I congratulate Graeme Dey on securing the debate and on the content of his speech. Although he may consider himself “computer savvy” and “tech-confident”—I am learning new phrases all the time—I merely note that, by his own admission, the people closest to him might disagree. I also congratulate Angus CAB on producing its report and highlighting the challenges that are faced by online benefit claimants.
We live in an increasingly online world. We pay our bills online, we can get our shopping online and we can make travel arrangements online. However, that is not for everyone and we should not lose talking to people face to face. Graeme Dey is right to point to the need for alternatives to doing things online.
It is correct to say that the DWP expects people increasingly to make their claims online. Indeed, the UK Government’s digital strategy expects that 80 per cent of all benefit claims will be made online by 2017, yet the rate of progress is extremely slow. For jobseekers allowance applications alone, the Government fell woefully short of the target that it said it would reach of 80 per cent of claims being made online by September 2013, just last year—it was 10 per cent in March 2011 and 19 per cent in March 2012. That is a long way off the target set.
There are a number of reasons for that. First, even the DWP admits that claimants are less likely to use the internet; 72 per cent of disabled people are online compared with 85 per cent of non-disabled people; 59 per cent of people over the age of 65 are online, which leaves a huge number that are not; and access to online services can often be limited by income—the Office of Communications found that one in three households earning less than £17,500 had broadband. Therefore, people who are older or in poor health or who have a lower income or less education are more likely to be offline, yet those are the very people who make the most use of Government services and who will need assistance.
An approach that expects all those who claim benefits and are in search of employment to have the necessary IT skills will not only put them at risk of being sanctioned but marginalise them further in their own communities. The UK Government is doing nothing to help to improve IT skills; rather, it is just closing down alternative means of claiming. That will put extraordinary pressure on public and voluntary services to help people with claim forms. Citizens advice bureaux dealt with 19,463—I had to make sure that I got that right—benefit form completions in 2011-12. That figure is likely to increase and CABx are not funded to meet that level of demand. The issue is equally a problem for local authority advice services. Access to computers in libraries may be helpful, but there are challenges, such as a lack of privacy, a lack of support staff and short time limits on the use of computers.
The three local authority universal credit pilots in West Dunbartonshire, North Lanarkshire and Dumfries and Galloway have already led to the expressing of significant misgivings. Councillors in those areas are already warning that
“online applications must not become the preferred method for accessing the benefits system and alternative methods must not be made more difficult to force people to go digital.”
Another comment that has been made is that
“it takes around 90 minutes to complete an online JSA application form. People cannot fill out a 36 page form on a mobile phone and many people don’t want to upload very personal information on a public computer in a library.”
There is even a question about whether the pilots will have had time to be properly evaluated by the time universal credit is introduced.
The UK Government cannot assume that people have the skills to access the internet or, indeed, the opportunity to do so. Simply asserting that benefit applications will have to be made online is just not good enough and fails to address the practical barriers that many benefit claimants face.
It is a wrong-headed policy to push people to apply for benefits online. It fails to reflect the reality of people’s lives and the impact that that will have on public and voluntary services. I again thank Angus CAB for drawing the issue to our attention and Graeme Dey for bringing the debate to the chamber. Ultimately, the UK Government needs to change its approach to some of the most vulnerable in our society and help them to make claims rather than put artificial barriers in their way.
17:22
I add my congratulations to Graeme Dey on securing this debate on a very important topic and to Angus CAB.
I agree with Jackie Baillie that the UK Government’s policy is wrong-headed. At a time when we are seeing an assault on benefit claimants and what, to me, amounts to a persecution of those who put themselves back on the voting roll for the referendum, who are now being hunted for historical poll tax debts, who would want to be a benefit claimant? Everything is made tough for them. The complex forms often have to be completed, as others have said, by those who are least capable of completing them. Frankly, without the CABx and other advice centres, where would those claimants be?
Recently, I confirmed that nearly 250,000 Scottish pensioners were claiming pension credit and that one third of those who were entitled to do so were not. Goodness knows how they were making ends meet. Together with the guidance notes, the pension credit form runs to 41 pages—I checked that today. You would need a PhD in form filling to complete it. I speak as a woman who found that she was going to get taxed for a van that she did not own after she had completed her own tax form for the Inland Revenue. I did not even get that right, and it was pretty straightforward. How often have members tried to fill in an online form, only to be told to go back and complete a line that had not been completed properly? I can understand why the process sometimes takes 90 minutes. If we add to that complexity the UK Government’s strategy that 80 per cent of benefit applications should be completed online by 2017, we realise that people will be in an even more difficult position.
