Agenda item 2 is benefit automation. I refer members to paper 1, which contains a note by the clerk and a letter from Inverclyde Council. Members also have a short Scottish Parliament information centre paper, for which I thank SPICe. The Inverclyde Council letter draws the committee’s attention to a barrier to the council’s aim of maximising uptake of free school meals and the school clothing grant.
In March 2018, the committee held an evidence session on benefit automation and maximising uptake. Following that, the committee wrote to all local authorities, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the Minister for Social Security. The issue that Inverclyde Council has raised has been highlighted in other local authority responses, albeit in more general terms. For clarity, and because there might be public interest in the matter, I want to spend a short time setting out the context.
Inverclyde Council’s letter to me, as convener of the committee, says:
“The Council considers the inability to re-use”—
council tax reduction
“data received from the DWP to identify families eligible for”
free school meals or school clothing grants
“represents a barrier to the maximisation of the uptake of these benefits and has also raised this matter with Cosla who have undertaken to take up this matter with the DWP. Inverclyde Council is committed to reducing Child Poverty and sees the re-use of DWP data as one step to achieving this aim so would welcome your assistance.”
The letter helpfully summarises the council’s perspective on the legal positions of the council and the DWP. I thank the council for that.
I want to put on the record some of the information in the briefing paper that SPICe has prepared. On social security information sharing, the briefing states:
“Information sharing is governed by GDPR, but legislation can allow information to be shared for particular purposes. The Welfare Reform Act 2012 allows social security information to be shared for:
-
welfare services,
-
council tax, and
-
housing benefit.
Welfare services: ‘includes services which provide accommodation, support, assistance, advice or counselling to individuals with particular needs, and for these purposes’. The Explanatory Notes to the 2012 Act refer to using the information to assess whether someone has to pay for residential care and”—
this is important—
“‘The information may also be needed for decisions on whether to provide assistance under localised schemes, such as help with council tax.’”
I apologise to members for the length of this explanation. The SPICe briefing, in citing examples of local schemes, quotes the explanatory notes to the 2012 act, which say that
“Examples of further services covered are the provision of: Disability Facilities Grants; Blue Badge parking permits; Discretionary Housing Payments; or assistance to families with multiple disadvantages.”
I will make two points before I seek members’ comments. First, and most important, it appears to be that the difference between the DWP’s and Inverclyde Council’s interpretations of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 has led to denial of data use that would deliver—by automation, potentially—the school clothing grant and free school meals to families in Inverclyde and, perhaps, across Scotland.
I suggest that benefit automation would provide
“assistance to families with multiple disadvantages.”
It would be staggering if the United Kingdom Government sought to deny, in that way, use of data—I am sure that it would not want to do so intentionally—that would help children and families who are in need of support and assistance.
Secondly, I suggest that, as a matter of urgency, we write to the UK Secretary of State for Work and Pensions to seek speedy clarification, in the hope that that will direct the DWP to permit use of the information for that purpose. However, if the clarification does not enable use of the data, we should ask the UK Government to prioritise whatever steps are required to amend the 2012 act, or the relevant regulations, to enable automation of entitlement to families who qualify for free school meals and the school clothing grant.
I know that there is a lot in that, but when a local authority writes to us with a substantive issue relating to getting money to people who are most in need, we have to look at the matter in a meaningful way.
I have made a suggestion for action. Before we make a decision on whether to agree to it, I would welcome members’ comments.