Chamber and committees

Deputy Presiding Officer, I thank you for your permission to leave before the end of the question session, and I apologise to you and to members for having to do so.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the “Scottish Biodiversity Strategy to 2045”, including in relation to riparian woodland planting. (S6O-04990)

To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of any implications for its work to address poverty amongst older people of recent findings by the Living Wage Foundation that a majority of people on a low-income pension in the United Kingdom are unable to cover basic living costs. (S6F-04335)

The findings in the report should concern all of us. Labour promised no austerity and more support for pensioners, yet, in the midst of a cost of living crisis, it tried to slash winter fuel payments, attempted to cut disability payments and blocked WASPI women—women against state pension inequality—from getting compensation. All of that was during a time of rising energy bills, food prices and inflation—pressures that are hitting struggling households the hardest.

What assurances can the First Minister provide to pensioners in Scotland that the Scottish Government is squarely in their corner and recognises the immense strain that many of them are under?

A lot of good work is being done in my constituency of Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley on riparian woodland planting. I refer specifically to the work of Symington community council, in partnership with other groups, to introduce extensive areas of woodland along the upper Pow Burn in order to create natural habitats and nature networks to reduce the flood risk downstream. What support is being provided to communities to support such endeavours?

My amendments 314 and 315 seek to place responsibilities on community planning partnerships to have regard to the need to prevent homelessness and to any relevant guidance that is issued by Scottish ministers. That was a recommendation from the prevention review group, of which I was a member, as there was a recognition of the important strategic role that CPPs play in their localities across all sectors.

The amendments are intended to support the bill’s intention for prevention of homelessness to become a shared public responsibility by requiring the key local strategic planning body to consider the need to prevent homelessness as part of its functions. That would be on top of the requirements on relevant bodies, many of which might be community planning partners, to ask individual service users about their housing situation and to act in line with their own functions.

Through its consultation work, which included consultations with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Association of Local Authority Chief Housing Officers and the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives, the homelessness prevention review group identified the strategic importance of CPPs in homelessness prevention. The amendments build on public bodies’ responsibilities under the fairer Scotland public sector equality duty to reduce inequalities of outcome as a result of socioeconomic disadvantage, and they help to join up homelessness prevention with related strategic local priorities, such as tackling child poverty, delivering community justice, improving mental health, identifying employment opportunities and addressing violence against women and girls.

By including community planning partnerships as a listed relevant body, Sarah Boyack’s amendment 319 seeks to achieve a similar purpose. The difference between my amendments and Sarah Boyack’s amendment is that mine do not subject CPPs to the operational duties that are set out in proposed new sections 36A to 36C of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987, which are not relevant to CPPS’ strategic planning functions. I understand that CPPs are not considered to be legal entities, but they are the linchpin of local strategy setting.

I hope that the cabinet secretary can say something about how CPPs can be involved in any guidance that is issued, to ensure that their role in prevention is given due regard.

I will spend some time exploring issues for the youngest children—those under 11. The youngest category in the CAS programme is the under-11s. How confident are you that development centres have sufficient protections and support in place for the youngest players? Are there any specific rules and regulations that apply to that group of kids?

There is a club that starts working with children at the age of five, which is quite young—you imagine that, at that age, they will be running around their local pitches with small local teams. To what extent do you think that young children are mentally and physically ready to engage in the CAS programme? From what you said, I understand that dual engagements happen with their local club and the CAS programme at the same time. Also, are there any specific safeguards or protections in place to protect children from overenthusiastic parental influence? You already touched on that in terms of what happens on the sidelines, but I think that a lot of pressure can be placed on wee kids at that stage.

Do they have due regard to the needs of those youngest kids? If someone is hothoused from a very young age with the aim of them progressing from there, that can be quite an intensive setting.

It might be quite helpful if you could give the committee a bit more information about what understanding the clubs’ wellbeing and safeguarding officers have of the youngest children. The position of a five-year-old or an eight-year-old is different from that of a teenager in terms of their agency.

Good morning. In its reply to SCOSS, the Scottish Government said that it would prefer the DWP and Social Security Scotland to share data about clients moving between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Why has that not been possible and what will the impact of that be on disabled people and carers?