I will keep to the demographics that Jackie Baillie touched on. It is clear from Citizens Advice Scotland’s report “Offline and left behind” that 59 per cent of people in the 60 to 74 age range never use a computer. Among those in the 75-plus group, the figure rises to 75 per cent. We should think about the pension credit that is not being claimed at the moment and the impact of that.
In the Scottish Borders, part of which I represent, the 60 to 74 age group represents nearly 20 per cent of the population, whereas the figure for Scotland as a whole is just over 15 per cent. In Midlothian, the figure for that age group is also higher than the Scottish average. At 9.9 per cent, the percentage of people in the 75-plus group is higher in the Borders than in Scotland as a whole, for which the figure is 8 per cent. In my patch, some 30 per cent of people are over 60, and a good wheen of them will be entitled to pension credit, which they are now supposed to apply for online.
The problem is compounded for all claimant groups by their home internet connection. Only 50 per cent in the Borders have such a connection—the figure for Midlothian is similar—which means that those people are expected to travel somewhere somehow to access the internet publicly.
My question—and indeed that of the CAS—is this: how is 50 per cent to become 80 per cent, and how is that to be achieved with an ageing population? As I have said, I can foresee that third of pensioners not claiming their pension credit rising, and I can foresee injustices for those who, for various reasons, find using the internet overwhelming.
Although I support the cutting of bureaucracy, it cannot happen at the expense of the vulnerable and the elderly, and I believe that the UK Government should embark on an assessment of the current difficulties of accessing the benefits system before it imposes another hurdle. In the meantime, it should simplify pension credit forms. If it is felt that the sorts of working examples that exist for that particular form are required, it is an admission that the form is too complex for a start.
17:25
I, too, congratulate my colleague Graeme Dey on securing this important debate. Although the debate makes specific reference to a report that was published by Angus CAB on the challenges that are being faced there by those who are required to make online benefits applications, I know from my work on the Parliament’s Welfare Reform Committee that similar challenges are being faced by many benefits claimants throughout Scotland.
What is the key issue? I submit that the magnitude of the challenges that are being faced stems from the UK Government’s determination to force people to make online applications and to maintain online activity with respect to their benefit entitlement even when the citizens concerned have no or low computer skills or have no access to the internet at all. As we have heard, that flows from the UK Government’s so-called digital strategy, which includes an expectation that 80 per cent of benefits applications will be completed online by 2017. Angus CAB and many other CABx throughout Scotland have expressed or experienced concern about this digital by default approach to the welfare system. On page 2 of its report, Angus CAB states that it is concerned that the approach could
“exclude some of the most vulnerable and marginalised members of society from accessing the very services they rely upon.”
Indeed, without at the same time taking or promoting measures to ensure that such citizens are not left offline and behind, what is the efficacy of the UK Government’s current approach? How will it, in and of itself, do anything to improve online skills and access?
The fact of digital exclusion and the implications that it has for the receipt of benefits to which people are entitled have been the subject of discussion at the Welfare Reform Committee. An area of particular concern, and a point highlighted in the Angus CAB report, is the impact on those who are required to maintain jobs search online activity. As the Welfare Reform Committee highlighted at paragraph 6 on page 2 of its fourth report of 2014, “Interim Report on the New Benefits Sanctions Regime: Tough Love or Tough Luck?”, which was published on 11 June 2014, an identified weakness in the sanctions system is
“A failure to appreciate that many people on benefits do not have the necessary IT skills at day one to utilise the DWP’s Universal Jobmatch facility or other IT technology.”
That point was raised during the committee’s inquiry by, for example, One Parent Families Scotland, which said:
“Issues of digital access are being ignored so that sanctions are being applied to lone parents who: don’t have access to a PC; don’t have broadband; or don’t have the on-line skills required by”
Jobcentre Plus
“to meet job search requirements.”
Cost issues have also been identified. Paragraph 95, on page 19 of the committee’s report, notes that
“Some clients are unable to meet jobseeking requirements because they cannot afford the costs of their jobsearch. Often this is the result of a previous sanction.”
The question arises of what support is to be made available in order to move claimants online. Page 5 of the Angus CAB report says:
“the DWP advises that claimants should contact their local council or local Job Centre to get help with claiming online or getting access to the internet.”
