Chamber and committees

To ask the Scottish Government what support it provides to retired carers. (S6T-01394)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Yesterday, BBC Scotland reported some very troubling accounts of carers who reached retirement age only to find themselves facing the rise in the cost of living without any substantial support.

As a result of dedicating their lives to caring for a family member or a loved one, many unpaid carers miss out on a workplace pension—something that many other people have and rely on in old age.

The Scottish Government has said that we can now expect the new carer support payment to be introduced later in 2023 with a roll-out in 2024, but does the cabinet secretary agree that the process of rolling out that new carer payment has been too slow? Does she agree that the Scottish Government should be acting with all urgency to introduce a fairer payments system to prevent unpaid carers from falling into poverty?

I am grateful to have the opportunity to contribute to the debate, and I thank Jackson Carlaw for bringing the issue to the chamber. As he mentioned in his opening speech, it is a hyper-local issue but could perhaps have far-reaching effects across West Scotland more generally.

It is great to be talking about East Renfrewshire Good Causes in the chamber. It is an organisation that I, being an East Renfrewshire boy, know well. Having spent much time, like Jackson Carlaw, working in our community, I know that the charity is well thought of across East Renfrewshire. Most importantly, it has attracted consensus across the political divide. That can often be hard to achieve in East Renfrewshire, but it is remarkable to see the amount of support that there is for the work that Russell and Yvonne Macmillan have done over many years.

As I was sitting here, I was reflecting on the times when we come together across political lines to mark the sad passing of Jo Cox. In the great get together, we reflect on her words:

“we ... have ... more in common than that which divides us.”—[Official Report, House of Commons, 3 June 2015; Vol 596, c 675.]

I think that that gets to the heart of what we are talking about with regard to East Renfrewshire Good Causes.

The work that Russell has done, which is rooted in his faith, is about finding our commonality and our shared humanity, and recognising the fact that all of us, at different times in our lives, experience adversity and often need the helping hands of neighbours and friends to get us through. We have heard some practical examples of the way in which Russell and East Renfrewshire Good Causes have, as good neighbours and good friends, reached out and supported so many people in all the communities of East Renfrewshire.

It was good to hear Jackson Carlaw refer to the support for the organisation across the local council. When I was a councillor in East Renfrewshire, my colleague Councillor Alan Lafferty—now a former councillor—was very supportive of the charity’s work. I know that, as well as Jackson Carlaw, Paul Masterton, the former Conservative member of Parliament; Kirsten Oswald, the current Scottish National Party MP; and Jim Murphy and Ken Macintosh—names from Labour’s past—were all supportive of that work, which, again, shows the breadth and depth of the support in the community.

However, it goes far beyond that, because it is about the people in our community as well. In preparing for the debate, I reflected on some of the cases in which the organisation has made the most difference. Back in 2009, a young girl from Netherlee with cerebral palsy, who was a wheelchair user, was able, using a power-assisted walking frame, to stand upright and gain her independence and travel to different places. Without the technology and the equipment, she would have been unable to do that. It was East Renfrewshire Good Causes that came to the aid of that family by providing money towards that facility, enabling her to get her own standing frame, which increased her independence and cut down her reliance on others.

I also reflected on the amount of work that East Renfrewshire Good Causes does for young people, in concert with our local schools, and I thought that I would share a testimonial that I read from the depute headteacher of Mearns primary school. She said:

“East Renfrewshire Good Causes charity never fails to bring about positive change in our community. Without their support and contributions, it would not be possible for some of our pupils to participate in activities with their peers.”

Likewise, the manager of the East Renfrewshire Carers Centre offered a testimonial. He said:

“East Renfrewshire Good Causes is a true friend of the Carers’ Centre and has over a number of years supported many carers to purchase vital equipment without which their caring role and life generally would be much harder.”

Those are two excellent examples of community testimonials about the difference that East Renfrewshire Good Causes makes to many people across the area.

I know that Russell Macmillan’s reason for starting East Renfrewshire Good Causes was to say thank you in terms of his life experience and the gift that he was given. It is important that we, in this chamber—and the community in East Renfrewshire—all take the opportunity to say thank you very publicly in the Parliament to Russell, Yvonne and all those who are involved in and who support the work of the charity for everything that they have done and will continue to do not only in East Renfrewshire but beyond its borders, and we must also, once again, offer them our support in all of that work.

Obviously, the committee is cognisant of the Illegal Migration Bill and has been looking at its impacts. Caroline O’Connor, it has been suggested that a broader humanitarian strategy that would pull lots of different Scottish Government strategies together might be a better way to respond to that. Do you have a view on that?

Good morning. The committee recognises that asylum and immigration are reserved matters, but we are particularly interested in the devolved areas, especially the Scottish Government’s work to address many of the issues about which we have already heard this morning and throughout our evidence taking.

Will you share with us what involvement you have had with the Scottish Government’s strategies, particularly the new Scots and ending destitution together strategies?

