Chamber and committees

There are a lot of questions in there. Let me try to take them in turn.

It is important to recognise that the look and feel for clients will be very different—for example, functional examinations will be removed from the consultation. As you are aware, the DWP routinely carries out tests during assessments such as asking clients to touch their toes and so on. All that will be removed. Assessments will be replaced with person-centred consultations and I intend to address concerns about how the criteria are applied, including those relating to mobility.

A new way of making entitlement decisions for ADP will ensure that the criteria are more fairly applied to all clients. In relation to the engagement of local teams, the feedback from families on the pilot for child disability payment has been very positive, as a lot of time has been spent on supporting people through the system. If you translate that approach to ADP, there will be more staff-intensive support for people applying for the first time for ADP and for cases being transferred.

You mentioned the 20m rule and I understand stakeholders’ concerns about that. There are a couple of things to bear in mind. First, and you have used this expression, in relation to the safe and secure transfer, the DWP has been very clear that the criteria require to remain the same for people to be entitled to their passported benefits.

I recently raised the issue of policy divergence with the UK Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work. We want to diverge on policy and we have said that we will review ADP in 2023 after the cases are transferred. The UK Government has announced through its green paper that it wants to review disability payments and is consider making changes to them in the rest of the UK. I said to the minister that, given that policy divergence, we need to be able to develop and deliver policy that is suited to the needs of people with disabilities here in Scotland, without being constrained by concerns about the risk of losing passported benefits.

Ben Macpherson, who is Minister for Social Security and Local Government, wrote to the UK minister, who has unfortunately now moved on, explicitly asking the UK Government for assurances on the passported benefits issue. We have a journey to go on the issue; we do not have that assurance yet, but we have an agreement to discuss it on an on-going basis. At the moment, we need to make sure that people will get their payments and that they are not put at risk. Even though there are frustrations, which I understand, we cannot risk people not getting their payments.

However, I want to fully engage with the committee, SCOSS and the equality budget advisory group, which I met recently and which in its commentary recognised that people first need to have their benefits secured when they are transferred. I recognise that the review opens up opportunities for policy divergence and I want to work with the committee on considering those options.

I am sorry that that was a long answer, but it is a very complicated issue.

I am happy to respond to that. I recognise the very important work that Christina McKelvie has done in the area.

We have made good progress, particularly on the accommodation actions in the plan. The £20 million Gypsy Traveller accommodation fund, which was launched in June, will initially be focused on the development of demonstration projects to establish model sites. As part of that, we are working in partnership with members of the Gypsy Traveller community and local authorities to develop a design guide for modern, accessible sites. The fund builds on the £2 million short-term funding that was provided for public sites in 2020-21, as a sustained investment to support local authorities in relation to site provision.

Officials are organising the next community conversation, which is due to take place online later this month. In that conversation, we aim to get further feedback and insight from community members on our on-going work and issues that are important to them. We will also take the opportunity to share an update on where we are with the actions that are set out in the plan. I will be happy to update the committee on that and provide more detail, if that would be helpful.

We will also reconvene the ministerial working group on Gypsy Travellers before the end of this year to oversee progress on the action plan. I am also happy to keep the committee updated on that.

The work of third sector organisations in supporting people who have no recourse to public funds is vital. The UK Government has strict rules on those who have no recourse to public funds, so we have to proceed with caution because, ultimately, at the extreme end of things, we could jeopardise someone’s status as having leave to remain if they were to receive funds that the UK Government deemed they should not receive. We have to be extremely careful in that area, which is why funding third sector organisations is the best way of supporting individuals and families who need support.

Many of the people who have come to Scotland through the refugee or asylum process are hugely skilled and valued members of our communities. The sooner they are able to use those skills and work, the better it will be for our communities and our society at large.

Unfortunately, some of the issues remain reserved to the UK Government. Therefore, we continue to have dialogue in order to work through some of the remaining barriers for some of the most vulnerable members of our society.

The second new Scots refugee integration strategy runs until December next year, and partners have begun discussions on the arrangements to develop the third strategy with the aim of publishing that in 2023. We want the strategy to be shaped by refugees and people with experience of asylum as well as those with expertise in supporting them. During the past few weeks, I have met people who have settled here and have heard their voices directly on some of the issues that remain—some of which are reserved and some of which are devolved—which we need to work through.

The member also made reference to the work with COSLA on the “Ending Destitution Together” strategy, which was published in March. That looks at improving and strengthening the support and provision for people who have no recourse to public funds. The strategy has been informed by powerful testimony from people with lived experience of suffering destitution. It sets out the initial actions to deliver essential needs, to enable access to specialist advice and advocacy and to make sure that people can pursue their ambitions and be active members of our communities. That is very pertinent to the work that we are doing to make sure that Scotland plays its part in supporting those who have come from Afghanistan in terrible circumstances, who are very vulnerable indeed.

Afghan families are already being welcomed into Scottish communities through the Afghan locally employed staff relocation scheme and, so far, 22 local authorities have expressed a keenness to support the Afghan citizens resettlement scheme. We have been pushing the UK Government for more information on that. Last week, Angus Robertson and I had a meeting with UK ministers to consider the details, including funding, to ensure that local authorities have the information that they need. There are some practical issues relating to access to interpreters and ensuring that people who first go to hotels are resettled as quickly as possible.

