Chamber and committees

In the Scottish Government’s budget, we doubled the Scottish child payment, which is game changing for families with children who are living in poverty. If memory serves me correctly, the Labour Party shamefully voted against that measure in the Scottish budget.

Yesterday’s spring statement showed a callous disregard for the misery that people are already facing and that will only get much worse. Household incomes are about to suffer their biggest fall in more than 60 years. The Resolution Foundation has estimated that an additional 1.3 million people across the UK, including half a million children, will be pushed into poverty. There was nothing in the spring statement to help the poor and those on the lowest incomes, which I think was shameful.

The most shameful thing about the chancellor’s announcements yesterday is that he squirreled away money for pre-election bribes. That money could be spent right now to help those who are in desperate circumstances. His actions yesterday in that regard were disgusting.

With regard to the Scottish Government’s actions, we have limited powers and resources but, due to our wider long-standing policies, people here already pay less, on average, in council tax, water bills and rail fares. Unlike people who live south of the border, people in Scotland pay nothing for prescriptions, eye tests or university tuition. In addition to the £150 payment through council tax, we have decided to uprate devolved benefits by 6 per cent. The failure to do so south of the border is having the biggest impact on low-income families.

As I have already said, we have introduced the Scottish child payment, we are investing in the Scottish welfare fund and we are increasing the fuel insecurity fund. We will continue to do everything that we can within our powers and resources, but anybody who is serious about helping the lowest paid would be arguing and demanding that powers and resources be taken out of the hands of Rishi Sunak and his type and put into the hands of this Parliament.

That is a really important issue. I recognise that it is also an extremely sensitive issue, so I thank everybody who has responded to the consultation so far. I appreciate that it takes a lot of courage to share deeply distressing stories such as that.

We are offering a private space for people to come forward to share experiences in complete confidentiality. I reassure the member’s constituent that participants can take part entirely anonymously and that no data that could identify an individual will be retained.

We also have a dedicated helpline, in collaboration with Health in Mind, to provide interim support to individuals who want to make a contribution. The closing date for responses is 20 April. Following that date, all responses will be analysed and considered, along with any other available evidence.

Services such as Hourglass are very important. Elder abuse is awful, and the pressures of the pandemic are understood by all of us. I am happy to have the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care meet or talk to Hourglass, to see what the Scottish Government can do to support it.

I am genuinely not sure whether Douglas Ross listened to a single word that I said. He asked who the individual minister was; I did not volunteer the information. It is a matter of public record who the transport minister was at the time of the decision; it is a matter of public record that it was Derek Mackay.

Here is the bit that I know does not suit the script that Douglas Ross prepared before he came into the chamber. Here is what I went on to say. I will repeat it, just to be absolutely clear. This Government operates by collective responsibility and I am ultimately responsible for all decisions that the Government takes. The buck stops with me. I have never tried to shy away from that on any issue. I know that that is not how things are done in the Conservative Government at Westminster, but that is how things are done here. Perhaps Douglas Ross might want to reflect on what I am actually saying, before he asks his next question. I am ultimately responsible for all decisions of the Scottish Government. That is why I am standing here answering questions.

I turn to the substance of the issue. As I said, the documents are available in the public domain. Caledonian Maritime Assets Limited had expressed a particular concern about the lack of a full-refund guarantee. Those concerns are set out in the documents. So, too, are the actions that were taken to mitigate the risks. The Government then came to a decision based on the balance of risk. The documents expressed the view that the current deal that has been negotiated with Ferguson Marine (Port Glasgow) Limited is the best deal that can be achieved, given the financial restrictions that the yard is operating under.

Three key changes were made; they are all set out in the Audit Scotland report. They were: that there was an increase in the final payment so that more money was being withheld; that CMAL would take ownership of all equipment, machinery and materials as they arrived at the shipyard; and that FMEL would require all major suppliers to offer a full-refund guarantee. Those were the changes that reduced the risk and underpinned the decision that the Government arrived at.

I return to the central point. I am not defending the cost overruns or the delay in construction of the ferries; they are completely unacceptable. However, at all points, the motivation of the Government has been to save jobs and the shipyard and to ensure that the ferries can be delivered, albeit that they will be late, which is a matter of deep regret. That is what we continue to focus on.