I have no confidence that that is happening in any significant way. Therefore, that begs the question of where the safety net is for those vulnerable people as far as the welfare system is concerned. Surely it is time that the UK Government had a rethink, not least in light of its lamentable track record on setting up computer systems.
17:17
Like others, I congratulate Graeme Dey on bringing this issue forward for a members’ business debate. I commend Angus Citizens Advice Bureau for its excellent discussion paper, which highlights particular issues faced by claimants as a result of the UK Government’s digital strategy.
Everyone who has spoken in the debate is concerned about the digital delivery of benefits. There is an absolute recognition of the difficulties that that is causing for many vulnerable people. However, we need to be specific about the problem. What I find concerning is the way in which the DWP chooses to deliver benefits through the digital channel, which in itself is not the problem.
When the digital delivery was announced by the UK Government, I raised with Lord Freud in one of my meetings with him the fact that I saw digital delivery as an issue that would impact on vulnerable people. I also said that I expected that the DWP would in some way provide support and financing to help people get over the hurdle of getting access to computers and the digital channel.
I have said before in the chamber that we are not a Parliament of Luddites. There is no doubt that digital is the way of the future. Now and in the future, most of us in society will expect and demand efficient and responsive public services to be delivered online. My colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and External Affairs recently published a digital participation strategy that commits us to building a national movement for change that works tirelessly to build a world-class digital nation in which everybody, regardless of where they live or the circumstances in which they find themselves, can embrace digital technology with confidence.
The strategy sets out the work that we are doing in partnership with the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations and signatories to our digital participation charter to provide courses that will help improve digital skills, mentors who will give people confidence, and financial support to organisations and community groups that people trust to support them on their digital journey. The comprehensive nature of the strategy and the cross-ministerial support that it enjoys give me the confidence that people in Scotland will be better placed than most to acquire the skills and confidence that the modern world increasingly demands.
There is a problem, however, when the DWP is railroading people down a digital route simply so that it can say that 80 per cent of people will make “digital by default” applications and when it is obvious that in many cases that is not the best option for people. Some of the stories in the Angus CAB discussion paper and from other sources that I have heard across Scotland are quite shocking, and we have also heard some in the debate. I hope that they are not an indication of how universal credit is intended to be delivered.
We heard, among other examples, Christine Grahame talking about the effect on pensioners and David Torrance talking about somebody who had worked for 35 years and never needed to use a digital strategy but was made redundant. For someone to lose their job in that way is a big enough trauma, but for them to be unable to apply online for or claim the benefits that they are entitled to because they do not have the skills to use the internet is a double whammy. It is absolutely disgraceful that people have to go through that.
Jackie Baillie referred to face-to-face advice. There are always going to be people, no matter how clever or advanced we are digitally, who will need face-to-face advice, including people with technophobia. Filling in a form is not always just about ticking boxes; people must also understand the questions in the form. From spending many years in the advice sector, I can certainly say that some people would have filled in the form wrongly if they had tried to do it themselves and that they must be asked the right questions in a face-to-face situation. People do not always know what benefit they are on, for example, or what income they get. Filling in a form with incorrect information about those matters could put them out of getting benefits for some time, and they would have to get all that sorted out. In the meantime, they would have no means to live on.
Graeme Dey and all the members who have spoken have highlighted that the people who will be most affected are those who are on low incomes, those who live in deprived areas, those who have a disability, those with long-term health conditions, those with numeracy or literacy difficulties and those who have never had to use a computer. They are the very people whom we expect the welfare state to be there for.
I say to the DWP that those people deserve a benefits system that meets their needs, rather than one that meets only an arbitrary target of 80 per cent of claims being made online. That figure has caused some concern. Because of such challenges, the Scottish Government is funding a variety of projects that are aimed at enhancing digital skills and improving access.
Our welfare reform resilience fund supports several digital projects, such as the local support project in Fife, which is recruiting local people to build IT capacity and delivering a bespoke community bus to take online services to outlying communities. The Shetland rural IT project aims to develop individuals’ information and communication technology skills and to improve access to the internet throughout rural Shetland.
Rural areas have barriers, some of which have been mentioned, but there are also issues in urban areas—particularly Glasgow, Clyde and Lanarkshire—where we know that broadband uptake is much lower than the Scottish and UK average. We must remember that many people cannot afford to have broadband in their home. Some of us see broadband as almost a necessity, but it is more than a luxury for others—they cannot even contemplate having the money to spend on it. As Jackie Baillie said, many people’s only internet access is through a mobile phone, and we all know that nobody could apply for a benefit or fill in a form on a mobile phone. That is why we are funding the Glasgow libraries project with £200,000 over two years to promote community-based access to computers, fit new IT kit, make wi-fi available and provide relevant skills and development training.
