference that it will make in our communities. A lot of the content of the statement has been covered by previous questioners, so I ask the cabinet secretary what the other key priority areas are to tackle inequality and reduce child poverty.

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

We are taking forward a range of actions and activities to tackle child poverty. One of the big things to point out is the “Every child, every chance” progress report, which shows that, alongside the significant announcement that I have made today on the Scottish child payment, we are investing £527 million in targeted support for low-income families across a wide range of programmes to make a long-term sustainable difference to children who are living in poverty.

That includes some of the things that I outlined in my statement, such as the work that Shirley-Anne Somerville is taking forward and the mitigation that we have to do to help to protect our most vulnerable people from the harsh realities of UK reforms. It does not include the things that we all enjoy—early learning and childcare, education, universal services or the social contract that underpins the society that we in this Government maintain and hold dear.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I welcome the Scottish child payment. It is a good initiative—and a long overdue one—to help to tackle child poverty in Scotland and in Dundee, where 31 per cent of our children live in poverty.

As the cabinet secretary encourages take-up, will she show some flexibility? I have had a constituent who recently tried to take up the best start grant for a child who was starting school and was told that they were not eligible based not on income, but on the cut-off date, because the child’s school place was deferred. Will the cabinet secretary look at that issue of eligibility for the best start grant and encourage flexibility as she approaches this welcome new policy?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

As I understand it, people who defer can apply. If Jenny Marra wants to set out the specifics in correspondence, we will ensure that she gets information and support and that we take any necessary actions. We will deal with the points that she raised because we want to maximise uptake. If there are things that we can learn, we are happy to do so.

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

For as long as I have breath, I will always campaign for the full powers of independence. However, given that this Parliament made an all-party commitment to use our existing powers and resources to end child poverty, how will the cabinet secretary build consensus on not just what we will spend money on, but the tough choices that will have to be made about what we do not spend money on so that we can focus our resources and efforts, raise the debate and take on the challenge of ending child poverty?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I pay tribute to Angela Constance for taking forward the Child Poverty Act 2017 and the delivery plan and setting in train the actions that we are reporting on today, which will have a fundamental and transformative impact on children’s lives and future life chances. She is right to point out that the issues that we grapple with demand tough choices. Today, I outlined the tough choices and hard decisions that we have had to make to find and carve out a space to deliver this much-needed bit of support for families around the country.

The progress report captures actions across the whole Government. Whether for the economy, education or other portfolios, every cabinet secretary needs to be guided by the principle of creating a fairer and more equal country.

My job—as Angela Constance’s was before me—is to ensure that the voices and lived experiences of those who experience poverty are not forgotten, and to speak up for folk who are not heard, are disempowered and are surviving but not thriving.

The decisions that we take as a Government must be examined through the lens of child poverty to generate the better decisions that must be made. That is the only way that we will ever make good on our national performance framework, which I fundamentally believe in, because it values the success of our society based not only on gross domestic product, but on the depth of our humanity and kindness, our dignity and our wellbeing.

All those things will ensure that we as a Government take the right decisions and make tough choices. It might be bumpy, but if we have the collective support of this Parliament, we can overcome those bumps. Ultimately, we want a country that is fairer, supports children’s rights and eradicates poverty.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I have had a last-minute request, which I can accommodate.

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn)

I very much appreciate that, Presiding Officer.

I welcome the cabinet secretary’s announcement of the child payment, which will benefit 410,000 children around Scotland.

The cabinet secretary mentioned the required alteration of the timetable for the new disability assistance benefit, which I accept. Is the cabinet secretary still confident that new claims for disability assistance and reassessments for it will be carried out by Social Security Scotland, as opposed to the DWP, by the end of this parliamentary session?

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Nothing is changing in that regard. Given Bob Doris’s position as the convener of

Social Security Committee,

we will

furnish him with all the implications of the announcement and ensure that he has access to the full analysis. We will send him a letter to ensure that he is clear about what the announcement means in terms of the other benefits that are being delivered by Social Security Scotland.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes questions on the ministerial statement on the tackling child poverty delivery plan first-year progress report.

