Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Tuesday, February 7, 2023

Official Report 1000KB pdf

---

Social Security Programme Business Case

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-07805, in the name of Ben Macpherson, on an update to the social security programme business case.

15:24  

Since the passing of the United Kingdom Government’s Scotland Act 2016 and the unanimous passing of the Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018 in the Scottish Parliament, establishing Scotland’s social security system has been the biggest delivery programme since devolution, with new powers allowing us to better support the people of Scotland.

We have already achieved an extraordinary amount in that time, and I pay tribute to the many people who have been involved in this shared challenge and success, including people on our experience panels, stakeholders who have helped us to shape our benefits, the staff of Social Security Scotland, Scottish Government officials and our delivery partners in the UK Government. We have achieved it together.

Social security is a collective endeavour; it is a collective investment in people. That is one of the eight principles enshrined in the 2018 act, along with others such as the role of social security in reducing poverty and our system being designed with the people of Scotland on the basis of evidence, continuous improvement, efficient delivery and value for money.

Together, we can be proud of what we have already achieved, including the introduction, despite the pandemic, of 12? Scottish Government benefits—13 from later this month—seven of which are entirely new forms of financial support that are only available here in Scotland. Those are all delivered based on the agreed values of dignity, fairness and respect.

Does the minister think that it is fair or dignified to let people wait, sometimes for up to six months, to get their adult disability payment?

I appreciate the point that Mr Rennie makes and the correspondence that we have had on the matter. Many people are receiving adult disability payment efficiently, but there have been a number of cases where people have waited too long. We are proactively putting changes into the system as it develops to ensure that waiting times go down. That is an important point, and much of my focus is on that on a day-to-day basis.

As Audit Scotland said in its report last year,

“Successfully launching new benefits during the pandemic has been a significant achievement for the Scottish Government.”

Social Security Scotland has performed well, and its annual client surveys have been positive, showing, for example, that 94 per cent of people think that they have been treated with the kindness that they deserve. That is testament to the way that we deliberately take time to co-design our benefits with people who will receive them—one of the many things that we are doing differently in our system.

Audit Scotland also made it clear that it had real concerns around the challenging timescales. Has the minister reflected on those concerns?

That is another important point, which I will come to shortly.

Next year we will spend a record £5.2 billion through Scottish Government benefits—£776 million more than the funding that we are forecast to get from the UK Government through block grant adjustments—providing important support to more than 1 million people in Scotland. That will double to an expected 2 million people in 2024-25, which demonstrates the scale and pace of the expansion of our Scottish social security system.

By 2027-28, spending on Scottish Government benefits will rise to £7.3 billion, which is more than £1.4 billion over and above transfers from the UK Government. On top of that, we support people through discretionary housing payments, the Scottish welfare fund and the council tax reduction scheme.

Our significant investment demonstrates the political choices that we make in Scotland to prioritise support for the people who need it most, particularly during these challenging times. That includes delivering our Scottish child payment of £25 per week per child for 387,000 eligible children.

Last year, we launched the adult disability payment across Scotland: a major milestone allowing us to make a real difference to people’s lives, with no-one being subject to Department for Work and Pensions-style assessments or functional examinations.

Last week, we launched a public consultation on the eligibility criteria for the mobility component of the adult disability payment. That is the first step that will inform the independent review that we have committed to establish later this year.

Will the minister take an intervention?

This is the last intervention that I will take.

I thank the minister for taking the intervention. To say that the consultation has been underwhelming is an understatement. One organisation has described it to me as follows:

“it really is something… pages of notes about cost and numerous references to a ‘fixed budget’ and precious little about delivering the support disabled people need. They say outright at one point”—

this is quoting from the consultation document—

“‘Major changes which result in new, additional spending will therefore not be deliverable within this parliamentary term.’ Don’t think they could be much more clear that they are planning to do absolutely nothing with this consultation”.

How would the minister respond to that?

That is an extremely negative position to take on an important consultation. I would hope that Pam Duncan-Glancy will be sharing the consultation among stakeholder groups and encouraging people to engage, because we genuinely want to hear from people.

We are also investing in automated payments, so that people get their benefits without needing to apply for them. We have made significant progress on that this year. That includes automatically awarding child winter heating assistance and carers allowance supplement.

I am pleased to confirm, again, that we have now received the data that we need from the Department for Work and Pensions for our 13th benefit—the winter heating payment—which will provide a reliable investment of more than £20 million each year to support eligible households. That is more than double the £8.3 million that, on average, the DWP provided through its cold weather payments during each of the past seven years. As we confirmed last week, work is now progressing as planned and payments will be made automatically this month or next to up to 415,000 people who are eligible.

Parliament will recall that, following the impact of the pandemic, three of Audit Scotland’s recommendations in its report last year were: conclude replanning activity; set out timelines for remaining benefits; and publish an updated programme business case, including refreshed estimates for implementation costs.

We have published that business case today. It is a detailed and evidence-based rationale for what we are doing and the costs of doing so. The business case includes an uplift in essential implementation costs from £651 million in 2020 to the current estimate of £715 million this year, which is driven by the additional work resulting from the pandemic and the positive choices that we have made to support people, including creating, increasing and extending our Scottish child payment.

In setting out the timeline for delivery of the next phase of Scottish Government benefits, I would again like to pay tribute to stakeholders, experience panels, and officials and ministers in the Department for Work and Pensions with whom we work closely. It is no secret that the Scottish Government disagrees profoundly with the UK Government over several things, including its approach to many aspects of social security, but, by and large, those disagreements have not coloured co-operation on devolved social security matters. I welcome that.

I am pleased to report that we agreed at the meeting of the joint ministerial group on welfare on 25 January that the timeline as set out in the programme business case is appropriate and achievable, and that both Governments are committed to providing the resources that are required to ensure delivery.

It is hard to overstate the importance and complexity of case transfer. It is as challenging as launching new benefits, and it is made more complex by the age of the DWP systems from which we are transferring people. I am pleased to confirm that we continue to make steady progress on the safe and secure transfer of 700,000 disability and carer cases from the DWP to Social Security Scotland and that we remain on track to complete that work by December 2025.

Given some reports that we have seen today, I must clarify that we used to extend agency agreements annually, but we have now agreed to extend those to the end of 2025, which is when we intend to complete case transfer. However, we have also created a three-month contingency to March 2026—for safety reasons only, because, as I said, we remain on track to transfer those cases from the DWP to Social Security Scotland by December 2025. All that makes it really important that we continue with our measured approach, with the seamless, safe and secure transition of people’s payments as a top priority.

Our 14th Scottish Government benefit, which will replace and improve on the UK Government’s carers allowance, will be called the carer support payment. The benefit will be launched in pilot phase by the end of 2023, ahead of national launch in spring 2024. I will set out more detail of our approach to the carer support payment this spring, when we publish our response to the extensive consultation that was undertaken on carer benefits last year.

Our 15th benefit—the pension age winter heating payment—will launch in winter 2024 and will replace the winter fuel payment. I am glad to say that we have now agreed a two-year extension of the social fund with the DWP, which is required to enable that to happen.

In autumn 2024, we also plan to introduce the pilot of the pension age disability payment, which is our 16th Scottish Government benefit, which will replace the current UK Government attendance allowance. A national roll-out of the benefit is scheduled for 2025.

Finally on the timeline, I intend to consult on the subject of employment injuries assistance and on the replacement of the current UK Government industrial injuries disablement benefit in the next few months. I acknowledge the work of MSPs and organisations that have an interest in the matter. Employee injuries assistance is a very complex area, and it is important that we work with stakeholders to decide the right approach, recognising the limits on our devolved powers in relation to issues such as health and safety and employment law. We need to recognise the substantial costs and operational requirements of providing a new benefit and the challenges of moving from what is an antiquated and entirely paper-based UK benefit.

I am pleased to say that the DWP remains committed to working with us to agree an approach that is practicable, affordable and, of course, in the interests of people, including current recipients. It is right that we take appropriate time to consider all those matters thoroughly.

In relation to social security, Audit Scotland said:

“The Scottish Government is preparing well for the next stages of delivery and is managing the complex programme of work effectively.”

While doing so, we are ensuring continuous improvement of our systems and are building the capability of Social Security Scotland. Those are fundamental requirements to ensuring that we continue to deliver for the people of Scotland and keep to the principles of the 2018 act. That sort of work does not often capture public attention, and there is no reason why it should, but it is important that we recognise the huge amount of work that is required, day in, day out, to develop and build on the strong foundations that we have achieved so far.

