Chamber and committees

Good afternoon. We have covered a lot of ground and I would like to try to pull some of this together. I am interested to understand how we prioritise the identification of indicators and datasets to support revised national outcomes. Tied to that is the question whether we should have a specific national outcome on gender inequality. I think that we have begun to touch on that, but it would be useful if we could pull together thoughts on that.

Good morning. We have touched on some of what I will ask about already, but I want to tie this together. I am particularly interested in measurable indicators and timely and robust disaggregated data. Will you reflect on how the proposed outcomes lend themselves to the use of measurable indicators? I will roll that into another question. What are the witnesses’ priorities for the Scottish Government’s approach to implementation of the revised outcomes, including identifying the indicators?

I am sorry, but I am not sure who wants to go first, because I am not in the room.

That is helpful. Do you think that that is true across a suite of interventions? Obviously, we will have a debate this week about climate targets. We have other areas that sit alongside this work. Is it your view that the framework has to sit at the centre and that we should then have spokes that come off it that have to be more interactive?

That is very helpful, thank you.

In the evidence that we have taken so far, we have been interested in hearing about approaches to accountability and transparency when it comes to flexible funding. We know that views vary on unrestricted and restricted funding models. We are interested in how you ensure accountability and transparency in the use of flexible, unrestricted funding without overburdening organisations with regard to their reporting requirements. When we took evidence in person with lots of different organisations in the sector, they spoke to us about that issue. Will the witnesses offer a view on that? Erica Judge, would you like to start?

Karin, the Robertson Trust has advocated increasing the amount of unrestricted core funds. How have you adapted the reporting requirements for those who receive funding? What feedback have you had from people who have been in receipt of Robertson Trust funding on those changes or further changes that they want to see?

Professor Jung, what is your view on reporting and how information from organisations could be used better?

Neil, in your written response, you mention the need for

“a more equitable dynamic between the funder and funded groups”.

Relationships are important. Will you say something about the National Lottery Community Fund’s experience in that respect?

That was very helpful.

I am pleased to bring to the chamber this debate to mark challenge poverty week 2024, and I thank members of all parties who signed the motion to allow the debate to take place. It is an important symbol of the cross-party consensus that really ought to govern how we debate in Parliament issues with regard to tackling poverty in all its forms. Although we will disagree on policy, it is important that Parliament is united in debating these issues, because we know that poverty in Scotland remains unacceptably high. The “Poverty in Scotland 2024” report from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation highlights that very deep poverty in Scotland is up to 40 per cent, having surged since the mid-1990s, and that 240,000 children still languish in poverty; rates of child poverty remain static, as so much research has now demonstrated.

There is much work to be done across all spheres of Government, in the Parliament and in the Scottish Government, but I also recognise the role of the United Kingdom Government and of local government in that work. In a previous debate this week, I said that it was important that the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice both launched the Joseph Rowntree Foundation report together on Monday, and responded together, thinking about how they could embark on a new partnership for how we tackle poverty.

I do not want to relitigate too heavily the politics of the issue, some of which we have heard about this week, but I hope that the debate ends up being the discussion that we should have had in Government time earlier in the week, which the Government chose not to have. It is important that, in challenge poverty week, we show our respect to the third sector organisations and anti-poverty campaigners that put in so much to this week and all year round to ensure that the issues are at the forefront of our agenda in Parliament.

This week provides a vital point in the year when civil society can come together and showcase what is happening out there and the best practice across Scotland. It is important to mention the work of the Poverty Alliance, which has co-ordinated challenge poverty week each year since 2013. Bringing together all groups and projects is no small task, especially on top of all the other work that the organisation does year round. I am pleased that we are joined in the gallery today by representatives of the Poverty Alliance, and I am sure that we are all very grateful for the work that it does and for the briefing that it provided to all members.

There is much work to do and many areas in which we need different interventions. As I said, all spheres of government must take tailored approaches to ensure that we reach everyone, no matter their background. That is evident from the themes that have been highlighted each day of this important week.

We could look at the issue of housing. We have many debates in the chamber about housing, and we have had some recently. The effects of inadequate and unaffordable housing on poverty rates are significant, and we need to understand how the housing emergency affects different groups. That is why I welcome Shelter Scotland and Engender’s research, published this week, which shows the disproportionate effects that are felt by women and the need for a gendered response to the housing emergency.

On transport, we need to support people to access their places of work, business and services and their support network. It is concerning to see the end of the off-peak rail fares pilot, which increases the costs to working people who commute to work. The distance covered by local bus services has fallen by 15 per cent since 2011-12, and the number of passenger journeys has fallen by 52 per cent since 2007-08. There is much more that we need to do in this place and across our local authorities to support and empower people to use public transport.