Tenement Maintenance

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S5M-17892, in the name of Kevin Stewart, on the working group on tenement maintenance.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I welcome the publication earlier this month of the final recommendations report of the working group on maintenance of tenement scheme property. I commend the group for bringing together members from all parties and a wide range of stakeholder interests. As convener, Graham Simpson has led the work to bring the report and its recommendations to publication. I also commend his predecessor as convener, Ben Macpherson, for his work to bring the group together and get it started.

The consensus that has been achieved is reflected in the motion today, which has the support of all parties in the Parliament. The motion seeks the Parliament’s agreement that the working group’s recommendations merit serious and careful consideration. I fully agree with that, and I have previously committed to consider the recommendations. Today, I reiterate that commitment. I intend to make a substantive response to the report in the autumn.

I note the working group’s intention to hold a conference in September to consider the recommendations. The Government will support the approach, and I am sure that discussions at the event will help us to take the matter forward.

Many people in Scotland live in tenements that will continue to provide good-quality, safe, sustainable and affordable homes for many years—but only if we look after the homes that we live in. Owners of tenements need to accept their responsibility for protecting and preserving them, whether we are talking about our older built heritage or brand-new flats, and they must carry out repairs and maintenance to common parts of their properties.

According to the most recent Scottish house condition survey local authority report, it is estimated that 36 per cent of Scottish homes are in tenements. Disrepair is worse in tenements than in other kinds of house; it is estimated that 66 per cent of houses and 76 per cent of tenements have at least some minor disrepair, which can cover a wide range of defects, and that around 5 per cent of houses and 8 per cent of tenements have extensive disrepair.

Regular maintenance is not just good practice; it is much more cost effective to invest in regular, proactive maintenance than to let small defects grow, through neglect, into problems that need expensive and potentially ruinous repairs. It is frustrating for owners who accept their responsibilities and are keen to work with their neighbours to find their efforts hampered by a culture of poor maintenance.

It is also necessary to look after our homes to play our part in tackling the global climate emergency. We will need more than 80 per cent of the homes that we currently live in to be in use in 2050.

In its report, the working group

recognises that primary legislation will be needed to deliver its recommendations in full and that time is needed for the development and passage of bills. A 10-year timescale is anticipated to implement the recommendations in full, including the proposal to commission the Scottish Law Commission to consider the complex interaction of maintenance responsibilities and property law. I will include the point in the response to the recommendations that I intend to make in autumn.

I completely agree that owners of tenements should plan ahead for future common repairs and maintenance and that they must be prepared to work together and pay their share of the cost of the work. However, as the working group notes in its report, it might be difficult to enforce compulsory sinking funds or five-yearly inspections. It is not clear what would happen if a flat owner did not have the money to contribute to a sinking fund or refused to pay.

Some home owners would not welcome the need to hand over sums of money for repairs that are not required at that point. That does not mean that the proposals are unworkable, but there needs to be serious thought about how they could be funded and enforced in practice; we all need to work together to address those issues. The motion recognises the challenges that must be met to ensure that our housing stock can continue to provide safe and sustainable homes for the future.

Andy Wightman (Green, Lothian)

The minister has highlighted challenges, such as the sinking fund. Does he accept that there are plenty of examples around the world of such arrangements that operate very smoothly? Although it is a challenge, it is not impossible.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

I have not said that it is impossible, and we need to look at what has happened elsewhere to get that absolutely right. I will respond in depth in the autumn about it. Mr Wightman can be assured that we will not do all this in isolation; we will look at practice elsewhere to see whether we can plagiarise the good ideas from other places.

I am pleased that what the Government has done has been acknowledged. We have taken action to improve the condition of Scottish tenements; the positive impact of missing shares powers and equity loans are noted in the report. In my constituency in Aberdeen, I have seen how missing shares powers have had that positive impact—often the threat is enough to persuade an owner to engage with neighbours. However, I accept that we need to go further.

The energy efficient Scotland programme will drive change in Scotland’s housing stock. Poor condition is a factor in the difficulties of keeping houses warm and affordable. A building that lets out heat or lets in water because it is in a poor state of repair is likely to consume more energy to heat comfortably, and that will lead to higher carbon emissions.

We will consider how to take those issues forward as part of the programme. The equity loan scheme provides access to funding for some maintenance works in conjunction with energy efficiency improvements, which could provide a route to funding for tenement owners. We will continue to monitor the scheme’s performance in the coming months with a view to wider roll-out.