Yesterday’s spring statement was a missed opportunity on the part of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give families and businesses the support that they need now in the face of rising costs. It showed a callous disregard for the poorest in our society. Despite the largest annual fall in living standards since the 1950s, as confirmed by the Office for Budget Responsibility, the chancellor’s decisions will mainly assist the better-off and will provide no real help to those on low incomes, with ever more households left facing poverty. In contrast, within our very limited powers and resources in this regard, the Scottish Government is taking a range of targeted steps, including, of course, doubling the Scottish child payment, uprating our devolved social security benefits by 6 per cent and extending our fuel insecurity fund.

It is a priority to ensure that patients are able to access NHS dental care. We have committed to abolishing dental charges in the lifetime of this Parliament, and that will help to remove at least one of the barriers to accessing high-quality NHS dental services.

To support patient care and access, we recently announced revised payment arrangements for dentists from 1 April that will more closely link payments to the number of patients seen and treatments provided. That multiplier funding arrangement will see additional investment in dentistry increase by almost £17 million in the first quarter of the new financial year. That comes on top of the 9 per cent planned increase in the budget for NHS dental services in the coming financial year and the support that has been given during the pandemic of £50 million in financial support for the sector and a further £35 million for personal protective equipment.

No. We continue to support NHS dentistry. In fact, we are investing around 40 per cent more, proportionately, than is being invested south of the border, as we have around 40 per cent more dentists per 100,000 of the population than there are elsewhere in the United Kingdom. There are significant challenges because of the pandemic. That is why we have financially supported dentists during the pandemic, and it is why we are taking action now to further support dentists.

The multiplier funding arrangement that I referred to in my earlier answer is extremely important, and it has been welcomed by many dentists. I think that the British Dental Association has also welcomed its introduction. That arrangement recognises the importance of linking payments to the number of patients and the treatments that are being provided.

We will continue to support NHS dentistry and ensure that people have access to it. As I said, removing dental charges will also take away one of the barriers that, traditionally, some people have experienced.

Our flagship policy is the Scottish child payment, which, of course, Anas Sarwar and his colleagues voted against when the budget came before the Parliament.

We will continue to look at everything and anything that we can do within the powers and resources that we have. Shona Robison will set out further actions when she delivers her statement this afternoon. There is real misery—a wave of human misery—being experienced right now, which will only get worse. On that, Anas Sarwar and I do not disagree, and we will continue to do everything that we can.

However, I am afraid that there is a real issue at the heart of this. If members look at the Joseph Rowntree Foundation analysis that was published this morning, they will see that those in the lowest income decile will see their household incomes cut by almost 6 per cent. The main reason for that is the failure to uprate benefits by more than 3.1 per cent. Where we have control of benefits here, we have uprated them by 6 per cent.

The reason why we cannot do that for the main benefits such as universal credit is that we do not have the power. The reason why we cannot impose a windfall tax to help with energy costs and why energy costs remain reserved is because, when it came to a choice between yes and no, Anas Sarwar encouraged people to vote no, and because people voted no, those powers remain in the hands of Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak. Until Anas Sarwar addresses that issue, we in this Parliament will always be limited in what we can do. When will he wake up and realise that?

I am relieved and pleased to hear that Bob Doris’s constituent’s family have made it safely to Glasgow. I know that they will receive a warm welcome here. I would be happy to provide any detailed information on the support services that are available, given their particular circumstances. We have a proud history of welcoming displaced people and a wealth of experience from previous schemes.

We are working with a range of partners to ensure that wraparound support is in place for all displaced people who arrive here in Scotland. Those who come from Ukraine will have a right to work, and access to social security benefits and public funds. We will be working to make sure that people are aware of that and get access to all those services.

We are standing ready to welcome—I hope—significant numbers of people fleeing the situation in Ukraine. We are pleased that the supersponsor scheme that we proposed to the UK Government went live on Friday. We have multi-agency efforts in place to provide support. We now need to see visas begin to be granted In significant numbers so that we can get more people to Scotland and give them the support that they need.

On that issue, let me take the opportunity to welcome—on behalf of all of us, I am sure—the Dnipro Kids children, who arrived in Scotland last night. I know that they would all rather be at home in Ukraine but, while they are here, all of us would want to ensure that they are surrounded by love, care and support.

As the member rightly says, I gave a commitment to Christine Grahame a few weeks ago. I hope that she accepts that consideration of those issues is still under way. I will make sure that, as part of that consideration, the proposals that she has made today are properly considered.