We have limited powers over social security and a largely fixed budget, which has been shrinking in real terms due to rampant inflation. That, as well as the practical realities, obviously restricts what we are able to deliver. However, despite those limitations, we are, with pride and purpose, delivering real and meaningful change through Social Security Scotland, which is helping more people in more ways and is significantly uplifting incomes. We are doing that by putting into practice our shared commitment to treat people with dignity, fairness and respect—to deliver social security not just as a public service but as a common good and human right. It is in that spirit of service that I am pleased to open today’s debate.

I move,

That the Parliament notes the updated social security programme business case; recognises the delivery of 12 Scottish social security benefits, seven of which are new forms of support only available in Scotland, including the Scottish Child Payment, which is a vital part of the collective national mission to tackle child poverty; acknowledges the imminent payment of the Scottish Government’s 13th benefit, the Winter Heating Payment, which, in 2022-23, will provide 415,000 low-income households with a reliable £50 payment, and thereafter an annual reliable payment, backed by approximately £20 million; acknowledges the UK Government’s contribution to the joint programme of delivery of Scottish Government benefits, and that the commitment of both governments will be required to deliver the programme business case; looks forward to the introduction of further Scottish Government benefits; agrees that social security is an essential investment in the people of Scotland; appreciates the important financial support that Scottish Government benefits provide to people, particularly during the current cost of living crisis, and welcomes the record investment of £5.2 billion in benefit expenditure in 2023-24, which will provide meaningful support to over one million people, including low-income households, disabled people and carers.

15:36  

I am pleased to speak in this debate and will be happy to move the amendment in my name.

I would like to mention at the outset that I am disappointed that the Scottish Government chose not to furnish us with the updated programme business case until only one day ago. I think that we can all agree that it would have been much more preferable if we could have had a reasonable amount of time to fully scrutinise the document before coming to the chamber to discuss it. Accountability? Maybe not.

In 2016, the people of Scotland were told that the Scottish Government was embarking on a journey to create a uniquely Scottish social security system. They were promised that, in relatively short order and with relative ease, the Government would set up a system that would take over from the big, bad, scary DWP and provide benefits to all those who need them in a manner that demonstrates dignity, fairness and respect. It is clear that the years between then and now have not been kind. Far from the sunlit uplands that we were promised, devolved benefits have been a mess of missed deadlines, delayed payments and disappointed claimants.

Let us have a look at the story so far—a story that, as my amendment notes, shows that the Scottish Government has run over budget and over time and has woefully underdelivered.

Let us take things one by one. At every level, the Scottish Government has treated timelines that it committed to as though they were mere guidelines. The most recent example of that relates to the winter heating payment, which is fast becoming a spring heating payment. The payment was due to be made in February this year. However, as the minister has just confirmed, it will not be paid to some people until March, which means that many families will slip into need.

I want to give Mr Balfour an opportunity to correct the record. Does he agree that I have always said that we will pay the winter heating payment from February? The reason for that is that we were able to acquire the scan from the DWP only on 31 January, despite requesting it at an earlier date. However, we understood the pressures on our DWP colleagues, and we are working together to deliver that important payment to more than 415,000 people in Scotland.

I am afraid that I do not agree with the minister. He said:

“To ensure that payments can begin in February”—

It was “from February”.

No, it was “in February”. He went on:

“it is critical that the DWP maintains its commitment to providing data to Social Security Scotland by 31 January, to allow us to conclude our internal assurance of the 400,000 records.”—[Official Report, Social Justice and Social Security Committee, 15 December 2022; c 3.]

The Scottish Government once again tried to blame the DWP for the delay. However, the minister cannot hide from the fact that the DWP handed over the required data in the way that he negotiated. When he came to the committee in December, he said that he was happy with that and that it was a fine time in which to get the payments delivered. He is now rewriting history.

When did the DWP hand over the data? It was 31 January. The blame for the delay lies squarely at the feet of the Scottish Government. For the minister to simply put two sentences about the issue—or even two words—in his speech today shows how little he cares about the most vulnerable people in Scotland.

On a larger scale, we are seeing further delays in the handover of devolved benefits, with the BBC reporting today that the DWP will be delivering benefits in Scotland until 2026, which is six years after the original projected handover date. This mess has been created by the same people who claim that they could set up a fully independent country in 18 months. The people of Scotland will not forgive them for the promises that they have broken.

The Government not only has a problem with timescales but seems to be incapable of sticking to a budget. The projected costs of setting up and running Social Security Scotland have ballooned over the years. Running costs rose by 33 per cent or £65 million year on year between 2020 and 2021-22. The figure will only go up as more benefits are, at some point, devolved. In fact, Audit Scotland has estimated that the Scottish Government will have to find £760 million by 2026 if it continues on the current spending course. That is not a small amount of money.

Finally, the Scottish Government’s social security programme has chronically underdelivered for the people of Scotland. The number of complaints received by Social Security Scotland has increased by more than 400 per cent since 2018. Claimants are unable to reach help and chatlines have broken down. People have given up because the system is simply too backed up. People are having to wait four months for their disability payment application to be processed, and some have waited six months for a decision. That is six months without vital aid for some of the most vulnerable people in our country, which is simply unacceptable.

Many Scots who live in the coldest places have missed out on cash this year to heat their homes. As Mr Macpherson admitted to the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, that is the case for those in the north of Scotland.

It has also become clear from evidence that the committee has taken that Social Security Scotland is not gathering the required data to properly evaluate its performance in providing benefits. Without the necessary data, how can the Parliament and other scrutiny bodies properly understand whether the agency is fulfilling its duties?

The programme is over time and over budget and has underdelivered. The Scottish Government has made a mess and simply has to get its act together. The people of Scotland deserve better, and if the minister cannot provide that, he should step aside and let someone else have a go.

I move amendment S6M-07805.1, to insert at end:

“; acknowledges that the Parliament was only given sight of the updated social security programme business case one day before it was debated; notes that the Winter Heating Payment will not be paid to many households until March 2023, which will likely be after the worst of the winter weather is over, and affirms that the Scottish Government’s social security programme has run over budget and over time and, in many cases, has underdelivered for the people of Scotland.”

15:43  

I, too, thank the minister for the advance sight of the business case. The cost of living crisis is getting increasingly worse, which makes a functioning, fast and effective social security system more important than ever. However, the updated business case that has been published today reaffirms that people in Scotland are dealing with a system that is not those things.

We can see that that is the case in the handling of the new winter heating payment. The 415,000 people across Scotland who are eligible for the payment were told that they might be paid this month, but we now hear that it could be next month. The Scottish National Party negotiated the deadline with the DWP for the transfer of the necessary data for payments to be made in February. That deadline was met, but now the minister says that the payments could be made in March.

When people are struggling, every penny counts. When they are freezing and expecting money that does not come, that can throw everything up in the air. That is what the Government has done to hundreds of thousands of people who were relying on the payments. Saying that they would be paid this month or next is no use for people whose bills are piling up now. They cannot tell their energy supplier that they will pay in February or March.

The Government has lacked urgency on the payment from the offset, when people really needed it to act fast. The benefit that it replaces recognised the urgency of action in cold weather and was paid within 14 days. Social security in Scotland was supposed to be fairer: paying in March for heating that is needed in the cold winter is not fair.

Does Pam Duncan-Glancy acknowledge that, under the UK Government’s cold weather payments system, on average about 185,000 people received that benefit, whereas the Scottish Government’s winter heating payment is projected to support around 415,000 people, including many people in Glasgow who often would not have received cold weather payments at all?

As the minister will know, and as I responded in committee, I am sure that people will be grateful for the £1 a week, although it is not going to scratch the surface. However, the bottom line is that, on the basis of temperatures in 2021-22, 65,000 people will lose out under the Scottish Government’s process and proposed benefit.

The devolution of that payment, as with others, was an opportunity to develop something new that would have a more significant impact on poverty and create a fairer system. Instead, the Government has created a payment that Energy Action Scotland has said is worse for fuel poverty than the one that it has replaced. Poor planning, disjointed communications and a lack of pace are common themes. The Scottish Government has done well to create a more positive narrative, but that is not enough. Under the surface, payments are delayed, processes are failing and social security in Scotland is being propped up by the DWP, because three quarters of benefits are still administered by it, due to the Scottish Government delays.