I also give an undertaking today that the recommendation to link a five-yearly report on tenement condition to the home report will be looked at as part of the Government’s response to the recommendations for improving home reports.

Traditional stone tenements are a distinctive part of Scotland’s built heritage. We have added to that with more modern types of flat. Our system of individual property ownership is also distinctive. As Professor Robertson notes in his recent report on common repairs for the working group, citing an observation from Roman law—communio est mater rixarum—co-ownership is the mother of disputes. He quotes Hugo Grotius from the 17th century:

“common ownership could bring nothing but discontent and dissention”.

That may be so, but I hope that the report of the working group on tenement maintenance can be a basis for finding a way forward that will allow us to improve co-operation between owners, helping us to build a culture of proactive common maintenance and to preserve our unique buildings for the benefit of future generations.

I move,

That the Parliament appreciates the work of the Working Group on Maintenance of Tenement Scheme Property and the publication of its Final Recommendations Report; acknowledges that the group had cross-party representation and has gathered views from across the Parliament and that of the housing sector; notes that the report acknowledges the important action that has already been taken to improve the condition of Scottish tenements; recognises the challenges that must be met to ensure that Scotland’s housing stock can continue to provide safe and sustainable homes for the future, and believes that the group’s recommendations merit serious and careful consideration.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I thank the Government for giving up its debating time to debate this issue; the Minister for Europe, Ben Macpherson, who was the initial convener of the working group; and fellow members who have been an integral part of the group—Andy Wightman, Daniel Johnson, John Mason, Jeremy Balfour, Maureen Watt, Stuart McMillan and Gordon Lindhurst, who I suspect was the only member who understood the minister’s attempt at Latin.

We have had a few debates on this subject, but the condition of housing does not get nearly enough attention in this place. It affects all of us and, if things go wrong, it can harm people’s physical and mental health.

We have all dealt with cases of buildings that are in need of repair, damp, insecure or leaking. The statistics—the minister touched on some of them—paint a pretty grim picture. We know from the most recent Scottish house condition survey that 68 per cent of homes have some degree of disrepair; disrepair to critical elements stands at 50 per cent; 28 per cent had some instance of urgent disrepair; and 5 per cent had extensive disrepair. Those figures have not moved in a year. Nearly a fifth of our housing is pre-1919—that is 467,000 homes, and 68 per cent of them have disrepair to critical elements. That is a lot of homes that need a lot of work done to them.

We need to see housing as part of the fabric of our nation. Our built heritage is part of our infrastructure, and we need to view tenement maintenance in that way. There is a need to act. Recent statistics for Edinburgh, for example, show that there are 20 incidents of falling masonry every month. That is just in Edinburgh—if we imagine that replicated across the country, we see the scale of the problem. We are looking not only at older buildings that one might traditionally think of as tenements but at newer buildings, too. In East Kilbride, where I live, a lot of the buildings, which were all built around the same time—they are not pre-1919—are falling into disrepair.

The working group on tenement maintenance is a genuinely cross-party group. That is important, because if we are going to tackle this extremely difficult issue, it needs to be done with the approval of every party in the chamber. Earlier this month, we published our final report with key recommendations; I will come to those in a moment. Implementing the changes will not be easy, and there will be a cost, but we cannot ignore the human cost to physical and mental health and wellbeing of not taking action.

There are three recommendations. First, we believe that tenement properties should be inspected every five years, and a report should be prepared that will be publicly available to existing or prospective owners, tenants, neighbours and policy makers. The purpose of the report will be to show what condition the building is in, how much it will cost to bring it up to standard if it is defective and what needs to be done by way of on-going maintenance.

Secondly, the group recommended the compulsory establishment of owners associations. Such associations are an essential element of tenement maintenance in that they provide leadership and effective decision-making processes and are able to enter into contracts. If, for whatever reason, an owners association cannot be established or it fails, compulsory factoring could be the fallback position.

The final recommendation is the establishment of building reserve funds. There was a lot discussion over how such a fund would look and operate; the minister rightly touched on some of the challenges in that respect. It was decided that a central fund was preferable to an owners association-held fund, as it would have better protection and would make it easier to prevent fraud. We know that none of those ideas is simple. The issue is very complex. The solution could be controversial and a lot of people will not like it, but it needs to be done. The report provides suggestions for further research and actions as well as timelines for the implementation of the recommendations. As the minister said, it could take 10 years or more.

