Chamber and committees

I am pleased to close on behalf of Scottish Labour in an important debate. I will pick up where other speakers have left off in reflecting on the importance of ensuring that boys and men understand the vital role that they play in reflecting on and changing their behaviours, and not leaving it to women and girls to tackle the scourge of violence, aggression and all the issues that have been discussed and debated. It is disappointing that Ben Macpherson and I appear to have been the only male speakers in the debate. There has been a range of inspiring and important speeches, but they have all been made by women. We have to reflect that more men must take responsibility in the Parliament and in society for our behaviours and that we need to work together.

In summing up, I want to reflect on the many contributions that have been made and the many actions that we can take from the debate and move forward with. The motion for debate focuses on the role of young people, and we have heard much about the concerning nature of what young people are experiencing. It is important that we learn from that and move forward. We need to ensure that we have good education in schools, which we have heard from a number of speakers. Of course, there needs to be education of young women and girls so that they understand issues of consent and respect and the support that they can get. Crucially, as I said at the start of my speech, we need to ensure that boys and young men are educated, that they have positive role models, that they understand the real issues that exist around consent in respect, and that they reflect on their behaviours and have space in order to do that. We will all want to take that away from the debate and do more work on it.

That is why am glad that Katy Clark raised the work that is being done in Scottish Labour. We have a suite of policies that I think we could look at on a cross-party basis. The minister has referred to the work that has been done by the Government, and other members have spoken about the work of their parties to move the issue forward. It is clear that toxic masculinity is on the rise, that we have serious and concerning issues on sexism and misogyny, and serious issues with access to harmful pornography. I recognise the work that has been done across the Parliament to look at many of those issues in depth—to look, for example, at better online regulation, at the education piece and at the need for positive role models. It is important that we continue to work together on those issues.

I highlight the work on strangulation to which members have referred today, such as the event that was held last week. My colleague Claire Baker has been involved in that work. A consensus has come out of today’s debate that there is more work that we can all do together to look at those very serious issues.

I was pleased to hear members refer to some of the international issues that sit across the 16 days of activism, not least the very serious issues in Afghanistan. We should all take those issues seriously, and reflect and take action on them, so it is important that Beatrice Wishart was able to bring that aspect into the debate.

In the latter section of the open debate, we heard powerful contributions from Pam Gosal, Elena Whitham, Carol Mochan and others, reflecting on the questions that we, as a society—and as men and boys—need to ask ourselves. Pam Gosal’s challenge to us all was to get to a stage at which mothers—it could also be fathers—say to their sons, “Who are you going to be when you go out tonight, and how are you going to treat women?” That is vitally important. Ben Macpherson followed that up by saying that it is not enough just to not “be that guy”—we should all try to be a better person and a good guy, and think about our behaviours. Those two reflections were extremely important.

As I said, I am conscious that we could have had more men speaking in the open debate, but I acknowledge that the First Minister will make a contribution at the debate’s conclusion. That is important, and it shows that the whole Government is taking the issue seriously.

It is clear from the contributions from members on all sides of the chamber that we all have more work to do. It is not just about the 16 days of activism, although they are important. There are 365 days in a year, and we need to ensure that we take the issue seriously, and that—crucially—men and boys take our role seriously. We must work to change attitudes and behaviours, and to ensure that we have respect for women and girls and that we build a more equal society as we move forward.

It is fair to say that there is cross-party consensus, and some of the frustration is that there was cross-party consensus across the manifestos for the 2021 election, which has been followed by a five-year parliamentary session. I do not deny that lots of things have happened in the course of both that election and the parliamentary session so far, but, as we heard at last week’s evidence session, there is a frustration that we will not have got to the stage of legislation in that five years.

I will move on slightly to other areas where people feel that there has not been progress. There is an opportunity for the Government to consider how it will use its remaining time in office to advance many of the issues that the minister hears when, for example, she comes to the cross-party group on learning disability or engages with people who have a learning disability.

At the moment, there is a significant issue with learning disability health checks, which I have been raising, particularly around the pledge that was made that everyone would be offered a health check in 2023. That has not happened. We know that funding of £4 million to health boards was attached to that pledge, but some health boards, including NHS Lanarkshire, have offered no checks at all. That is really concerning. I raised that with the First Minister on Thursday, but I am not sure that he fully grasped what I was asking about or had knowledge of it.

That is another totemic issue that speaks to the frustration of people who have learning disabilities, so this is a good opportunity to ask the minister to respond on that point, and to say what work she is undertaking to understand that picture and deal with the situation.

It would be helpful for the people who have a learning disability who have given evidence to the committee or come to the cross-party group on learning disability to be able to engage in that as well.