Last week, the UK Government agreed to extend existing agency agreements for carers allowance and the personal independence payment until 2025 and for other benefits including the industrial injuries payment—I appreciate the update given today—until 2026. In so doing, it made clear that any further slippage would create significant delivery risk. That means that, for many people, it will be nearly eight years after the devolution of benefits that they get the new and improved system that devolution could offer and that they were promised.

Even where the roll-out of a benefit has begun, such as the adult disability payment, there are problems. Devolution of social security could have consigned to history degrading and arbitrary measures such as the 20m and 50 per cent rules, developed indicators that reflect the real experience of disabled people and delivered a rate of payment that reflects the real living cost for disabled people. Instead, the adequacy and eligibility criteria are a mirror copy of the DWP’s and the consultation on it says that nothing about it will change in this parliamentary session.

In the meantime, disabled people across the country are struggling to afford to charge essential medical equipment. They are being let down not just by the lack of ambition but by the lack of effectiveness. They are facing additional barriers when making claims because the system is not supporting them in the way that it was designed to do. In an answer to my parliamentary question in January, the Government told me that only 23 people had been referred from Social Security Scotland to VoiceAbility, which holds a £20 million contract to provide independent advocacy. VoiceAbility told the Social Justice and Social Security Committee that work to embed

“the offer of advocacy ... in the agency’s information, systems, process and training”

now needs to

“gather pace.”—[Official Report, Social Justice and Social Security Committee, 24 November 2022; c 11.]

Embedding that offer and equipping people with the support that they need when making applications might reduce the redetermination rates, which last year saw 86 per cent of child disability payment applications awarded after decisions were overturned by review, in a system that we were told would get the decision right first time.

We were also told that the system would be dignified and fair, yet social Security Scotland is spending an undisclosed amount on a counter-surveillance team. One of the worst aspects of the DWP system is that people believe that it is spying on them—most likely, on those who are struggling the most in society.

Will the member take an intervention?

Will I get the time back, Presiding Officer?

Yes.

Then I will.

Does Pam Duncan-Glancy recall the session with Social Security Scotland at committee in December, where it was made clear that we are taking the counter-fraud measures to make sure that Social Security Scotland is not a victim of organised crime? Does she not think that that is important?

We pressed on that question. I would be keen to understand more about the evidence that the minister has of international organised criminals trying to claim benefits from the Scottish social security system that makes it a significant enough risk to put money into a counter-surveillance team. I would appreciate any information that we can have on that. That is one of the worst aspects of the DWP system and now it is being used here.

Social security spend should be going as directly as possible into people’s pockets, but, unfortunately, a lot is being spent on fixing systems, including the information technology system. Delays and poor planning by ministers have created a system that is slow and not functioning as it should, which is leading to operational costs that far exceed the Government’s initial spending commitment. Even worse, the Scottish Fiscal Commission has said that, without proper tools and techniques to publish data, Social Security Scotland is limiting its ability to accurately forecast spend.

What we do with the money that we have is crucial. Because we are not managing it properly, money that should be going to people is not going to them. People are being led up a hill on a false promise of better security, while other budgets are being raided to cover the shortfall, which strips resources from other areas that can help to keep people off benefits.

I am afraid that the Scottish National Party has missed opportunities and wasted resources. It cannot account for how it will pay for things in a few years’ time. It is overspending on projects, underdelivering on services and overseeing a system of chaos. That is not fast, functioning or effective, which is what people were promised. Now, in an unprecedented cost of living crisis, the Government must do better and give people in Scotland the social security system for which they have waited for too long and which they deserve.

I move amendment S6M-07805.2, to leave out from “recognises” to end and insert:

“notes that the Scottish Government has ceded control of vital benefits to the Department for Work and Pensions until the second half of the decade, creating a further year's delay for hundreds of thousands of potential recipients of Scottish benefits; further notes that costs for delivering the social security programme are spiralling out of control, with higher than predicted estimates for IT and staffing; acknowledges that the Scottish Government’s changes to the winter payment will leave many people in Scotland out of pocket over winter, during a cost of living crisis; calls on the Scottish Government to commit to no one losing out financially from its new Winter Heating Payment, and notes that the lack of transparency on plans to fund increased costs of Social Security Scotland's implementation have led to the inability of key organisations such as Audit Scotland to properly scrutinise Scottish Government policy.”

15:50  

The transfer of the social security powers in the Smith agreement after the referendum was a significant moment. It was the first time that powers had been disentangled from the UK apparatus into the Scottish Government scene, unlike other devolved powers, which were already devolved within the Scottish Office. That was a significant step. It was ambitious. It was the first time that that had happened and it represented up to a £3 billion budget with several different benefits involved.

We supported that. We wanted to work in partnership with the Government on dignity, fairness and respect. We thought that it was important that, when we set up a new welfare system, all parties worked together to try to achieve something better for the country.

I have to say that expectations were high partly because of the expectations that the Government set. They contrasted quite starkly—not unreasonably so—with those of the UK Government system, and the Scottish Government tried to make those significant ambitions a reality. Then, reality struck about how difficult those things would be. First, there was the delay in the transfer of the powers. As the minister said at the time, that was necessary in order to get it right. However, as Pam Duncan-Glancy said, we are coming up to eight years after it was promised that some of the powers would be transferred.

I am afraid to say that the system has not been managed well. It is unacceptable for people to wait for up to six months for their adult disability payment no matter how complex the case is. I got a message this week from Social Security Scotland that said:

“some disability benefits decisions are taking longer than we would like ... The majority of people will receive a decision within four months”.

Originally, the promise was that it would be two to two and a half months. Now, the majority will receive a decision within four months.

To build on my answer to Mr Rennie’s intervention on me on that point, it is important to recognise that that piece of correspondence would also have said:

“although processing times vary from a few weeks ... a small proportion of very complex cases”,

in which additional evidence is required, have taken longer. We are working to improve that.

It is still a majority who will have to wait four months, when it was expected that it would be two to two and a half months. The minister should not brush it aside too quickly, because I am worried about what other benefits will be impacted in that way.

The child payment will be incredibly important, as the Government has rightly said, for tackling child poverty. Those ambitions are set out, the targets are clear and the dates are not far away. If there is any slippage in that payment, it will be difficult to achieve those targets. Therefore, it would be helpful to have absolute assurances from the minister that he has learnt the lesson from the adult disability payment and that we will not have a repeat with the roll-out of the child payment, because it will go to significant numbers of people and we do not want to be back here.

We have seen the problems and I have heard the explanation for the winter heating payment. I understand what the minister said about it being paid from February—I get that, but there was an expectation that it would be in February. If we raise expectations among people who are paying their bills now, many of whom have prepayment meters and are desperate for the money right now, people’s confidence will be crushed when those expectations are not met.

I hope that the minister is able to deal with that in his closing speech and that we will not be back here with the child payment. There are consequences not just for Government priorities and targets but for the reality for people who are in poverty.

15:55  

The first words of the Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018 lay out that the Scottish social security principles are that

“social security is an investment in the people of Scotland, ... social security is itself a human right and essential to the realisation of other human rights, ... the delivery of social security is a public service, ... respect for the dignity of individuals is to be at the heart of ... the system, ... the Scottish social security system is to contribute to reducing poverty in Scotland,”

and it is

“designed with the people of Scotland on the basis of evidence.”

The principles go on to say that

“opportunities are to be sought to continuously improve the Scottish social security system in ways which ... put the needs of those who require assistance first, and ... advance equality and non-discrimination”

and

“the Scottish social security system is to be efficient and deliver value for money.”

Everything that we do in our Parliament in regard to social security should be guided by those principles.

Social security is a demand-led service, and Scotland does not have the fiscal flexibilities that other countries have, which is a built-in disadvantage. I remember Labour members of the committee voting against the principle of additional borrowing powers for social security in Scotland.

Will Paul McLennan take an intervention?

I have only four minutes, so I will not take an intervention. I am sorry.

In February 2020, the social security programme business case provided a view on the whole-life costs and benefits of the Scottish Government’s social security programme over a 30-year timeframe to 2050. The five-case model clearly explains the strategic context, rationale, socioeconomic considerations, commercial considerations, financial information and management structures that are necessary to deliver social security benefits for the people of Scotland. The PBC ensures that decision making is robust and that value for money is assured, which I will touch on later. The update that we are talking about today is based on those practices.

Since the unanimous passing of the Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018, the Scottish Government has introduced 12 benefits, seven of which are entirely new forms of financial support that are available only in Scotland. We should remember that context in this debate.

