Chamber and committees

I hope that Mr Stewart will forgive me for getting in here.

Mr Ross and I know that he and I will never agree on the constitutional question—unless, of course, he changes his mind. There is always that possibility. However, I believe that the issues that I have set out relating to the overall context in which we operate are material, because the fiscal envelope in which we operate is material to our ability to tackle child poverty. Using our powers, we have expanded the resources available to us to invest in a Scottish child payment, for example. We could take other steps if we had wider powers as an independent Parliament. I do not see the constitutional question as a distraction in any way, and I hope that, in our dialogue in Parliament, it is not an impediment to Mr Ross and me finding common ground.

Mr Ross sets out a laudable aim, and the Government is working as fast as it can to deliver on that objective. However, the challenge that Mr Ross has ignored in his contributions so far is the fiscal environment in which we are having to operate and the effect of the erosion of the value of public expenditure because of the inflation that we have wrestled with in the past two years. Is Mr Ross going to come on to acknowledge just how difficult the context in which we have made progress is? If we had not done what we did, relative poverty levels would be 10 percentage points higher than they are today. Will he acknowledge the challenges of the fiscal environment, which is very much the property of the UK Government that he supports?

Mr O’Kane is helpfully setting out that there is a UK context to this discussion. In my speech, I was anxious to make the point that a UK Government can choose to follow an agenda that either helps or hinders the Scottish Government’s efforts to eradicate child poverty. I stress to Mr O’Kane the importance that I attach to an incoming United Kingdom Government taking purposeful decisions to help our agenda of eradicating child poverty, rather than hindering it, as has been the case up until now.

I agree with much of what Mr Rowley has set out, and I endorse the holistic approach that he has described. However, Mr Rowley must accept that at the heart of the challenge that we now face is the public spending situation. That is the issue that troubles me most about the outcome of the forthcoming election. From what I have heard, I do not see a discernible shift in the public expenditure profile, which will be crucial to affording the direction of policy that Mr Rowley is, quite rightly, setting out to Parliament. I am not hearing that from the commitments that the Labour Party has made about what it will do, should it win the election.

We should probably leave the footballing analogies for another day.

On the question of the poverty-related attainment gap, the Government remains absolutely committed to the agenda of closing that gap. However, I point out to Mr Ross that every educationalist will tell him that the relationship between educational attainment and poverty is absolutely fundamental. That is the core of the Government’s agenda.

I come back to the point that Mr Ross has not really engaged with me on today, which is the fact that, as a consequence of the actions of the UK Government, the fiscal environment and the policy environment in which we have been operating until now have made our challenge more difficult.

Will the member give way?

When I accepted the Parliament’s nomination as First Minister, I made it clear that the single greatest priority for my Government would be the eradication of child poverty. That was little more than a month ago, and much has happened since. We now have a United Kingdom general election in July, which has meant that, due to pre-election guidance, the Scottish Government is unable to set out more detail on the specific plans that we intend to take forward. However, that is an opportunity for ministers to engage the Parliament on views from across the political spectrum on how we can most effectively achieve our aim of eradicating child poverty.

I made it clear when I became First Minister that I wanted to bring people together to focus on shared priorities. I would be the first to accept that, in the context of a general election campaign with contested agendas, priorities and political choices, the environment for such a conversation is more than a little challenging.

I intend, however, to participate in the debate in the spirit in which I intend to act as First Minister, which is to set out the mission of this Government but also to listen to others and to commit to reflect on how the Government can work across Parliament to achieve our mission. The election campaign will not last forever—I suspect that I speak for all members when I say that I am grateful for that. It will be complete in just over three weeks’ time, and we will then know the wider political landscape in which we are operating.

I also intend to participate in the debate on the basis that I have set out, because I recognise that there is a shared desire in this Parliament to achieve the Government’s mission of eradicating child poverty. Although Parliament may be polarised at this time, surely there must be scope for us to find common ground on an issue that is so fundamental to the health, wellbeing and future of children in our society.

