Chamber and committees

The cabinet secretary has had five years since the bill was passed in which to prepare for the new benefits. For the carer support payment truly to be an improvement on carers allowance, it will have to be paid to more unpaid carers and take into account their varied and very difficult situations, which I have already outlined.

Carers Scotland estimates that only one in 10 carers is eligible for the payment, with many not meeting qualifying criteria. I think that members in the chamber would agree that it seems wrong that unpaid carers cannot access a benefit that has supposedly been made for them.

Since the establishment of Social Security Scotland, we have been promised repeatedly by the Government that things will be better, yet many Scots are being made to wait with uncertainty, just as they were under the DWP. Therefore, can the cabinet secretary say with confidence that the proposed carer support payment will be the much-needed, long-term improvement to carers allowance that will allow more unpaid carers to access support, or will it merely be a tweak that fails Scotland’s unpaid carers who desperately need it, now more than ever?

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?