The Scottish Government is doing all that it can with limited powers and a fixed budget. The UK Government must do more to fix the deeply flawed and inadequate UK social security system.

I will talk a little about the Scottish social security system living up to the principles that I mentioned earlier. The social security budget allocation shows the strength of commitment to building a future-proofed Scottish social security system that has dignity, fairness, and respect at its heart.

In line with Scottish Fiscal Commission forecasts, the Scottish Government is set to invest £5.2 billion in benefits expenditure in 2023-24, providing support to more than 1 million people. In 2027-28, that figure is forecast to increase to £7.3 billion, which is money that will go directly to the people who need it most.

Thanks to Scottish Government decisions, people living in Scotland have access to a range of social security benefits that go significantly beyond what is provided in other parts of the UK. It has not been mentioned today that, in April 2023, all benefits will be uprated by 10.1 per cent—the September 2022 rate of the consumer price index—at a cost of £430 million.

The Scottish child payment is the most ambitious poverty reduction measure in the UK. The payment is now £25 per week, which is a rise of 150 per cent in less than eight months, with a cost of £442 million.

I heard Jeremy Balfour’s speech, which took me back to the time when I watched Tory MSPs sitting in silence when we discussed cuts to universal credit and the impact that that would have on every constituency in Scotland. They sat in silence.

The Scottish Government has a clear and achievable delivery timetable for future benefits that is based on what has been learned so far, including during the pandemic. In May 2022, Audit Scotland found that the Scottish Government had

“responded well to the challenges presented by the Covid-19 pandemic”

and adapted ways of working, including replanning, to deliver major new benefits despite the unprecedented disruption of the pandemic.

This is the largest delivery programme and transfer of powers under devolution. The Scottish Government does not underestimate the scale of the work that needs to be done next. The Scottish Government is working jointly across the social security programme and with Social Security Scotland to address the remainder of recommendations, with clear actions developed and under way, which will be a key factor for its plans for the remaining benefits.

15:59  

I have sat through far too many debates and speeches from members on the Government benches in which it has been suggested that all aspects of welfare policy and its delivery are easy, that there are no difficult decisions to be made and that more money must be found. As my colleague Jeremy Balfour and other members have already said, who can forget the promises that were made to the people of Scotland back in 2016?

We were led to believe that, if only those powers were in the hands of SNP ministers, all would be well. As is so often the case from this nationalist Government, the reality does not even come close to matching the rhetoric, and today’s tone, whether from the minister or from SNP back benchers, shows exactly what the problem is. Rather than admit that they have failed, they tell us that everything is still all right, that there is no problem and that people should just be patient.

Will the member take an intervention?

I am not going to take an intervention: as the minister’s own back benchers have shown, four minutes is very tight.

The Government is not delivering a radical departure from the culture and practices of the DWP, a point well made by Pam Duncan-Glancy, whom I might otherwise disagree with. There is a mismatch between rhetoric and reality. At best, we have seen more of the same, under a different logo; at worst, we have seen completely avoidable delays. Real people are being let down by a Government that is more interested in grabbing the headlines with flagship policies than delivering in a real and meaningful way.

Today’s debate is an example of that. A Government minister or a Government that is serious about having a grown-up debate would have sought to work across Parliament to give a reasonable amount of time for the programme business case to be tested and scrutinised. Today comes from the same, SNP knows best until it doesn’t, approach that I have already touched on. The Government does not want to be questioned and it believes in its own hype. If the shoe was on the other foot and the same practices came from the UK Government, I can guarantee that SNP members would not be so accepting, nor would they believe the excuses, especially those about data.

There are many areas of concern. Perhaps the minister can, in his closing speech, start by explaining to me and my constituents where the SNP will find the £760 million needed by 2026 to fund its welfare policies. Audit Scotland is right to sound alarm bells and many of my constituents will see that as the inevitable consequence of the SNP’s failure to be honest with people about the cost of its welfare policies or about who will end up funding them. We all want to see support for those who need it most, but we cannot pretend that funds are unlimited.

It would also be good to hear the minister’s thoughts about the rising running costs of Social Security Scotland. Where will that end? Does he really believe that the organisation is providing value for money?

People across Scotland deserve a Government that makes good on its promises. They expect a Government that is, at the very least, willing to hold its hands up and admit that things have not gone as well as it hoped. They want a Government that not only believes in dignity and fairness and speaks up for those ideals in this chamber but lives up to them in practice.

At present, we cannot say with any confidence that that is what we have. Instead, we have a Scottish Government that brushes off concerns and makes excuses. After years of hiding behind the DWP, the Government itself has been found wanting. It has massively underdelivered, while at the same time, it has overspent.

16:03  

I welcome the chance to contribute to this debate on the social security programme business case, which will provide record investment of £5.2 billion in benefit expenditure in 2023-24. That is an investment in our people, and the Scottish Government should be proud of that. It was also great to hear the minister set out the next steps in building our social security programme.

I have no doubt that the steps that we are taking in Scotland are making an impact on our aim of tackling poverty. However, we are doing that in the most difficult circumstances: a global pandemic, which has been followed by one of the hardest cost of living crises that we have ever seen. Energy bills are through the roof, the price of everyday items is eye watering and interest rates are soaring. People who were struggling before are finding life even harder, and a rise in in-work poverty means that many have found themselves in a position that they might never have thought that they would be in.

The creation of Scotland’s social security system was a mammoth task, and one that I do not underestimate. Breaking away from the DWP system was always going to be difficult, but Scotland has made great progress, and I am proud of the way that it has been carried out. Members in this chamber might have differing views, but it cannot be denied that the Scottish welfare system is a fairer system and an investment in our people.

Will the member take an intervention?

No, thank you. I would like to make a bit of headway.

The Scottish child payment has been groundbreaking, and we know from speaking to friends and family or constituents, and from evidence to the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, that it is making a real difference to people’s lives. We would, of course, like it to go further, but I am acutely aware of the limitations on the Scottish budget, and it is a testament to our priorities that the payment was raised to £25 a week. The Scottish child payment is putting food in the mouths of children and taking stress away from parents, and if that is not a success of the Scottish welfare system, I do not know what is.

Of course, we could always do more. Under the current circumstances, it would take putting hundreds of extra pounds into people’s pockets to truly tackle the issues that people are facing. In Scotland, though, at least we can say that that is what we are trying to do—seven of the 12 new Scottish benefits are entirely new forms of financial support that are available only in Scotland.

I note the comments that have been made about the winter heating payment, which I find really disappointing. I will admit—the minister is certainly aware of this—that I had my concerns about that new payment. However, we should be clear about the fact that, in winter 2021-22, only 11,000 people benefited from the DWP’s unreliable cold weather payment. In Scotland, 415,000 people are set to benefit this year. As I said earlier about the Scottish child payment, of course I would like to see us go further, but where can the money be taken from?

Does the member agree that there was at least a perception among the people we talked to that the benefit would be paid in February and not after February? That was what people expected to happen.

I understand that some people will receive the money in February, and the minister was pretty clear that it would be paid from February.

I find some of the arguments that we have heard today quite disingenuous. The Opposition knows about the difficulties that we face and the lack of fiscal flexibilities that the Government has. The projected costs for social security are set to rise in the coming years; we will have to deal with that, but it was always going to happen. The Opposition cannot, on one hand, welcome the Scottish child payment and then, on the other, criticise the Government for the increase in expenditure in the coming years.

I am proud of the system that we have built in Scotland.

Will the member take an intervention?

I am sorry, but I do not have any more time.

Charities, organisations and local people are all extremely positive about the way in which social security is being rolled out, whether that is the ethos of the whole delivery, the priority of ensuring that people receive everything that they are entitled to, or the ambition to make the system work for people.

The Tory UK Government can charge on with bumping up energy bills while food prices continue to soar, and debt, pain, misery and anxiety all rack up for the people in Scotland who need our help the most, but I believe that the system that we have created so far is good evidence of the priorities and aims of an independent Scotland. While I hear the sighs from the Opposition when we raise the issue of independence, it cannot be denied that our having full borrowing powers and control over our own affairs could benefit this country.

16:08  

That speech finished, again, with a call for more powers, but when the Scottish Government gets such powers, it hands them straight back. It is truly unbelievable that, today, we are again hearing about further delays in the implementation of the Scottish social security system, which was devolved in 2018. We will now wait until at least 2026 for it to be fully delivered by the Scottish Government. That is almost a decade late.

