Chamber and committees

Apologies, Ms Gallacher.

Thank you for the question. I do not know where the 20,000 figure comes from, but I can assure you that the tackling child poverty delivery plan combined package will lift an estimated 100,000 children and young people out of relative poverty. That is the first point.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates that our combined support means that children from the lowest-income households will be better off by £2,760 a year. Those are the figures that I am aware of. The Scottish child payment alone will lift about 50,000 children and young people out of relative poverty.

I am not familiar with the figure of 20,000 that you quote. If it is okay with you, I will write to the committee on other aspects. I should caveat all that by saying that there are things that we can do within our devolved competence and there are things that are reserved, and I am mindful about mitigating some of the UK Government policies. However, I am happy to write to the committee on those issues and that figure.

You rightly pointed out that paternity leave is a reserved matter, and paternity leave will sit with other portfolios in addition to this one. I want to provide reassurance that, within its devolved competencies, the Government is looking at the whole aspect of wider support. I am incredibly mindful of the society in which we live and the fact that women are expected to be the primary caregivers. We also need to consider how we upskill parents, and we have invested £20 million in that.

On addressing poverty, I go back to Ms Bruce’s question about priority areas, such as single parents, young parents, disabled women and parents from ethnic minority backgrounds. Work is being done on all those aspects, but perhaps that is not coming across. I am really sorry if you feel that the Government is not talking about that. We are thinking about a wider package of support to ensure that we respond directly to families’ needs.

For example, the Scottish child payment is the defining and single most considered policy that we have delivered. Since its introduction in 2021, we have increased the Scottish child payment by, I believe, 180 per cent, which is remarkable. Therefore, we are doing things in response to child poverty and women’s poverty.

On leave and paternity leave, I and my portfolio colleagues will be happy to write to you about our discussions with the UK Government. Anything that you and I, and colleagues in the room, can do to advocate for that and to come together as a collective voice in speaking to the UK Government will be helpful.

Our current offer already delivers many benefits, as you know, but it has taken time to put in place the steps to broaden our childcare support for children aged from nine months to the end of primary school. A lot of that work sits in Ms McAllan’s portfolio, but I assure you that we will be consulting on and publishing a blueprint for a new childcare offer that will focus on what matters most to families.

If we focus on 1,140 hours for the moment, I can tell you that it is saving families £6,400 per eligible child, per year. That shows that things are working, but I appreciate your comments about broadening the scope. A blueprint will come out, following a consultation on what matters most to families.

I again reassure you that we are looking at that holistically to ensure that the whole family support system is working. If we were to combine whole family support with breakfast clubs, transforming childcare and dealing with the two-child cap, all those policies would come together to support families. You have highlighted how the burden falls on women, and we are conscious of that. We know that child poverty is women’s poverty and we are taking a whole family approach to mitigate the effects of some UK legislation.

10:30

We are very mindful of the bedroom tax, the benefits cap and the local government restrictions. We know that poverty impacts on young mums, on families with single mums and families who are from an ethnic minority background. Families with young mothers are one of our priorities. In considering any policy, we highlight priority areas, and young mums are one of those priority areas, as are women in single-parent households and women from ethnic minority backgrounds.

That is exactly what Mr McKee has highlighted in relation to public service reform. We see an inconsistent approach, exactly as Collette Stevenson has set out. It is up to local authorities to prioritise different services but, as a result of that, we see inconsistency. We hope that, through public service reform, we can ensure consistency in the service provided, regardless of a person’s postcode.

The single biggest measure is something that is already known about, which is the Scottish child payment. It is unique in these isles. I will quote again the figures I mentioned earlier. Even if we look only at the Scottish child payment, that single element is going to lift 50,000 children out of relative poverty, but we also have a combined tackling child poverty delivery plan. With the wider package, that number jumps to 100,000 children and young people being lifted out of relative poverty.

We know that child poverty is also women’s poverty, so that single measure is truly the basis of this Government’s defining mission to eradicate child poverty.

As you rightly pointed out, older people come under my portfolio, and I am working with our stakeholders. I chair the older people’s strategic action forum, which brings together portfolios in relation to older people—not just women. Having a wider scope is crucial, because, for example, we need to think about the impact of rising fuel costs on people’s ability to heat their homes and travel. Again, Scottish Government policies, such as free travel for the over-60s, are helping. If we had more powers, including, for example, to give us control of our energy prices, that would help women, including older women, in relation to poverty.

I have always stood with our WASPI women. A lot of the matter is reserved and will be discussed at UK Government level, but I am disappointed about some of the things that have come out of the UK Government when it comes to support for the WASPI women. I am resolute in my support for the WASPI women, and I hope that other colleagues will be doing the same as I am in continuing to advocate for them.

I am not sure whether the cabinet secretary wishes to add any other points.

11:00

Ms Bruce, I absolutely hear you on council tax arrears and debt collection. At the end of the day, it is about income that goes to local authorities. I reiterate that a dignified and empathetic approach is needed, and we have often seen that the ways in which we collect debt must be improved. We are working with COSLA to encourage the adoption of best practice, from the point of view of families, which you have talked about, and also in terms of debt recovery.

Along with colleagues from other portfolios, we will be considering and reviewing council tax arrears within the domestic abuse space. The review communication will be coming out to the Parliament by the end of the year. If there is anything that we can do to work together in that space, I would really welcome that. However, the review will be coming to the Parliament by the end of the year.

Your question is focused on the ASN element of breakfast clubs. I am quite determined that, as a Government, we look to expand breakfast clubs, but I know that it sits under Ms McAllan’s portfolio, so, if it is okay, I will come back to the committee or ask officials to write to it on those specific issues. I do not have the figures in front of me because the matter is not under my portfolio, but you have made an important point in relation to children and young people with additional support needs, which I am happy to take away.