There is a lot still to do, but I am confident that we are on the right path, and I know that the Scottish Government takes the matter seriously. I am pleased to hear that the minister will be making a statement in the autumn—I look forward to that. We need cross-party support, which is why no amendments to the motion have been lodged.

I give my appreciation for the hard work and effort of the stakeholders in the group, our secretariat—Euan Leitch from the Built Environment Forum Scotland and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors—as well as the other organisations and individuals who took part. Without them, we would not be where we are today.

Last May, Parliament voted in favour of a motion that called for a review of legislation on tenements. That has not happened yet, but I hope that today’s debate will be the catalyst for it. I was pleased to hear the minister say that he will make a statement and that the Government will take part in a conference on the issue because, to be frank, doing nothing is not an option.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I, too, begin by reeling off a list of thanks. I thank my fellow members of the cross-party working group. Taking part in such a group h

as been genuinely refreshing. It has worked in a very constructive way and certainly without any hint of party-political partisanship.

I thank the Government for making time for the issue to be discussed. The issue is serious, but it could easily be dismissed as technical or not necessarily as important as I believe that it is. I thank Euan Leitch, who put in an absolute power of work. Without his input, the report would not have been written. I also thank RICS, which supplied much of the wherewithal to make the report happen.

There is a simple reason why I think that the work is important. Tenemented residences and homes are absolutely core to my constituency. When we think of Edinburgh Southern, which I represent, we think of places such as Marchmont, Bruntsfield and Morningside. Those places are absolutely built on tenemented maintenance, and we need to maintain such fantastic areas and areas that we might not consider to be tenemented. As we have heard, the buildings range from post-war local authority-built houses to subdivided mansions. All those types of building—that rich seam of different types of homes—are tenemented. We need to maintain them not just because they are nice buildings—many of them are—but because they are critical to our country.

As Graham Simpson pointed out, housing is infrastructure. However, it is our most fundamental form of infrastructure. We are talking about the very homes in which we live. Housing is critical.

The minister and Graham Simpson set out some of the details. Before I set out some of the context, I acknowledge that Andy Wightman established the concept of housing being infrastructure. That is critical. Although housing is infrastructure, we must recognise the context in which the debate is taking place. We are seeing something of a housing crisis on many counts.

We are seeing a crisis of availability. Huge numbers of people in the city of Edinburgh have to live in temporary accommodation for far longer than they should have to. On affordability, too many people find themselves priced out of the housing market or simply find that housing costs take up a disproportionate amount of their wage. There is also the issue of sustainability. I was glad that the minister made points about the environmental sustainability of our housing and the need to invest in that for those reasons.

Those are the reasons why housing is so important. Maintenance is critical to housing for all those social goods, because housing underpins so much wellbeing in this country.

There is a clear public interest in taking forward measures such as those that are set out in the report. It is important that we preserve our housing stock and invest in it for future generations. It is not just the people who live in the houses now who will benefit from investment; future generations who will live in those houses will, too.

That is why we need legal recognition of the reality of tenemented housing. People do not own individual bits of property that are completely distinguished from other people’s property; in effect, they are co-owners of a single building. That fact is not currently recognised in the law, and that needs to change.

Over and above those points, there is a fundamental point of public safety that we need to recognise, which Graham Simpson alluded to. In the city of Edinburgh, there are huge numbers of roof falls every month. Between 2014 and 2018, the number of roof falls almost quadrupled. The 78 roof falls in Edinburgh, including 53 masonry falls, rose to a total of 254 roof falls and 179 masonry falls in 2018. Roof falls can be lethal, and they have been lethal in the past.

The proposals are not simply things that it would be nice to have and which would make lives a little bit better, although they would do. They could potentially save lives. The proposals have already been outlined, but we need building checks to make sure that the buildings continue to be safe and habitable, because preventative spend is much more cost effective than spend that is required when the damage has already been done.

We need owners associations so that people have the structure and the entity through which they can make collective decisions—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You must close now.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I will close shortly. For those reasons—