My colleague Clare Adamson started to touch on some of this, but it would be useful to understand the other non-legislative interventions that the Government intends to make to support people. We know that there are huge issues around school exclusions, for example, and seclusion and restraint. We have heard about access to employment and support for that. There are also issues about specialist training on learning disability and the barriers that exist. We also have the national moves to try to tackle bullying and stigma.

What more do you intend to do in the remaining time in this session of Parliament to deliver?

As I did last week, I refer to my entry in the register of members’ interests, as I am a member and a former employee of Enable Scotland.

As we have touched on, last week’s panel referred to other bills that the Government has delayed—the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill and the human rights bill—as well as the bill that we are discussing this morning. We heard that that

“represents a tranche of disappointment”,—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 26 November 2024; c 22.]

which was quite stark. The situation was particularly referenced by those with a learning disability who gave evidence.

We could look at that and say that there is a pattern that might illustrate that legislation that focuses on the equality and human rights of people who have a learning disability is being deprioritised by the Government. I appreciate that the minister has touched on that already, but what would you say about the particular views that were expressed last week?

Would you accept that people who have a learning disability were made a promise on no less than two occasions by two ministers, and that has been broken, so they feel a sense of frustration? That is against the backdrop of everything that I have just said about other pieces of legislation. We heard last week that they feel as if they

“remain unheard”

and that they are

“not a priority for Scotland.”—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 26 November 2024; c 3, 4.]

I am keen to understand whether the minister intends to update Parliament on the progress that she wants to make. She has acknowledged that there is a significant challenge with the health checks, so it is important that we have regular opportunities to scrutinise that going forward.

I am grateful to have the opportunity to close the stage 3 debate on behalf of Scottish Labour, and to reflect again on some of the contributions that we have heard, and some of the progress that we have made on the social security system in Scotland.

During the bill’s journey, we have been able to reflect on what is working in social security and on what could be improved. The debates that we have had on the amendments at both stage 2 and stage 3 have allowed us to do that. I am sure that there is much for the cabinet secretary to reflect on with regard to what more needs to be done, and for all of us to reflect on in considering the need for continued scrutiny of Social Security Scotland and the on-going potential for new benefits, which I will come on to speak about.

I will reflect briefly on Maggie Chapman’s opening and concluding contributions. I heard what she said about the UK Labour Government and our ambitious plan to support people to get back into well-paid and secure work and put our new deal for working people, which I have spoken about many times in the chamber, on a legislative footing to ensure that work pays and is secure for people. That is absolutely a driving agenda for the UK Government.

It is also worth reflecting that many people in this country want to work but cannot, because they are not getting the support that they need to be able to do so; we should not shy away from that. The UK Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Liz Kendall, has made it clear that with £240 million-worth of investment across the UK, we can help people to get back into the workplace. However, people need to know that there is always a safety net, that there is no judgment, that there will be support when they need it and that they are not being forced back into work. It is clear that that is the agenda in the Government’s white paper on getting Britain working again.

We hope that the Scottish Government will be part of that partnership, because—this is important—good things happen here in Scotland in relation to employability and supporting people to get back into work, but there is more to do. Maggie Chapman spoke about universal services. We need to have a health service that works and delivers for people, so that they can get the support that they need to go back to work. Tomorrow’s budget will show us the reality of the money that has come from the UK Government and whether that will be spent on health and social care, as we have called on the Scottish Government to do.

I will touch briefly on Marie McNair’s contribution. I thought that she made some good points about the committee’s work, but I was disappointed to hear the tone that she took on pension age winter heating assistance. We had a debate today in which we had an opportunity to vote as a Parliament to put that on a legislative footing—I have rehearsed those arguments. I point out to Ms McNair the support that is coming to this Parliament through the UK budget—£1.5 billion this year and £3.4 billion next year. We will see the colour of that money tomorrow in the budget process, and I am sure that ministers will be listening intently to this debate.

I begin by reiterating the remarks that I made at the beginning of proceedings this afternoon, which have also been made by the cabinet secretary and Jeremy Balfour, in thanking all who have been involved in the bill process, not least the staff on the bill team, the committee clerks and everyone else who has been involved in ensuring the smooth progress of the legislation.

Today offers us an opportunity to reflect on the devolution of social security to Scotland and on the intervening period, taking stock of that journey and the opportunity to update the legislation that governs much of what we do on social security. In doing so, we have an opportunity to reflect on the successes, the challenges and what still has to be done to ensure that we progress with a system that works for everyone.