The winter heating payment, which the Scottish Government claims is “imminent”, was intended to be rolled out for 2022-23. We are in February 2023. The worst of winter is, we hope, behind us, but people are still waiting for that payment. That new benefit will pay a fixed sum of £50 instead of paying out £25 for every week of cold weather, which was the amount that was paid out by the benefit that it replaces.

I am particularly concerned about the effect that that policy will have on rural areas. We know that the rate of fuel poverty is significantly higher in rural areas, which are largely off gas grid, compared with more urban areas of Scotland.

What is Rhoda Grant’s view on the fact that, last time around, Orkney, Shetland and Wick did not receive cold weather payments at all, and areas such as the Western Isles have very rarely received anything, given that those areas, which both of us represent, have the highest levels of fuel poverty?

Those are the very areas that are going to lose out under the new payment. Whereas they would have received £25 for each week of cold weather, they are going to receive £50 as a whole, regardless of the weather.

Even before the cost of living crisis, people who lived in rural areas faced up to 30 per cent higher costs of living. That figure will be much greater now, because of heating costs; it was based on the situation back in 2021, when 40 per cent of people in the Western Isles lived in fuel poverty, compared with 13 per cent in East Renfrewshire.

An average of 24 per cent of all households in Scotland suffer fuel poverty. When we compare the figure of 40 per cent in the Western Isles with that of 24 per cent in the rest of Scotland, we can see the difference, yet under the new policy, everyone will receive £50 towards their fuel bill. That policy will cost my constituents, who are the people who are most in need, hundreds of pounds a year. Our weather is inclement and temperatures drop lower in the north of Scotland, so the very places that have the highest fuel poverty will lose the most.

Energy Action Scotland has warned that “lives will be lost” due to the inadequate level of support that is provided. We have already experienced a period of unseasonably early snow and ice over a number of weeks. My constituents are already losing out in the face of soaring fuel prices. As Pam Duncan-Glancy said, Energy Action Scotland also raised the concern that the new payment will have less impact on fuel poverty than the benefit that it replaces. It is desperately sad that the Tories’ cold weather payment is more socially just than the SNP-Green Government’s low-income winter heating assistance.

In addition, it is ridiculous that the SNP-Green Scottish Government took money from the home insulation schemes to cover the cost of a social security system that is failing to deliver adequate winter heating payments to those in fuel poverty. Again, that is down to incompetence. The only scheme that the Scottish Government has ever been able to devise is based on one simple tick box. It is incapable of developing schemes that work.

We look back at the agricultural payments scheme and shake our heads at the mess that the Scottish Government made of that, yet it has learned nothing. The poor design of its social security system has led to a 400 per cent increase in complaints from the public. Due to the Scottish Government’s incompetence, it has had to hand back numerous benefits to the UK Government to run on its behalf, but it has no say in how those benefits will be delivered. In this brave new world of the SNP-Green Government, our disabled people are still left with the discredited 20m test under the Scottish Government’s agency agreement, which will run until 2025.

If things are going so badly—I disagree with Rhoda Grant on that—why did the social security directorate and Social Security Scotland win the Campbell Christie Holyrood award last year?

I am not blaming the civil servants; I am blaming the Government for its mismanagement. It seems very unfair that the Government points the finger at others. If the civil servants are winning prizes in the face of the Government, I can only pay tribute to them.

Of course, the costs are out of control. The Government cannot build a ferry on budget, so how could we expect it to deliver a social security system on budget? That should not be a surprise. Its track record speaks for itself. For example, the fiscal framework, which does not work for Scotland, was negotiated by the SNP. The health service has record waiting times. Under this Government, our world educational rankings are toppling. The Government is failing Scotland and it is doubly failing our most vulnerable people.

It is long past time that the Government focused on the needs of the Scottish people but, sadly, it is letting down the most vulnerable.

I call James Dornan, who joins us remotely.

16:14  

I thank all the staff, officials and ministers involved for their hard work and dedication in establishing Social Security Scotland, and for their continuing commitment to the development and roll-out of existing and new benefits for the people of Scotland. Today’s motion reflects their hard work.

I echo the balanced tone of the motion, which recognises

“the UK Government’s contribution to the joint programme of delivery of Scottish Government benefits, and that the commitment of both governments will be required to deliver the programme business case”.

Unfortunately, I am disappointed, if not surprised, at the Labour and Tory amendments, which show no recognition of the staff who are working tirelessly to ensure successful delivery, or of the many successes of those elements that are bespoke to Scotland.

I have just heard a rant from Rhoda Grant about how the SNP is to blame for everything that has happened. However, there is no recognition from the unionist parties of the Scottish Government’s acknowledgement that future delivery will require continued close working between the Scottish and UK Governments. I would have imagined that Rhoda Grant, and other members, would surely want to highlight that, but no—we have heard none of that, and nothing constructive as to future delivery.

What a day it is when both the Scottish and UK Governments understand the need to work together, but here in the Scottish Parliament, as usual, the Opposition parties offer nothing. If those parties cannot or will not remember, I remind them that the Social Security Scotland agency was established only in 2018 and has since delivered a number of benefits successfully, despite the complexities involved in decoupling existing UK-wide benefits and the introduction of a new benefit.

First, there was an increase of 13 per cent in the carers allowance supplement from the UK equivalent—that is surely a success. The agency then introduced the best start grant pregnancy and baby payment, offering £600 on the birth of a first child and £300 for any subsequent children, as an improved and increased benefit to replace the UK’s sure start maternity grant. That is another success.

There was also the most ambitious poverty reduction measure in the UK: the Scottish child payment, which is likely to lift 50,000 children out of poverty in 2023-24. In the city of Glasgow alone, more than 22,000 children have benefited from it. In any other world, that would be a huge success, but in the eyes of the Opposition, it is either “Not good enough” or “Where is the money coming from?”

Those are only a few examples of the benefits that have been successfully delivered since 2018. We should be proud of those achievements and give credit where credit is due, rather than continuing to talk Scotland down, as the Opposition seems to be intent on doing.

Of course, we cannot rest here. We must continue to develop the system for the benefit of the people of Scotland, and we will. It is a complex process, however, and ensuring successful delivery must remain a priority. It is surely far better to take our time than to rush forward before we are ready. That is only practical, and I would have thought—or hoped, to be honest—that Opposition parties would both recognise and support that.

Despite the complexities involved, and disruptions such as the Covid-19 pandemic, it is important to recognise how positively the Scottish Government has responded to those challenges. The Audit Scotland report has been mentioned but, as I said, the Scottish Government has responded well to the challenges that the Covid-19 pandemic presented, and has adapted ways of working, including replanning, to deliver major new benefits, despite the unprecedented disruption as a result of the pandemic.

In addition, the Scottish Government has worked closely with the DWP and other delivery stakeholders to agree an ambitious but deliverable timetable for launching the remaining devolved benefits and completing case transfer, including ensuring time for the development and scrutiny of necessary legislation. That is a sensible approach, and the right one.

My memory of—[Inaudible.]—the aim was to get things out in February, but that some of the payments might not be out until March because of the late delivery, which was understandable, from the DWP. Committee members should not mislead the Parliament in the statements that they make today.

The benefits of today’s delivery programmes will be felt for generations, so we need to get them right. I believe that we are doing that, which is why I support today’s motion and reject the amendments, which fail to recognise that, and fail to recognise the hard work of everyone involved and the ambition for the future.

16:19  

The old adage “You wouldn’t start from here” applies to the social security system that we are trying to create in Scotland. We have had more than a decade of austerity; the two-child limit, also known as the rape clause; the benefits cap; and cuts to universal credit. Each of those decisions or policies, and so many more, were taken or implemented by the UK Government, and they make for a pretty bleak foundation on which to build our social security system.

We would not choose to start with the uncertain foundation that the UK Government has created. That is because we want our social security system to support individuals and build the common good, to help to create strong communities, thriving families and healthy, confident, informed and compassionate children.

However, we are where we are and in such circumstances it is right to acknowledge the level of investment in our Scottish social security system and how it is interacting with and mitigating some of the worst effects of the UK Government’s austerity regime. That regime goes way beyond social security and includes the cost crisis, high inflation and increasing wealth inequalities. I acknowledge the significant changes—improvements—that we have in Scotland today, as outlined by the motion. Is it perfect? Of course not. Do we still have work to do? Of course we do.