Many members have mentioned that there are signs that the DWP has recognised that many claimants will face challenges and will require assistance to make the transition to the new system. We do not question the fact that digital delivery of public services, including benefits, is a development for the 21st century, but we question and continue to raise with the DWP the implementation of that approach and the intent of the welfare reforms that are behind it.
Meeting closed at 17:42.
I begin by thanking Scottish National Party colleagues and Labour members whose support for the motion has given us this opportunity to consider the paper that has been produced by the social policy team of Angus Citizens Advice Bureau, and the important issues that are highlighted in it. I also thank the members who have remained to participate in the debate.
I say at the outset that I am seeking to highlight the content of the report not as a means of attacking the general actions of the Department for Work and Pensions or Westminster, but to draw attention to the serious practical impact that the digital by default strategy will have on some of the people who are most reliant on accessing benefits.
Angus CAB’s paper “Digitally enhanced or digitally disadvantaged?” lays out clearly the challenges that are presented by the United Kingdom Government’s digital strategy and its expectation that by 2017 80 per cent of benefit applications will be being completed online. It highlights the fact that the DWP itself does not believe that that is achievable, given that it has acknowledged that only 30 per cent of benefit claimants would have no difficulty moving to an online application process. In other words, more than two thirds of claimants will encounter varying degrees of difficulty and yet the aim is to have 80 per cent of claimants embracing the approach within three years.
I think that I am reasonably computer savvy, although my kids and constituency office staff might disagree, but even I find myself checking, double-checking and sometimes triple-checking bookings or forms that I have completed online. Imagine what it would be like for someone who is not computer literate or tech-confident, when their lifeline benefits are at stake.
The DWP has admitted that the people who are most likely to claim benefits—those who are on low incomes, who are disabled or who are over 65—are the very people who are least likely to have access to the internet or the ability to use it. However, that seems to have been disregarded in drawing up the new strategy. Of course, that highlights the wider issue of the digital skills deficit that is spread throughout Scotland. Only one third of those who are on low incomes in our country have broadband access, compared to 56 per cent of comparable households in the rest of the UK.
The digital deficit needs to be addressed and the disparity between Scotland and the rest of the UK and between different areas of Scotland has to be dealt with, but let us focus for now on the issue that is under discussion, and the UK Government’s anticipation that such a large majority of benefit applications will be made online, while offering no new support to facilitate that. Understandably, it is that lack of support that concerns Angus CAB. Just 35 per cent of Angus CAB’s clients believe that they would be able to apply online for benefit, which will leave a large group of people relying on services such as the CAB provides, or on their friends or family to help with applications.
During 2011-12, CABx across Scotland helped clients to complete an average of 75 old-style paper benefit forms every day. That help might have been required because of technical and confusing language on the forms, or because of claimants who struggle with reading or writing. Those problems will still exist with online applications. For anyone who experiences trouble with reading or writing or, for example, people in the deaf community who often do not use the written English language, moving the application process online will not fix those problems; it will simply exacerbate them. Those who are already struggling to fill in long and complex forms require help to do so, as will those who do not have readily available internet access or do not know how to use a computer. The digital by default strategy fails to make the application process easier for users. For the majority of claimants, it just makes it harder.
I referenced the deaf community, and I have also been told that to reduce costs, the DWP is to telephone clients where possible in order to secure additional information or to process applications. That might be a good intention, but where does that leave hearing-impaired people? The actions of the DWP will undoubtedly pile pressure on local services such as CABx or libraries that offer internet access, because no further support or funding has been offered to help such services to provide for claimants, even though the UK Government recognises that they will need extra support.
There is a move across society to have form filling done online, but the question is how, in pursuing that approach, we cater for the people who fall through the cracks. Angus Council’s preferred method of applying for housing benefit or council tax reductions is online, but it also offers a telephone service and a paper-based service. Revenue and benefits staff are available at four locations to assist with completion of applications, and the service can be extended, by appointment, to three other locations. Additionally, officers will, on request, visit people’s homes, and access is given to digital skills programmes from the most basic level upwards. That is a commonsense approach involving compromise and flexibility.