We, on this side of the chamber, have been very clear that there are welcome steps in the bill and that welcome things have come from the process of devolving social security. For example, the Scottish child payment was a welcome step that was supported by members on this side of the chamber. Putting it on a legislative footing and ensuring that it continues to command the support of members and wider support in Scotland allows us to affirm again our support for it. It is an example of the strength of devolution in that we are doing what it was intended to do and attempting to make progress in supporting children and families across Scotland, ensuring that the poorest in our society are better supported.

The Social Justice and Social Security Committee has had many debates about how we can better analyse and better understand the impact that policies have. I will also reflect on some of the challenges that we have seen in Social Security Scotland. I know that the cabinet secretary is not immune to those challenges, and we have debated them many times, including in various parts of today’s debate. There have been challenges in long processing times, including, most notably, real challenges in the introduction of child and adult disability payments and in people having to wait too long. We must continue to watch that very closely and take action as required.

There have also been challenges in the transfer of devolved payments, including employment injury assistance. We have debated that in other contexts, and we must keep it at the forefront of our minds as we continue to develop Social Security Scotland and consider what more we have to do in the transfer of other benefits.

I will also comment on the challenges that exist around information technology infrastructure and making sure that the system is as flexible and supportive as possible. We know that there is an overrun in IT costs, and there have been challenges with telephony, which we have debated many times in Parliament. I accept that progress is being made, but we have to continually monitor and review those processes to ensure that there is the most efficient use of public money when it comes to what we are developing in the agency. It is clear that, in some instances, the challenges continue to grow, but there has also been action to look at those issues and slowly begin to tackle them. I hope that the bill provides another stepping stone on the journey to tackling those challenges.

We have welcomed a number of the amendments, today and at stage 2, that have sought to make the bill stronger and to continue to improve the system. Today, we have had a variety of debates on new social security payments such as the pension age winter heating payment. We have had amendments that have sought to tidy up parts of the bill and parts of the system. We have had the important amendment on uprating for inflation, which puts into legislation something that will ensure that we continue to drive forward progress on the payments that are being made to people.

There were some important amendments that we did not agree to but that are worth future reflection and continued thought—on the rights of appeal and ensuring that we can build case law that is supportive of people. With regard to the issue of having key performance indicators, which Jeremy Balfour raised, it is important that we reflect clearly on how we are able to scrutinise what is being done by our national agencies, such as Social Security Scotland, and how public money is being spent.

What we require now is implementation of the legislation at pace, as well as more rapid actions to get on with resolving issues in the system that do not require any provisions in the bill.

Scottish Labour remains committed to holding the Government and Social Security Scotland accountable for the way in which social security is administered within the devolved framework and for the pledges that have been made, which have often not been lived up to. However, recognising the many positive changes that are in the bill, we will support its passing at decision time and we will continue to work with the Government and other Opposition parties to do everything that we have set out in today’s debate.

The cabinet secretary will recall that I raised these issues at stage 2 and suggested that there would be an opportunity for a debate and further discussion in the chamber at stage 3. I do not think that it is fair to characterise me as not wishing to engage.

I note that the cabinet secretary brought her statement on energy costs to the chamber on Thursday with less than 10 minutes’ notice to members. She never mentioned this to me previously, so I do not think that what she has said is in the spirit of trying to find consensus.

The cabinet secretary has made an important point about the care leaver payment, which we debated at stages 1 and 2 of the bill. Will she say something more about her engagement with the many organisations that represent care-experienced young people? Will she be able to attend some of the many cross-party groups that have an interest in that area, not the least of which is the cross-party group on care leavers?

They do not want to hear this.

Despite our discussion of and debate about the issue over many months, it has taken the cabinet secretary until now to confirm what she will do with a new devolved payment in future and also what she will do now that she knows that the Barnett consequentials are there.

The cabinet secretary has been telling me for months that she cannot do anything because she does not know what the budget will be, that she cannot base the budget on

“a wing, a prayer and a promise”,—[Official Report, 3 October 2024; c 44.]

that she did not know that there would be £41 million this year and £82 million next year or what she would do in future. The UK budget has made things clearer, and that is why I have lodged amendment 21.

I appreciate that the Scottish National Party does not want to take the opportunity to bring Parliament together to look at the future of this devolved benefit and to put it on a legislative footing. As I said at stage 2, there is an opportunity to ensure that we have a discussion about what pension age winter heating assistance should look like.

My amendment 22 shows that there is an opportunity to look at how we do that in future. We know that receipt of pension credit is the criterion for the delivery of winter heating assistance. In her announcement last week, the cabinet secretary said that anyone whose income takes them above pension credit level will receive £100. There is an opportunity to look at how we might do things differently in Scotland, where we have a devolved payment. At stage 2, I raised comments that we had from the Poverty and Inequality Commission and others, who have pointed to the need to make a fairer system so that those who have a higher income or pension do not receive money that they are not entitled to.