The offer that I made in this chamber last month, and that I made to local authorities, businesses, the third sector and communities, remains the same. Let us work together to deliver for Scotland. Let us co-operate in good faith and try to find consensus. Let us capitalise on our shared values and goals and our shared commitment to the future of this country.

On the question of eradicating child poverty, our challenge is significant, given that we are operating in a context of acute difficulty in achieving that aim. Over the past decade, the upheaval that has been brought on by austerity, the pandemic, the cost of living crisis and the impacts of Brexit has escalated the scale of the challenge that we face.

We are a modern nation and a prosperous nation. Our economy must meet the needs of everyone in our society. We must build on our current economic performance to create new opportunities to generate economic activity and wealth, and we must ensure that the wealth of our country is used to transform the lives of all our citizens. Our definition of prosperity must place the wellbeing of current and future generations at its core, and that prosperity must belong to everyone in our society, not only to some.

Every child in Scotland deserves a fair start in life. They deserve good health, safety, education and opportunity. As a parent, the greatest priority in my personal life is to see my three remarkable children safe, healthy and happy. My aspirations will be no different to those of all parents of all families and communities across Scotland and of colleagues in this parliamentary chamber.

My Government will build on the strong foundations laid over the years of this Scottish National Party Government, which has seen a transformation in the life chances of children in Scotland. Since 2007, we have more than doubled the funded hours of early learning and childcare to 1,140 hours for all three and four-year-olds, and for two-year-olds who will benefit most from the provision of such support. We have established a new social security service, delivering 14 benefits—seven of them brand new and available only in Scotland, including the Scottish child payment. We have delivered more than 128,000 affordable homes, of which more than 90,000 are homes for social rent. That is 43 per cent more affordable homes per head of population than England and 73 per cent more than Wales. That is in addition to giving every baby in Scotland the best start in life by providing their families with a baby box, expanding free bus travel for all under-22-year-olds and passing milestone legislation to ensure that children’s rights are respected, protected and fulfilled under Scots law.

As the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice reported in her statement to Parliament last week, last year this Government increased its spend benefiting children in low-income households to almost £1.4 billion. We provided nearly £430 million in Scottish child payments to families, supporting more than 329,000 children, and we increased the value of all Scottish benefits by 10.1 per cent, except for the Scottish child payment, which we increased by 25 per cent the year before. We launched the carer support payment and expanded eligibility for best start foods to reach an additional 20,000 pregnant women and young children, and we delivered innovative school-age childcare services through our early adopter projects.

In total, our investment in social security benefits and payments in 2023-24 amounted to an estimated £5.3 billion. All that has happened despite the on-going pressure on public finances, the spending cuts, the cost of living crisis and the inflationary pressures with which we have wrestled. People should make no mistake: Scotland’s actions and policies are having an impact. We are making a difference.

Although the data showing the full impact of our policy interventions has not yet been captured in the latest poverty statistics, modelling estimates that this Government’s policies will keep 100,000 children out of relative poverty in 2024-25, with relative poverty levels being 10 per cent lower than they would have been otherwise. It is therefore crystal clear that the Government’s interventions are making a profound impact on the lives and wellbeing of children in our society.

I know that Mr Briggs has a long history of raising that serious issue, which cannot be divorced from the challenges on the availability of housing stock in society in general. The Scottish Government has a substantial record on constructing new social housing. A moment ago, I set out the scale of the achievement on affordable homes. Comparatively speaking, we have moved at a faster pace than has happened in England and Wales, and we have delivered more projects and more accommodation on the ground.

However, I acknowledge the severity of the issue that Mr Briggs has raised. The Government’s housing strategy is designed to intensify the development of affordable housing in Scotland. One of the challenges that we currently face is the availability of financial transactions, which has been the mainstay of our approach to the affordable housing programme. That is why the Minister for Housing, Paul McLennan, has convened the housing investment task force, which is exploring other finance models to enable us to expand the housing supply. The fundamental answer to Mr Briggs’s fair question is to ensure that we have adequate housing supply to meet the needs of our population.