Angus CAB believes itself to be underresourced to meet the demand that will undoubtedly arise by virtue of the strategy that is being pursued. Throughout its report, the CAB highlights previous cases that support that assertion. It appears that benefits claimants are being punished repeatedly for not having online access. For instance, two Angus CAB clients were sanctioned for not being able to access the jobseekers allowance services, which have already moved online, even though both clients were vulnerable and had no knowledge of how to use a computer, let alone how to apply for jobs online.
It is not only the change to the application process that will cause upheaval for people who are in receipt of benefits; the fact that it is being paralleled with the rolling out of universal credit will also cause upheaval. As universal credit spreads across the country, increasing emphasis is being placed on job searching and applications by people who currently receive jobseekers allowance. Not only will they have to apply for benefits online, they will also have to search and apply for jobs online. That approach signposts everyone to apply online and treats digital applications as the rule rather than the exception. Needless to say, Angus CAB has examples of clients who have no access to the internet and very limited access to the telephone. As I highlighted earlier, how are hearing-impaired people supposed to cope with applications being discussed or progressed by means of the telephone? I am not saying that the phone approach will not be helpful to some, but the practice does not entirely reflect the flexibility or resourcing that is required.
Although I accept that moving to an online benefits application process may have benefits for some people and should speed up the process for those who successfully manage to apply, the UK Government’s digital by default strategy, with its 80 per cent target, is a non-runner for many. The strategy offers insufficient flexibility for those who struggle with the online application, and the DWP offers no support to the local services that are bound to experience an influx of people who are struggling with the new application process. For me, the strategy is badly thought out. The UK Government has recognised the difficulties that it will cause but has not provided adequate means of alleviating those. That needs to change, otherwise cynics might wonder whether adopting the approach is just another method of reducing the benefits bill regardless of the human cost.
17:12
I thank Graeme Dey for bringing this paper to Parliament through his motion, and I pay tribute to the work of Angus CAB.
On its front cover, the paper is described as
“A discussion paper produced by Angus Social Policy Team (part of Angus Citizens Advice Bureau ... )”.
Such a discussion paper is vital at this time and is valuable in promoting the debate. As far as digital exclusion is concerned, we must remember that those of us who have access to the internet and use it regularly have a tremendous advantage over others. Many of the things we buy, some of the things we sell and many of the services we access are cheaper on the internet, and those of us who have such digital connectivity have a natural advantage while those who do not have a natural and converse disadvantage.
There are a number of reasons why digital connectivity might be a problem. As has been highlighted, access to broadband in many of our rural areas is not all that it could be, and many who live in our geographically most marginal communities struggle to access the internet because they have either no broadband connection or, as is the case in many areas, no mobile connection that they could use as a substitute.
The people whom we are talking about not only have been excluded from the advantages of internet access but will now be expected to make applications for support by that means. Some of us from the Welfare Reform Committee have had the advantage of visiting the Glasgow pilot and talking to some of the people involved, and what we heard there was reassuring to some extent. I can reassure the chamber that the 80 per cent target that has to be met by 2017 will not be met simply by dropping people off; if it cannot be met, other ways will have to be found to reach those who cannot get online.
We also spoke to those responsible for running individual accounts in the pilot, who look at the online applications that have been made and contact those who have failed to complete the form adequately or have made some other error that requires such further contact. In fact, it became clear during that visit that many of those who are responsible for running the pilot on a day-to-day basis understand only too well the disadvantages that are coming along.
The truth is that universal credit, once fully implemented, will have tremendous advantages for claimants and give huge flexibility. However, people must be able to access their accounts, which is why I am supportive of those who have expressed grave concern about those who would have an advantage if they could connect online but who are unable to do so.
Angus CAB has highlighted a key problem that we must begin to deal with at every level. That means finding adequate support for those who can give the training and assistance locally; providing the equipment that is necessary—if that is in our libraries, that should be done in a much more secure manner; providing support through local government where it can be effectively funded by some other means; and, above all, finding the resource within DWP budgets to ensure that a little spent in the right place results in the savings that it would like to achieve in the long term.
There is a great deal to be achieved by pursuing the target, but it must be implemented in an effective and understanding way that produces those results for the benefit of not only the DWP but the claimants.
17:30
I thank Graeme Dey for lodging the motion for debate and emphasise the importance of the issue that he has raised.