It is also important to highlight what the motion does not say, which is that the increase in total expenditure is mostly—81 per cent—comprised of uprated payments to older people and disabled adults, which are increasing by £642 million, and the Scottish child payment, which is increasing by £216 million. The increase in Scottish child payment spending reflects the increase in the weekly payment from £20 to £25 and the extension of the age limit. Modelling suggests that the payment could lift around 50,000 children out of poverty in 2023-24.

Do I wish that we could do more and that we could do it more quickly? Yes, I do. However, I am proud of the role that the Scottish Greens have played in ensuring that we mitigate some of the worst excesses of the UK Government’s cruel targeting of those in need, such as through the uplift to the Scottish child payment and the benefits cap mitigation measures.

On the adult disability payment and the personal independence payment, there is considerable uncertainty about how much the transfer of recipients from the DWP to SSS—and the elimination of exclusionary, eligibility-proving processes—will cost in total. The Scottish Fiscal Commission forecasts that in 2023-24, spending on child and adult disability payments will be at least £171 million above the funding received from the UK Government for the devolution of PIP and ADP.

There are other issues that make it harder to deliver what we would wish to deliver. The double onslaught of a UK-driven cost of living crisis and the failure of the UK Government to adequately fund staffing in health and social care are both key drivers of the estimated difference between the money that we get from the UK Government and how much the Scottish Government is choosing to spend, given the number of people who depend on social security.

That translates into a pressure on our budget that is forecast to intensify significantly over time. In 2023-24, the total social security block grant adjustment is forecast to increase by £657 million. At the same time, spending on new payments and benefits with a BGA will increase by £1,057 million. So, the difference between the spending and BGA funding is forecast to increase from £374 million in 2022-23 to £776 million in 2023-24. That reflects the difference between the inclusive Scottish approach and the exclusionary UK approach; it also further highlights the double onslaught that I mentioned earlier. Pressure on public services is intensifying across the board, in large part because of a UK-driven cost crisis and austerity.

You need to conclude, Ms Chapman.

So, we are making progress with Scottish social security despite those profound pressures. Of course, we still have work to do to deliver what I and others want: a social security system that is an integral feature of a welfare state contributing to the sustaining of a wellbeing economy.

You must conclude, Ms Chapman.

I thank all those who are helping us to deliver that.

We are short of time, so I ask members to stick to their speaking time allocations.

16:23  

Earlier, Jeremy Balfour invited us to look at the story so far, so I will do just that. Twelve benefits have been introduced—it will be 13 later this month—by a new, progressive social security agency, which treats benefit claimants with dignity and respect, instead of suspicion and disdain. Seven of those benefits are available only in Scotland. The Scottish child payment and best start grants are already playing a huge part in tackling child poverty by providing parents with financial support over which they have complete control. Those unique benefits clearly show the Scottish Government’s priorities: tackling child poverty and tackling the cost of living crisis.

I would say that it takes longer to do things properly but, given the DWP’s efforts on universal credit—which is still being rolled out, full of faults, more than 10 years after the introduction of the legislation that brought it in—that is possibly not true. However, it is worth doing this properly. It is worth listening to the disabled people who said that they would rather be treated with respect and be able to rely on payments. They would also rather that the system that administers benefits was compatible with the Government later deciding to uprate them, instead of having the archaic DWP system, which, according to the claims of UK Government ministers, does not allow them to increase payments if they want to.

Will the member take an intervention on that point?

I am sorry—I do not have time.

It is worth noting that many of the long processing times are due to the fact that Social Security Scotland has taken a lot of the life admin burden from applicants and seeks to gather evidence when applicants have not been able to get it by themselves. That is going above and beyond, and I am sure that it is appreciated by those who are making use of that system, who would previously have been completely precluded from accessing such benefits.

Of course, we must look forward to what is yet to be achieved as well as back at what has been achieved already. I know that many of my constituents will be reassured by the update on both carer support payment and pension age disability timescales. I have already been contacted by multiple people who do not want to face dealing with the DWP and applying for attendance allowance—a position that I sincerely understand, as someone who has experienced humiliating and degrading assessment by external assessors that the DWP contracted. Having seen how welcome the changes that were brought in with the child and adult disability payments have been, and what a difference it makes to have disability benefits administered by an agency that values the dignity, lives and experiences of applicants, the people who have been speaking to me are looking forward to the 14th and 15th benefits being delivered.

At the end of last year I had the pleasure of visiting my local delivery team for the Highlands and was really pleased to hear about the culture in which its staff are working. People at all levels of the organisation told me that they felt that their concerns were listened to and that their suggestions were valued by the leadership. There are, of course, things to be worked on and improved, but what a difference it makes to be able to address issues when everyone involved is willing to listen and make changes where needed.

A lot of issues have been aired in the debate, and I am sure that we will discuss those that need attention both in meetings of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee and probably here in the chamber. However, I hope that the message that our constituents hear loud and clear from the debate is that the Scottish Government and Social Security Scotland are both working hard to make their experience of claiming benefits as easy and painless as possible. I hope that my constituents will hear the minister say that he wants people to feel the dignity, fairness and respect that have been built into our social security system. I hope that that is the takeaway, and that my colleagues from all parties will work with their local delivery teams to spread information to their constituents about what is available to them and how they can access it.

16:28  

During the lead-up to the 2014 independence referendum, the SNP boasted that it could set up a fully independent state within a mere 18 months. Following that referendum, in which a clear majority voted to remain in the United Kingdom, the Scotland Act 2016 set out a route map to devolving more powers to Holyrood. Those changes included administering an additional 11 welfare powers worth £3 billion, which accounted for roughly 15 per cent of social security spending in Scotland. Considering the SNP’s highly critical stance on the current system for administering benefits in the United Kingdom, it had a big opportunity to look at a new approach when it set up Social Security Scotland.

However, it seems as though the Scottish Government has one talent, which is for making an absolute mess of every single area of devolved competence—or, in this case, devolved incompetence. The SNP was full of grand promises that the Scottish benefits system would be fully operational by the end of the 2020-21 parliamentary term, but that did not happen. Instead, Scotland has had to endure years during which benefits have been kicked backwards and forwards between Holyrood and Westminster.

Will the member take an intervention?

No—sorry. I have only four minutes.

To its further embarrassment, the SNP Government has now handed back the administration of the severe disablement allowance to the DWP because, according to the former Cabinet Secretary for Social Security, there would be “no advantage” to Social Security Scotland delivering it. It is clear to everyone that the Scottish Government did not have the right mechanisms in place. To me that is a scary thought, considering that the SNP thought that it would win in 2014.

At one point during the independence referendum campaign, Alex Salmond boldly claimed that it would cost only £200 million to set up an independent Scotland. Setting up Social Security Scotland has already cost the public purse £651 million. It is obvious that the Scottish Government’s claims about a fully independent Scotland in 18 months were pie-in-the-sky thinking, just like its current plans to hold another referendum.

It is not only the handover of devolved powers that has led to another failure of the SNP Government; since its implementation, Social Security Scotland has performed poorly, with waiting times for applications increasing and payments not being made on time. Whether it is less than half of people aided by the fair start Scotland scheme sustaining employment, or application processing times for best start foods increasing year on year, it is concerning that the SNP seems totally incapable of getting to grips with the new welfare systems.

More recently, MSPs were told that the winter heating payment could now be delayed until March. I must ask: what on earth is the Government doing? It is certainly not focusing on the creation of a benefits system that supports Scots. The SNP needs to urgently explain how it intends to fix the mess that it has created, and how new and expanded benefits will be funded on top of increasing demand.

I believe in devolution. I was only seven years old when the Parliament opened, and I grew up in a country that has the advantages of having two Parliaments. However, the SNP is making a mockery of devolved government by not being able to get the basics right. I believe that the ability to support those in need is a vital role for any Government. If the SNP continues to make a mess of the roll-out of Social Security Scotland, it will make a mockery of the Scotland Act 1998 and this Parliament.

Crucially, the SNP’s failure to get this right will have let down the thousands of Scots who rely on those benefits, and that would be shameful.

16:31  

One of my most memorable experiences as convener of the Social Security Committee was a visit to meet the civil service team that was tasked with delivering the IT and wider systems that underpin Scotland’s ambition to embed a nimble, modern and progressive social security system. I was left in no doubt about the complexities involved or the competence of the team that delivered those tasks—something that we have not heard about often in the debate from Opposition speakers.

In the first sentence of its report from May last year on social security in Scotland, Audit Scotland said:

“The Scottish Government has continued to successfully deliver new and complex social security benefits in challenging circumstances.”