I turn to the Government’s performance. As a consequence of its policy aim of keeping 100,000 children out of relative poverty, the Scottish child payment alone is estimated to be keeping 60,000 children out of such poverty. That is a policy choice that the Government has made, at the expense of other policy options that it could have adopted. It has also been informed and enabled by the decisions that the Government has been prepared to take on tax, which have created greater availability of revenue for investment in public services and programmes than would ordinarily have been the case. At the heart of the debate is our willingness to take decisions that will be controversial and challenging—ones that people might not always like, particularly on the tax question—to enable us to take the necessary action on eradicating child poverty.

Recent analysis from the Trussell Trust found that our policies have helped to slow the pace of demand for food parcels, with Scotland being the only part of the United Kingdom not to see an increase in the number of such parcels being distributed through the trust’s network last year. On that measure, the Government’s activities are, again, achieving the objective of ensuring that families have at their disposal more resources that enable them to exercise more choice over their circumstances.

Although there are signs of great progress, I recognise that we still have a long way to go and that we face headwinds. We are greatly constrained by our budget settlements from Westminster, which, historically, have been challenging, as well as by the limits of our devolved powers.

For too long, decisions that are made at Westminster have undermined our ambition and the progress that we in Scotland seek to achieve. Next month’s general election brings its own uncertainty and challenges, and we all have to recognise that decisions that are taken at a UK level will inevitably set the context in which we have to operate. This Government has demonstrated that we will use all the levers that are available to us to make as much progress as we can, but a United Kingdom Government that was more favourable to our objectives would help, rather than hinder, us in that regard.

Our ambition is to ensure that every child in Scotland has the means, resources and support to enable them to reach their full potential. We will ensure that the Government has the necessary focus on eradicating child poverty, because that is the surest investment in Scotland’s future. That touches on some of the choices that will be relevant in the forthcoming general election campaign and decision.

From the start of the current financial year, the Government has increased all social security benefits by a further 6.7 per cent to provide more support to people on low incomes and those who need it most. In total, we are committing a record £6.3 billion to benefits expenditure, which is £1.1 billion more than the United Kingdom Government gives the Scottish Government for social security purposes. We are essentially putting the investment where it is required.

One of the exciting projects that we have taken forward has been the investment of £16 million to expand our early adopter community projects. I visited one of those projects in Fife and heard at first hand from parents about the difference that having a reliable childcare service and support makes to their family. Yesterday, I visited Pollok United to see one of the after-school clubs that is supported through our extra time programme, which is a joint initiative with the Scottish Football Association to provide before-school, after-school and holiday football clubs for children from families on low incomes. This year, we are investing an additional £4 million in the extra time programme and expanding it to 31 clubs, which will give around 30,000 children each week free access to sport and other activities that wrap around the school day.

In combination with our decision to distribute a one-off emergency fund of £1.5 million to support councils to help remove the impact of school meal debt on families, we are taking practical measures to support families at a local level. The passage of the Housing (Scotland) Bill, which includes homelessness prevention duties, will go a long way to supporting what needs to be delivered to address the issues that Miles Briggs put to me.

I fear that Douglas Ross was not listening to my earlier answer, because I said that I accepted the decision that Parliament arrived at last night.

The reason why I did not vote for that last night is that I felt that the process was tainted, for the reasons that I rehearsed at First Minister’s question time last week.

Yesterday, Parliament said, in relation to the points that I have raised—and Mr Ross voted for this—that the actions that led to the issues that caused me concern ran the risk of the committee report

“being open to bias and prejudice and the complaint being prejudged, thereby bringing the Parliament into disrepute.”

That is what I put to Parliament last week, and that is why I took the view that I could not support the sanction—[Interruption.]

The issues that I raised have now been endorsed by Parliament.