The paper that was produced by Angus Citizens Advice Bureau highlights major problems with the UK Government’s digital strategy and its aim of having 80 per cent of benefit applications made online by 2017. Those issues will affect benefit claimants across Scotland, as the universal credit continues to be rolled out throughout the regions, and I am certain that claimants in my constituency will face many of the same difficulties as those that have been encountered by CAB clients in Angus.
One of the most pressing problems that face claimants who must make their benefit application online is lack of access to the internet. Citizens Advice Scotland found in a 2013 survey of its CAB clients who had a benefits issue that just 54 per cent of respondents had an internet connection at home. That suggests that almost half of the clients who were surveyed would have to seek alternative access to the internet in order to make their benefit claim online. Although some people may be able to rely on friends or family who have a computer, those who are unable to do so must turn to publicly available facilities. Most local authorities provide such facilities in libraries or community centres, but many facilities are limited in number as well as in the venue’s opening hours.
In my constituency, internet facilities are available in local libraries, but other than there options are limited. That is one of the reasons behind the newly launched olive branch cafe, which is located in Bennochy parish church in Kirkcaldy. An internet cafe is provided that allows free internet access for people in the local community. Although the service is invaluable to benefit claimants, it is limited to the current opening hours of the cafe.
Even if such facilities are more readily available, some claimants may have difficulties in getting to them. That could be for mobility reasons or because of the cost or availability of transport. Internet access therefore remains a major obstacle for many benefit claimants.
Practical access aside, many claimants lack the skills and/or confidence to use the internet. One of my constituents, who was made redundant last year after 35 years of working in a manual job, struggles to use the internet due to a lack of IT skills. When he found himself younable to perform job searches online, his jobseekers allowance was sanctioned.
That is surely a sign of things to come, particularly for the older generation, who are inevitably less likely to possess the IT skills of our young people, who have grown up in the digital age. CAS’s 2013 survey found that 47 per cent of respondents who cited skills and confidence as a barrier to applying for jobs or benefits online were aged between 45 and 59 and that 22 per cent were aged between 60 and 74. Those factors can make applying for benefits online a very daunting task.
Under the current UK Government’s digital strategy, benefit claimants may be sanctioned should they fail to perform tasks online. I have witnessed at first hand how some of my constituents have been affected by unreasonable and disproportionate sanctions. One of my constituents was recently sanctioned for failing to attend an appointment at his local job centre, despite his having notified it in advance that he would be attending his father’s funeral that day. Although that sanction was reconsidered and later reversed, my constituent had to face weeks in the interim awaiting the outcome of his appeal with no income whatsoever. He came to me with no money for food or electricity.
We should bear in mind that the majority of people who are in receipt of benefits are some of the poorest in our society and that they already face the impact of billions of pounds of Westminster-imposed cuts to the welfare budget. The DWP’s digital by default strategy is likely to lead to a growing number of sanctions and consequently a higher prevalence of such incidents whereby claimants end up in dire straits with nowhere to turn for alternative sources of income.
It is abundantly clear that the UK Government’s target of having 80 per cent of benefit claims made online is completely unworkable and that it unfairly penalises those who face challenges in using the internet whether for reasons of lack of access or skills, or health. That is likely to have a knock-on effect on other local services, which will find themselves under increasing pressure to deal with those who are struggling to meet the digital demands that are placed on them by the DWP.
I whole-heartedly support Graeme Dey’s motion and call for a review of the UK Government’s 80 per cent target at the earliest opportunity.
17:34
Moving swiftly on, the final item of business today is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-010757, in the name of Graeme Dey, on Angus Citizens Advice Bureau publishes paper highlighting challenges faced by online benefit claimants. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
I call Graeme Dey, who is already on his feet, to open the debate. Mr Dey, you have seven minutes.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament welcomes the launch of Digitally enhanced or Digitally Disadvantaged?, a discussion paper produced by Angus Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB); notes the paper’s concern regarding the Department of Work and Pensions’ “digital by default” strategy, which expects 80% of benefits applications to be made online, despite the UK Government recognising that only 30% of claimants for universal credit would have no difficulty in moving to online benefit claiming; understands that the paper states that often those who are applying for benefits are those who are least likely to have access to the internet; notes with concern the wider issue of an IT skills deficit in Angus, including Angus South, with only 54% of Angus CAB clients having access to the internet at home, compared to 68% across Scotland, and commends the work done by Angus CAB on the paper, which it considers provides an understanding of the challenges faced by those claiming benefits online and the future pressures that this may place on local services.
17:05Previous
Decision Time