Chamber and committees

I am sorry; anybody could probably answer; I do not want to target the question specifically.

That is really helpful. As ever, people will be unsurprised to hear that I hope that the pace will be quick and that the actions will follow to meet the ideas in the plan.

On the point about addressing the poverty of the priority groups, I note that Close the Gap published a blog post this week in which it says that the plan represents a regression in relation to gendered analysis and women’s poverty. Do the witnesses share that view?

Good morning. Thank you for all the evidence that you submitted in advance of the meeting and for all the work that you have done this year and, indeed, in previous years. It has been—and still is—a really tough time for a lot of the people whom you represent.

I want to start with a question for Bill Scott. In its submission, the Poverty and Inequality Commission says that it is looking for “greater pace and scale” and increased investment. How does the delivery plan compare with those expectations? Does it include the stronger focus on evidence that you had wanted, and does it contain enough on social security to address the cost of living crisis at the moment?

Yes, please. That was all really helpful. I think that there is a real challenge for us in how we gather information and intelligence then use them to react quickly in times of crisis. As you said, we absolutely need to do that.

I have a question for Jack Evans on the actions that are in the plan. How much action does it contain to address poverty in the priority groups?

Thank you for that really comprehensive and helpful answer. How much does the effect of income distribution on poverty rates explain some of the projections in the modelling?

I also have another question, which is for Peter Kelly. The Poverty Alliance noted that social security is not yet adequate—members and others will know that I share its impatience for action on that, in particular on the adult disability payment and carers allowance—so could you talk about how we can start to address that and what we need to do now?

My first question was a short supplementary for Bill Scott, and the second one was for Peter Kelly.

Good morning, panel. Thank you for the evidence that you submitted in advance, and for all the information on the issue that you have shared to date with the committee and others.

I take the point that the plan is not written as a cost of living plan. However, it has been written during a cost of living crisis that is—I hope—the biggest that any of us will ever live through. Although the modelling suggests that we will meet the initial relative poverty target—only just, but we will get there, nonetheless—it does not feel like that for people on the ground. Things do not feel optimistic at all. It does not meet the sniff test, I guess; it is just not quite right. Is the modelling optimistic? Given the circumstances that we hear about from people who live in poverty, and their experience right now, will we still be saying, in a year’s time, the same thing about possibly meeting the targets?

Thanks for those answers. I will move on to the next theme. Some of the submissions say that, even if we reach the targets, we will only just reach the relative poverty target and we will miss—obviously—the absolute poverty target. There are concerns about standards of living and the targets on destitution.

For many people, it does not feel that we are in an optimistic situation with regard to the economy or the cost of living, so does the modelling still hold? In a year’s time, will we still be saying that we will meet the targets? Is there anything that we need to do now to guarantee that we will get there, given that the modelling suggests that we will only just make it?

As has been touched on already, the reductions in poverty do not reflect living standards, so it would be good to hear a little more about what that means for families. In the interests of time, I ask Peter Kelly and Bill Scott to answer those questions. I know that everyone could say something on the issue.

What training would be needed? Who in particular would be best to provide it?

I thank the witnesses for their evidence so far. I have been particularly struck by the good practice that we have heard about, particularly from May Dunsmuir, and by the ingenuity that has been explained and described. I have often said that, if we can get it right for disabled people and disabled children, we can often get it right for everyone. That seems to be a really good benchmark. It is really important that we engage in an inclusive way. Well done on everything that you have outlined, your approach, and sharing your learning. I have been struck by the fact that you have all said that it is important to learn from one another.

I want to ask about the Children (Scotland) Act 2020. It has been said that we could learn a lot from the children’s hearings system and said that we could replicate some of those things in the family court system. It would be good to hear from Alastair Hogg about what he thinks those things are, where they should be replicated and how the good practice that we have heard about this morning in your various services could reach other parts of the system.

As a supplementary to that, what impact do you believe the delay in introducing the changes under the 2020 act has had on the ability of children and young people to fully participate in decisions?

Good morning, panel, and thank you for joining us. It is also nice to see people in what I think is called the public gallery for the first time since I came into Parliament.

Thank you for the evidence that you have given this morning and all the work that you have done over the years. My first question, which is for Sarah Axford, is about the Children (Scotland) Act 2020. Children 1st submitted quite a lot of evidence on the original bill and made a number of recommendations, some but not all of which were taken on board. What impact do you think the changes that were taken on board will have when the provisions come into effect? Has the delay in introducing them had any implications?