We have a long history of welcoming people of all nationalities and faiths, including those who are seeking asylum and refuge from war and terror elsewhere. It is important that we continue to play our part.

It goes without saying that Scotland is a diverse and multicultural society, that that diversity strengthens us as a nation and that we are better for it. There is absolutely no excuse or justification for hatred, bigotry or prejudice, and we absolutely condemn anti-Catholic prejudice and anti-Irish racism.

Fulton MacGregor has made a good point about tackling sectarianism in our schools. Third sector organisations in particular are doing a lot of good work in our schools to try to tackle those issues. They are not easy to tackle—some of them are deep rooted and generational—but we need to do absolutely everything that we can to tackle them, and the Government is determined to do so.

Pam Duncan-Glancy has asked a number of questions. I will try to cover all of them.

Pam Duncan-Glancy referred to the disability summit last year. That summit, which was very well attended—there were more than 100 participants—was an opportunity for ministers to hear from disabled people’s organisations and disabled people in particular in responding to issues that were highlighted. We have a wealth of information from that summit that will help to guide the development of the next disability equality plan.

Pam Duncan-Glancy specifically mentioned employment. “A Fairer Scotland for Disabled People: employment action plan”, which is now three years old, sets out the actions to deliver the ambition, working with partners, to at least halve the disability employment gap by 2038.

The second annual progress report, which was published in March this year, highlights the work that has been undertaken to date in supporting the delivery of that ambition. It shows that the disability employment gap in 2019 was the lowest recorded in recent years. However, that gap widened in 2020, unfortunately. That was particularly in relation to Covid, I suspect. It moved from 32.6 per cent to 33.4 per cent, so we have work to do, and we need to ensure that we take further action to address that.

Pam Duncan-Glancy mentioned social care, and that issue has been raised by stakeholders, as you would imagine. We have ambitious plans for the national care service, which she is more than aware of, and those will be important in restructuring our care services. However, we need to ensure that people are supported. There are undoubtedly lessons to be learned from the pandemic on people’s vulnerability and on the situation that they have found themselves in.

Finally, on learning disability, we are taking forward a learning disability, autism and neurodiversity bill to make improvements in that area. There is a commitment to having a commissioner, as we recognise that there is a particular vulnerability and a need for an office to support the rights of those who are most vulnerable.

On accessible homes, the member will be aware that “Housing to 2040” contains a lot about accessibility and ensuring that homes are barrier free as we develop and deliver the affordable housing supply. It is really important that homes stand the test of time and are barrier free, no matter what challenges people have.

We expect to move forward with the gender recognition bill next spring, so we will be giving you more information about that. The human rights bill will be introduced later in the session. Good work is being done on the bill, which is very complex. Again, we will be able to give you more defined timescales on that as we move forward. It is a far-reaching piece of legislation. Christina McKelvie recently convened the advisory board that is progressing a lot of the detailed work on the legislation. Good progress is being made.

That is an important question. Part of the Deputy First Minister’s Covid recovery work is focused on listening to the experiences of those communities that have been most impacted. The DFM has undertaken a number of engagements, listening to those with lived experience to find out what their priorities are to build a Covid recovery strategy. Again, I am happy to write to the committee with more detail on that work, if that would be helpful.

I hope that, when we take forward the bill, we can try to find as many areas of consensus as possible and that it can be done in a respectful environment—in particular, when we discuss the issues in more detail in Parliament.

You might be aware that the first consultation showed that 60 per cent of respondents were in favour of the reform. The second consultation sought views on the draft bill itself, so its approach was qualitative rather than quantitative. For example, it asked whether the minimum age should be reduced to 16, and it included other specific questions on the bill.

Because of the volume of responses—there were 17,000—an in-depth analysis of them was not possible. That is why only the organisational responses were published; it would have taken an inordinate amount of officials’ time to extrapolate all the detail from 17,000 responses. The same approach was taken in the first consultation on the issue and with the equal marriage legislation. It is important to note that there has been an independent analysis of the consultation, which has given a clear summary of views on key aspects of reform such as the minimum age.

Karen Adam has made important points. In the second consultation, we tried to put out information and to reassure people. There is no conflict between the proposed legislation and the rights of women and girls. The Scottish Government has brought forward a huge amount of work on protecting women and girls. That work continues with the misogyny working group. The equally safe strategy, which we might touch on today, is hugely important. Through the work on the bill, we are trying to make the lives of a small number of people that bit easier by changing the process by which someone can obtain a gender recognition certificate.

Karen Adam made the point that some of the debate seems to indicate a desire to move away from the ability to obtain a gender recognition certificate in any way. I hope that, as parliamentarians, we can focus the debate on making the process—which already exists—easier and on removing the difficulties that make the lives of a small number of people very difficult. It is about making the process easier for those who are affected. As we take forward the proposals, we will ensure that they in no way impact on the rights of women and girls.