Listening to Opposition speakers this afternoon, you would not know that. They are detached from reality.

With 12 social security benefits now up and running, and with a 13th—the Scottish winter heating payment—imminent, I congratulate the delivery team who have brought us to this stage; I do not disparage it, as some members have done. We should remember that our social security act was passed in 2018. The pace of delivery and achievement has been remarkable, as we look set to deliver £5.2 billion in benefits expenditure in 2023-23 to more than 1 million citizens.

The Scottish social security payment that has, understandably, attracted the most attention is the Scottish child payment. Let us not forget that campaigners’ ask—I remember it—when the payment was first discussed was £5 per week. Our SNP Scottish Government is now delivering £25 per week to 387,000 eligible children, which is an annual investment of £442 million. In doing so, we could lift up to 50,000 children out of poverty, as Willie Rennie noted.

I have no doubt that the UK Tory cost of living crisis would have pushed even more families deep into poverty if not for Scotland’s groundbreaking Scottish child payment. However, we are currently in the process of undertaking one of the most challenging aspects of our new social security system, which is the safe, secure and reliable transfer of adults on PIP over to Scottish adult disability payments. Of course, new claimants can currently apply directly for that payment. We are open for applications. The process will be more dignified and humane, but we have to speed it up as best we can.

I want to talk about a constituent who is in the process of transferring from PIP to the new Scottish disability benefit. In December 2022, he decided to contact the DWP because his mobility had deteriorated significantly and he wanted to be assessed for the mobility component. Until that point, he had not applied for that. The DWP informed my constituent that, as his benefit was to be transferred to the new Scottish system, he could not apply. My constituent has been informed that the transfer will take place on 13 April this year and that, given that there is a wait of up to 18 weeks for the DWP to assess for a mobility component, he will not be given a reassessment under the DWP. He will have to wait until he is transferred.

My constituent must apply for the mobility component after his PIP has been transferred successfully and securely to Social Security Scotland on 13 April 2023. If there are another three months after that before he can be reassessed, we could be looking at six, seven or eight months from when he first said to the DWP that his mobility was deteriorating and he would like to be considered for the mobility component. I have no idea whether Social Security Scotland is able to flag that up on its systems or whether that will be passed from the DWP to ensure that the benefit can be backdated to December last year.

My constituent should not lose out because of the safe, secure and stable transition of benefits. In the minister’s summing up, I would welcome his taking account of my constituent’s case, so that I can update him on the best way forward.

16:36  

I thank members across the chamber for their contributions.

I understand the concerns that have been raised and the heaviness of heart among some SNP members when they hear criticism of what is happening, because I believe that, when the Parliament set out to devolve social security benefits, they believed that we could create a system here that would work for the people of Scotland. I say a massive “Thank you” to the organisations that work tirelessly across Scotland to campaign for a better social security system.

Willie Rennie’s contribution was spot on in highlighting that everyone’s expectations were high when we devolved social security to Scotland—and I have to say that they still are. The situation that has been outlined can be turned around. I will not apologise for pressing the Government to do more faster and to plan properly, because this is about lives. It is about paying bills, meeting extra costs and lifting people out of poverty. We have an opportunity to do that in Scotland, and we should seize it.

Members have noted the difference between the Scottish Government’s approach and that of the Tories. I acknowledge the differences in the language and the narrative, the differing options for assessment, and better roles for recipients’ doctors and supports. There are other differences that we have heard about, including from Bob Doris. The approach contrasts with the increasingly hostile benefits environment created by the Tory Government, of course. Most colleagues—even Tory members—would probably not wish to associate themselves with that too closely. The bar for a benefits system cannot and should not be the one that we see from the Tory Government.

I understand the frustrations of Bob Doris, James Dornan and others in highlighting Government successes and challenging those of us who want things to be better. However, I would press them on the examples that they used. I am not sure that carers thought that not getting their carers allowance assistance doubled after being told that they would was a success or that waiting until halfway through the next decade for changes to the rules for that benefit is a success. I do not think that families with children over six years old who had to wait for two years for their payments will think that the system is a huge success either.

It is possible that two things can be true. An intervention can be well intentioned but it can also be not well delivered, and that is what is happening here. That is not talking Scotland down; it is talking the truth. I care so much about getting it right because I want to talk Scotland up.

Emma Roddick and other members have mentioned safe and secure transfers. Members of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee will remember hearing from civil society organisations that disabled people might not have prioritised safe and secure transfers if they thought that that would mean getting no more money or being left to the DWP until halfway through the next decade.

Labour members and others across the chamber can recognise success, and I have said several times where I think the Government has got it right. I, too, pay tribute to the civil servants who are working tirelessly on the matter. However, they, too, are fed up. I know that because I have spoken to some of them in recent days.

Natalie Don expressed disappointment at concern from our benches about spend. I say to her that, if the money was going directly into people’s pockets, I would not be complaining about it—but it is not. Significant sums are going to an IT system that is overspent and underdelivering and to an advocacy project that is not reaching the people it should be reaching. Those are my concerns. People want and expect more, and so they should. I believe that we all believe that.

When I made that point, I was referring specifically to the Scottish child payment, which, I would argue, is money going directly into people’s pockets. Would the member not agree?

I would agree, and I welcome that. Along with activists and campaigners across Scotland, we called on the Government to double it, increasing the payment so that it could help to mitigate the poverty that children experience. I have said in the past that we welcome that payment. My argument about the money that we are spending—with £39 million of additional expenditure on an IT system, because we had a minimum viable product rather than a fully functioning IT system—is that it could have been going into people’s pockets, but it is not. That is the concern that I have.

The minister said that it is with pride and purpose that the Government will continue with its programme. I hope so—I really do—because I believe that, for the most part, the minister’s intentions are good. We must make them a reality, and I hope that that will come sooner rather than later for the people of Scotland.

16:41  

Like Pam Duncan-Glancy, I will start my closing speech by referring to Willie Rennie’s speech, as he made a fair and honest assessment of where we find ourselves today. I believe that the Minister for Social Security and Local Government is one of the more thoughtful ministers in the Government, but it has been in office for 16 years and what we have heard today has been the usual SNP and Green press office lines—same difference, I suppose—of blaming Westminster and the DWP. We have also heard the line “Everyone is talking Scotland down” and the claim that we are using Social Security Scotland staff, not praising them—in this case, SNP and Green members want to use them as a human shield. We need to rise above that, however, and to look towards what needs to be a system that delivers for the people of Scotland.

As I have said in every single debate since being given my present role in the Parliament, it is in all our interests to ensure that Social Security Scotland is a success and is able to deliver for the people of Scotland and for future Governments, which will want it to do that, too. Parliament has a crucial role to play in holding both the institution of Social Security Scotland and the SNP-Green Government to account in ensuring that transparency is delivered. It is concerning that Parliament was only given sight of the updated social security programme and business case just one day before the debate. That has not given us time to be able to play that role.

Looking at the motion that ministers have brought today, I think that we need a more honest discussion over the many and increasing number of challenges, which the Scottish Government acknowledges, facing Social Security Scotland.

Oliver Mundell gave an excellent speech: it is important to understand that MSPs from across the chamber will be hearing complaints from constituents about the service that they are receiving, about the delay to payments and about the fact that ministers have not kept their promises about what Social Security Scotland would deliver for people across Scotland.

Despite claims by SNP and Green ministers that all is well, the transitional arrangements are not going well. The fact that DWP and UK ministers are now having to provide contingencies and extensions to agency agreements to support the on-going delivery of welfare payments in Scotland demonstrates where we are and the fact that ministers have not delivered. Promises made by SNP ministers on the establishment and capabilities of Social Security Scotland have come and gone, often with elections, when they have said that those promises would be kept.

Rhoda Grant made a number of good points. It is clear that the days of virtue signalling by the SNP-Green Government have been replaced with the cold reality of having to deliver on a plan that will now have to run until 2025 to fulfil the agreements that have been made.

Meghan Gallacher and other members have stated the honest fact that ministers told the people of Scotland that they would establish an independent country in 18 months, yet they have failed to deliver a social security system more than a decade since having the powers to do so. That is despite promises that the new system would be in place by 2021. I was on many panels with members of the Government who said that that would happen.

Audit Scotland has been clear—this is an important part of today’s debate—about the concern that it continues to express around the “challenging” delivery timescales. I think that that is still the case today—I doubt that it thinks that things will be delivered by 2025.

