Chamber and committees

Does anyone else want to come in?

Other colleagues have questions on data, so I will hand back to the convener.

It would be customary to thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement. We note the short period of time that she had, but we, of course, read her plans in some detail in today’s press.

I welcome the support that is finally being offered this winter. The cabinet secretary knows that I have always said that more could be done this winter. I have consistently asked in the chamber about the £42 million that will come as a result of UK Government decisions about the household support fund. Will the cabinet secretary finally provide some clarity on what will be done with the Barnett consequentials that will come as a result of spending this winter?

In addition, we have always said that the pension-age winter heating payment, which is devolved to Scotland, provides an opportunity to widen the criteria beyond those receiving pension credit. I again point to the in-year announcement of £1.5 billion of Barnett consequentials for the Scottish Government, with the figure rising to £3.4 billion in the budget next year. I ask the cabinet secretary whether it is as a result of that spending that she is able to announce that she will bring forward regulations on the pension-age winter heating payment, given that she previously said that that would be impossible because she did not have the money and that she

“cannot base a budget on a wing, a prayer and a promise”.—[Official Report, 3 October 2024; c 44.]

Finally, will she speak to the Poverty and Inequality Commission about its opinion of her payment?

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to address the reported disproportionately lower levels of social security uptake among ethnic minority groups. (S6O-04022)

Analysis of client and applicant data by the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights shows that only 6.3 per cent of applicants are black and minority ethnic, which is well below the Scottish population average. That analysis also found particular underrepresentation in disability payments and that people were more likely to have applications rejected. The Scottish Government’s stats show that relative poverty among BME groups is more than 50 per cent, compared with only 20 per cent in the overall population.

We know that social security is an important part of the anti-poverty strategy, but reductions in the development of marketing campaigns could impact on groups that are less heard and less able to access information. Will the cabinet secretary reflect on that and say what she will do with regard to those budgets?

To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body whether it will consult MSP staff trade unions before deciding on uprating the staff cost provision in the 2025-26 financial year. (S6O-04046)

I remind colleagues of my entry in the register of members’ interests, which states that I am a member of the GMB union.

The parliamentary staff unions are a large and active body and have worked year after year to deliver fair pay consideration for their members. Although I recognise what Jackson Carlaw said, which is that they are not negotiating bodies due to the parliamentary staff structure, does the SPCB agree that those who determine pay and conditions for staff should be in some form of formal communication with staff whose decisions they affect? Will he say what inflation index the SPCB intends to use to calculate the pay uplift this year?

Last week it was reported that, despite the Government handing at least £4 million to health boards since 2022 to deliver health checks for vulnerable Scots who have a learning disability, and promising that those would be completed by March 2023, as of this year, not a single board has met that target, and some boards have offered no checks at all. This week, the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee was told by individuals who have a learning disability that they feel that they “remain unheard” and that they are

“not a priority for Scotland”.

What has happened to the £4 million that was given to health boards for an unfulfilled promise, what will be done to rectify that failure and will the first minister now apologise to those vulnerable Scots with learning disabilities who have been let down by his Government yet again?

Following Maggie Chapman’s contribution, I am interested in what outcomes we would like to see. If we think about the particular challenges with other aspects of policy, there are concerns that non-residential care charges will not end by the end of the parliamentary session. We know that not everyone with a learning disability is receiving annual health checks, and that the human rights bill that would have helped to address some of those things is not going to progress during this session. What outcomes will we achieve, and what is your view on that? I appreciate that it is a big question.

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. I am a member of Enable Scotland and was previously employed by it.

How, and when, was the decision to delay the bill communicated to your organisation?

I will start with Susan.