John Taylor, you mentioned the current challenges with regard to interaction with local authorities, particularly around housing supply, and you said that wider dispersal will exacerbate those issues. Is the challenge with local authorities about what is available, or is it about how Mears chooses to interact with them? There have been a number of high-profile cases, which I think we would all recognise and which have been particularly concerning. Is it your view that the problem is with the interaction with local authorities?

I have one more question on local authorities before I move on to the human rights approach. Caroline O’Connor, in your interaction with local authorities, where do you see the gaps or challenges in terms of wider support provision?

Are you cognisant of the criticisms that have been voiced by people such as the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland of the circumstances in which pregnant women, in particular, have found themselves and of the issues around how hotels are managed and supported by Mears? How do you react to that criticism, take it on board and make changes? Much of the evidence that we have heard thus far has suggested that that does not always happen—or, at least, there is a real feeling that it does not always happen.

We have had a conversation about resource and how such decisions often become very resource driven because of the pressures that local authorities and other agencies face. The evidence that the committee has heard thus far from people such as the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland is that we need to refocus on the issue and look at it through a human rights lens, because there are serious concerns about dignity. John Taylor spoke about dignity and respect in his opening statement, and there is a lack of dignity and respect for people who are seeking such support. In a previous question, I referred to high-profile cases of people being housed inadequately or in inappropriate settings and the challenges that people who are being left destitute face.

Do you think that Mears takes a human rights approach? What more do you think that you could do in your contracts to achieve the dignity and respect that you spoke about?

I am pleased to lead this debate on behalf of the Scottish Labour Party. At the outset, I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, as I currently serve as chair of the trustees of the Neilston War Memorial Association.

I take the opportunity to thank the Social Justice and Social Security Committee for its hard work in scrutinising the bill. I pay tribute to all the former members of the committee. As Jeremy Balfour rightly recognised, there are many newbies participating in the debate who have inherited this important piece of work, but we are nonetheless keen to make our contribution as the bill moves through its stages. I know that Pam Duncan-Glancy, a former member of the committee, worked very hard on the bill during stage 1, including through the stage 1 report process.

From the outset, I want to be clear in stating that Scottish Labour supports the bill and believes that it is critical that charities operate with transparency and accountability. We recognise that the bill will update Scottish charity legislation by aligning it with key tenets of the regulations that govern charities in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

In common with what we have heard from other opening speakers, I note that it is evident that some aspects of the bill should be refined and clarified as we move to stages 2 and 3. In particular, we should consider how the new regulations will impact on and interact with different charities in different ways. For example, it is critical that we do not overburden charities with regulation to such a degree that it limits their resources and stifles their ability to perform their primary function of delivering support for the causes that they champion and that are supported widely by the public in a variety of ways.

On regulation, it is important that, at stage 2, there is greater focus on exploring the remit and resources of OSCR, the independent regulator and registrar for Scotland’s charities, to ensure that there is a proportionate increase in funding, if required, to allow OSCR to carry out its responsibilities effectively. I appreciate that we have already had the beginning of a discussion about the wider piece of work that is required in reviewing the charity sector in Scotland and the support for it.

It is clear that the wider context is important. I have highlighted in the chamber the significant financial pressures that third sector organisations across Scotland face. We know that the reality is that the majority of charities are small local organisations, with fewer than 10 per cent of registered charities in Scotland having more than 20 employees. Very often, those organisations are firmly rooted in their community and are reliant on the tireless generosity and passion of volunteers to deliver vital support for those who need it.

In my contribution to the debate on the social isolation and loneliness strategy last week, I mentioned that, in the context of the cost of living crisis, third sector organisations are being asked to deliver more with less resource. Although this is a technical bill, we need to recognise that there is a wider debate about the third sector as a vital national resource. The expertise of those in the sector is unrivalled, and the work that they do is invaluable.

As part of that wider review, the Government will want to consider the continuing conversation about long-term funding and to move beyond year-to-year funding for the third sector. It will also want to look at the availability of more core funding and at supporting representative bodies such as the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations to drive forward a lot of the changes and to support charities in growing their capacity so that they can seamlessly move with those changes. Our third sector needs greater stability rather than being limited by continuous cycles of short-term funding and different interventions and regulation at different stages.

Indeed, during the consultation process on the bill, several third sector organisations highlighted that they were struggling to respond as they simply did not have the capacity to draft meaningful responses within the required timescales. That in itself tells the story of the current picture for many charities. Only a tiny fraction of the 25,000 registered charities in Scotland submitted responses. In those responses, questions were raised about the impact of the legislation. Such issues—for example, the creation of a register of trustees—have already been articulated in the debate. Many bodies, including the Faculty of Advocates, have highlighted that charities already struggle to recruit trustees with the requisite skills, passion and experience and who are prepared to give the necessary time commitment.

According to the bill, prospective trustees will be able to apply to OSCR to preserve their anonymity. Although that provision protects the accountability and transparency of charities, it is important to recognise that, for many people, it will create additional barriers to becoming trustees and engaging with charities. That is particularly the case for those who are going through a period of rehabilitation and rebuilding their lives after criminal convictions or prison sentences. We therefore need to be mindful of the balance between protecting charities, and the money that people donate to them, and giving everyone a fair crack of the whip.