Any Government body or quango must be fully transparent. The Scottish people rightly expect us as a Parliament to make sure that resources that are being spent on social security are managed effectively and that, ultimately, they deliver value for money for the Scottish taxpayer. That is important. However, this Government’s record is not good in that area.

Let us look at the facts. The number of complaints against Social Security Scotland has increased by more than 400 per cent since 2018; the SNP Government has missed deadlines for transferring benefits since 2020; and—this is one of the points that has been missed in the debate—it has handed back the severe disablement allowance to the DWP because it sees no advantage in Social Security Scotland delivering it.

We should have been looking at those issues in more detail. Why has the organisation been unable to deliver benefits on time? That is a crucial issue. Without robust data, it will become more and more difficult to make comparisons, and for the Parliament and its committees to carry out the critical role of effectively scrutinising Social Security Scotland and, indeed, whether the new welfare payments, which all parties have supported, are delivering the key outcomes that we all want to see achieved. The key one, as a number of members have mentioned, is lifting children out of poverty.

As I said, no doubt MSPs across the chamber are receiving complaints. Just this morning, I dealt with constituents who have become tired of their phone calls not being answered. They are giving up. Therefore, I do not think that we even have a real estimate of the extent to which people are giving up on the system. That is concerning—ministers have acknowledged the issue in committee—and we need to see things improve.

The future financial sustainability of new benefit payments is another critical issue that has been raised by a number of members. By the end of this session of Parliament, more than £700 million will be spent on new welfare payments. Where will that come from? How will it be paid for? We need to find that out.

I hope that the debate has presented Scottish Government ministers with a bit of a reality check. They probably hoped that the debate would be an opportunity to pat themselves on the back. Their pledges around Social Security Scotland delivery timescales have been broken. Making sure that Social Security Scotland can deliver should be the focus of everyone’s attention in Parliament.

Ministers say that they want a system that delivers dignity, fairness and respect. I agree. However, members on the Conservative benches also want a system that delivers on time. I support the amendment in the name of Jeremy Balfour.

I call Ben Macpherson to wind up the debate. I would be very obliged if you could take us up to just before decision time, which is at 5 o’clock.

16:48  

I thank colleagues for the constructive points that have been made. It has been important throughout the debate to remember that we passed the Social Security (Scotland) Bill unanimously in 2018, and that we are trying to achieve a collective investment in people and to improve the circumstances of all our constituents. In that spirit, we have made remarkable progress since the legislation was passed. As others have said, there is more to do. I have set out what we will do next.

First, I will respond to questions that were put to me. Willie Rennie, who made a very constructive speech, asked me about delivery of the Scottish child payment. I emphasise that applications for the Scottish child payment that have been made since the benefit was extended on 14 November 2022 have now all been processed and many have been paid. We expect everyone who is waiting for a payment—payments will, of course, be backdated to the date on which they applied—to get a decision before the end of February. New applications that are made thereafter will be processed as quickly as possible.

Oliver Mundell was unfairly critical; he asked about value for money and costs. I clarify that the implementation estimates remain within 10 per cent of the 2020 programme business case figures. That is a good outcome, given the replanning that we undertook during the pandemic and our additional work on delivery of the Scottish child payment. It is expected that once all benefits have been introduced and case transfers have been completed, Social Security Scotland’s running costs will be comparable with those of the Department for Work and Pensions. The updated total investment costs across Social Security Scotland, the social security programme and the social security directorate are broadly similar to the costs that were outlined in the 2020 programme business case, although they will drop slightly overall, by about 0.5 per cent, over the nine years from 2017-18 to 2025-26.

I thought that it was unfair of Mr Mundell to say that there has almost been just a rebranding and that no difference is being made. I encourage him to engage with constituents who have received the Scottish child payment because, if he does so, he will understand the difference that the money makes.

We are prioritising investment in social security in a period in which, as Paul McLennan emphasised, there has been a reduction in social security investment by the UK Government, which has cut universal credit. In comparison, I note that we have chosen to invest in social security and will continue to do so.

Ministers were clear that no one in Scotland would lose out in relation to the winter fuel payment, but it is now clear that rural communities across Scotland are losing out. Communities including Braemar and Aboyne, which Maggie Chapman represents but did not mention, will now be out of pocket. Does the minister regret that?

As I said to the committee, about 12,000 people in some areas of Scotland might have received more payments under the cold weather payment scheme, but that scheme is completely unreliable, so we are replacing it with a reliable payment. We have doubled the fuel insecurity fund to £20 million, and we have engaged with local authorities in encouraging them to utilise the fund.

Will the minister take an intervention on that point?

No. I have listened to colleagues and tried to respond, but I have some important things to say in my remaining time. I would be grateful if colleagues could take that into consideration.

I cannot accept the two amendments that have been lodged. I urge members to reject them on the basis that they—unfortunately—contain a combination of unhelpful overnegativity and unrealistic wishful thinking. The difference between we who stand here in Government and those who sit in other parts of the chamber is that we have to balance what is desirable with what is possible. We have a responsibility to take things forward for the benefit of all constituents across the country. Since taking on the role of social security minister, I have sought to do that.

I am driven by the four values that have always driven me—they are a bit like the Parliament’s four values. For me, this is about determination, imagination, courage and honesty. With Government colleagues, I have sought to develop a social security system that not only delivers well now, but has strong foundations for the years to come. Miles Briggs emphasised that that is important. Such a system can be utilised to good effect by whoever governs Scotland in whatever constitutional situation the Scottish people choose as their future.

Through using our social security powers, we have realised that, with determination and imagination, we can build effective modern systems in just a few years. I appreciate that those systems are not performing perfectly for everyone. I encourage Bob Doris to write to me about the case that he raised. It would not be appropriate for me to comment on the individual case right now, but if he writes to me, I will definitely respond. Other members mentioned individual cases. I encourage them, too, to write to me, because every piece of feedback that I receive on the case-transfer process or on operational matters helps us to build as perfect a system as we can build. However, the system is performing well.

Whatever our views on which powers the Parliament should have, I strongly believe that we all need to have the courage to accept honestly, and to be candid and transparent about, the realities of change. I have sought to do that in my role.

The truth is that home rule for Scotland, continued devolution and independence have, for me, always been more evolution than events. The next phase of the social security programme is part of that journey. The Government will do it well, as we have done up to this point. I encourage members of other parties to be constructive and positive in their service to the constituents whom they seek to represent, and to work in Parliament in a way that allows us, whatever our position on the constitution, to build the social security system together.

Social security staff make a huge impact every day. I absolutely salute their commitment and the contribution that they are making to building a better Scotland. That is the reason why 89 per cent of people who have engaged with Social Security Scotland rated their overall experience with the agency as being very good or good. That is the reality.

The truth matters. In recent days, somebody posted on Social Security Scotland’s social media to say:

“I honestly think we are so lucky in Scotland to get the amount of help we do.”

That is because of the changes that have been made and the delivery that is being undertaken by dedicated civil servants in the agency.

The truth matters, and the truth is that we are delivering more support in Scotland than is being delivered elsewhere in the UK, because we know that that is the right thing to do.

The truth is that more disabled people in Scotland feel empowered to get the support to which they are entitled, which is why projected spending on the adult disability payment is set to increase. We know that that is the right thing to do. Our changes are making a difference.

The truth, as Audit Scotland has said, is that

“Despite the challenges of the pandemic, complex new benefits—including Scottish Child Payment and Child Disability Payment—have been delivered”,

and that

“This is a significant achievement.”

The truth, as the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has said, is that

“The full rollout of the Scottish Child Payment is a watershed moment for tackling poverty in Scotland”.

Across communities, the parents and guardians of the 387,000 eligible children are benefiting from the payment; they are welcoming it and feeling it.

The truth is that 133,000 carers have benefited from more than £200 million since we launched the carers allowance supplement in 2018, and will benefit more next year when we launch the carers support payment. That is the truth, and the truth matters.

The truth is that there is more to do to deliver with our social security powers, as I and others have set out. However, we can, based on what has already been achieved, move forward with confidence, and with humility about the challenge, but with a sense of common purpose about the further positive difference that we can and will make, especially if we work together constructively.

I therefore ask Parliament to vote for the positive delivery that we can and should achieve. Let us work together and continue to develop a social security system that not only benefits the people who need help, but makes Scotland better for us all.

I urge Parliament to vote for the motion and to vote down the amendments.

That concludes the debate. It is now time to move on to the next item of business.