Chamber and committees

I take on board Mr Balfour’s point, and we will consider everything. However, maybe the member should look at carers allowance, which his Government could have upgraded but did not. We will take no lessons from the Tory party.

The cost of living crisis is caused not just by increasing costs but by decades of intentional reductions in social security support. Surely it is obvious to all that that needs to change.

The UK Government explained its U-turn by saying that the policy was a distraction, but it was not a distraction—it was a disgrace. That budget plan chooses to reinstate bankers’ bonuses but not the £20 uplift to universal credit, and it continues the austerity and welfare cuts that are leaving so many behind. There is no commitment to increase the benefits by inflation; I hope that what the member said earlier will happen, but we will see. There is no commitment to scrap the five-week waiting time for universal credit, to abolish the two-child policy—with its abhorrent, disgusting rape clause—or to U-turn on plans to increase benefit sanctions instead of filling bankers’ pockets. It is a missed opportunity to provide the help that people need to get through this crisis, and that will not be forgotten.

In Scotland, our focus is different. Although 85 per cent of the social security budget remains under Westminster control, we are working to maximise our interventions. We are building a system led by dignity, fairness and respect—no unjust sanction regime and no pointless private sector assessments.

The Scottish child payment is being increased to £25 per week, and eligibility is being extended to under-16s. Taken together, the Scottish Government’s five family payments are worth more than £10,000 by the time the first child reaches six and about £9,700 for subsequent children. There is no restrictive two-child policy here.

We continue to mitigate the effects of the bedroom tax and, now, the benefit cap, when we could be investing those resources elsewhere in our social security budget. We have introduced the Scottish carers allowance supplement, righting a wrong that was continued by Tory, Labour and Liberal Democrat Governments at Westminster. And we move at pace to roll out all disability benefits and further support to carers.

Those interventions, along with the rent freeze, the evictions moratorium and other support such as the Scottish welfare fund, are essential from a Government that gets the priorities right, and we should continue to look at what else can be done with our budgets and powers. But it is absolutely obvious that this Parliament needs the full powers of independence to cut out the cause of this crisis at its core—an arrogant Westminster Government with no compassion and no understanding of its impact on our constituents.

I thank my colleague Elena Whitham for securing the debate. It is much needed and I congratulate the Poverty Alliance and all anti-poverty campaigners across the country for promoting the event. I also take the opportunity to thank the many support groups, food banks and advice agencies in my constituency. I praise them all, including the Dalmuir community food pantry, the Recycle Room, Old Kilpatrick Food Parcels, Faifley food share, East Dunbartonshire Foodbank, West Dunbartonshire Community Foodshare, Clydebank Asbestos Group, the Big Disability Group, the East and West Dunbartonshire citizens advice bureaux and both councils’ advice staff. As a constituency MSP, I see what those organisations do to provide much-needed help and support and I am firmly on their side.

The debate is timely, given the scale of the challenge that faces many of our constituents. Just yesterday, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation in Scotland published its report “Poverty in Scotland 2022”. The report states that

“Nearly one in five households on low incomes in Scotland have gone hungry and cold this year, even before we enter the winter months”.

The report says this about the UK Government:

“their wilful abandonment of low-income households in last month’s budget is outrageous. Meaning without further intervention by them the situation described in this report will be worsened from an already terrible position by the oncoming winter.”

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation correctly asserts:

“This cost of living crisis is not just caused by increasing costs. The incomes of low-income households have been intentionally reduced by a decade of reductions in social security support”.

Surely it is obvious to all that that needs to change. But also, yesterday, we instead got a speech from the chancellor that shows he has no shame. His speech made little reference to the screeching U-turn, and there was no hint of apology.

One factor that is driving cost increases and that came up in the evidence is Brexit. Professor Ken Gibb, from the University of Glasgow, highlighted concern about the

“economic change associated with Brexit.”

He said that Brexit is a “contributory factor” to the negative impact on labour supply and on the cost and shortages of materials. Do you share that concern? How is the Scottish Government considering the impact that Brexit is having?

You announced that you are introducing emergency legislation to freeze rents, which has been welcomed, not least by the Scottish Housing Regulator, which highlighted that a survey of the national panel of tenants showed that

“7 in 10 were concerned about future affordability of their rent”.

You will also be aware that yesterday, the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations said that the freeze will impact the ability to meet targets for building homes and decarbonisation.

What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the impact that a freeze on social sector rents might have on social landlords’ affordable housing development plans? Will it mean a need for increased subsidies to minimise the risk to the delivery of the target?

Thanks. I have no further questions.

Thank you—it is very much a challenge.

In evidence, the Association of Local Authority Chief Housing Officers emphasised the need to listen to existing tenants before determining priorities. How did the Scottish Government consider the needs and priorities of existing tenants when setting its affordable housing supply targets?

Good morning, cabinet secretary. Thank you for giving some time to the committee this morning.

Some witnesses have highlighted the challenge of investing in important aims, such as decarbonising existing stock, as well as in developing new homes, without compromising the affordability for tenants.

To ask the Scottish Government how it continues to assess the impact of Brexit on Scotland. (S6O-01334)

With yet another Brexit-obsessed Conservative in Downing Street and the cost of living crisis escalating, will the cabinet secretary reiterate the need for the people of Scotland to have the opportunity to decide their own constitutional future to make up for the worsening democratic deficit, which has seen Scottish concerns utterly ignored under the Tories at Westminster?

I direct my next question to Ailsa Raeburn. Your submission states:

“There are unnecessary complexities in the funding and planning processes which, if addressed, could speed up the process and enable more communities to deliver hyper local schemes that meet local need.”

You touched on that in an earlier response, but will you expand on it and suggest any improvements that could be made?