Chamber and committees

The discussions with the UK Government are on-going, and I will update the committee once a final agreement has been reached with the Treasury. In essence, when it comes to recouping the funds, it is more about what happens with the block grant and the Scottish Government than with the agency. The agency will continue to deliver the benefit as planned.

Scottish Government officials continue to engage with their Treasury counterparts to develop the plan with a view to minimising the additional complexity and to looking at the operation of the fiscal framework. This is a new type of discussion that has not been entered into previously, but it is continuing at this point. As I say, once we have a conclusion, we will update the committee on the decisions that have been taken.

This is certainly the process that will be in place. With every benefit, we have a system of support to ensure that we analyse what happens in real time with real people as they go through the process, and that will be an important part of how we can evaluate how big any challenges for individuals are. If there is evidence of issues, we will not be talking theoretically but will be talking about the actual impact as people have gone through the process, so we would certainly go back to the DWP with that evidence, because this is not the position that I want to be in. However, at this point, the DWP’s position is the DWP’s position, so we have to get on with making the best that we can of the situation. I can reassure the committee that we have the process in place to see what is happening on the ground with clients as they go through the process.

Let us consider winter payments in the round. In my introductory remarks, I mentioned in passing some of the differences that we have made. For example, the child winter heating payment does not exist in the rest of the UK. Also, our winter heating payment for low-income people is a guaranteed income, which is very different from what happens in the DWP system.

We have used the devolution of winter heating payments in the round to make different choices in those aspects. It is challenging if, while we attempt to move ahead with our policies, there is a handbrake turn from the UK Government on its policies, particularly if there are repercussions—as has been the case with some of the winter heating payments—for the Scottish Government’s in-year budget and not just for the future. That makes things challenging, and we have to bear that in mind as we make our decisions.

I hope that that gives a demonstration of the difference that we can make with devolved social security when it comes to the winter payments. It is still important to use those powers responsibly within our fixed budget and to make choices that we think will deliver support to pensioners, who are most likely to be struggling.

That is subject to what we get from the DWP—being given that information is what will allow us to function. With the caveat that we are reliant on that data and its quality, we expect to begin the payments by the end of November, as we have planned to do.

The ambition is to have paid the majority of clients by the end of December this year. That reflects the DWP’s payments process, which is similar. We are ready to begin the process for those payments at the end of November, and the agency stands ready to receive the data from the DWP to allow data matching to continue. However, it is dependent on the quality of that data.

It is important to recognise that, although this is the first time that we have had the transfer of this data from the DWP to Social Security Scotland, there have been other data transfers in the past. Lessons learned exercises have been undertaken following those processes, because, sometimes, there has been a challenge in relation to the quality of data from the DWP, leading to further work and further manual intervention being required by Social Security Scotland. I hope that the committee is reassured that, following the experience of previous years, those lessons learned exercises have put in place an even better and more robust process for the DWP to be able to hand over high-quality data to the agency this year, to allow it to get on with its work.

Again, this is a more complicated situation than we would have hoped for, but, nonetheless, it is about looking at how can we support people during that process. Although new applications are not available for Scottish adult DLA, it is important that there is an avenue for people in the rest of the UK, should they move up to Scotland. With regard to when we need further information, the Scottish adult DLA cross-border form has been developed. That will be available to people with an on-going DLA award who have moved to Scotland. In essence, that will be similar to the part 2 form that is used for other disability benefits, so that clients can provide the further information that is required about their conditions and how they affect them.

Under the arrangements, individuals who have moved to Scotland while receiving a DWP benefit will be signposted by the DWP to contact Social Security Scotland, and to ensure that people understand the process of accessing Scottish adult DLA, clear information will be provided through the usual channels. Again, the process is not ideal, but we have endeavoured to make it as simple as we can for the individuals concerned.

Despite best efforts, we have not been able to agree a cross-border process on terminal illness cases, which is, I think, particularly disappointing. We note that the commission welcomed the Scottish Government’s on-going attempts to agree a data-sharing option with the DWP for terminally ill clients. We would all hope that it is recognised that those clients are in some of the most vulnerable situations, and it would be far from ideal if we put an additional barrier, stress or process in place for those individuals and families. We will absolutely continue our efforts to reduce the burden that we are placing on those families wherever we possibly can.

The DWP has agreed to confirm with Social Security Scotland when a client is registered with it as eligible for special rules for terminal illness, and that will allow Social Security Scotland to confirm that status without needing to seek confirmation from the client. However, the process can be triggered only when a client applies for the special rules for terminal illness, and we have confirmed that it is a cross-border application.

Again, it is not an ideal position that we have been placed in, but we are continuing to work through the data-sharing options with the DWP, particularly for those vulnerable clients.

I absolutely take the point that different measures can be taken right across Government to alleviate poverty. Choices have been made across Government on that point. I would say that those choices have also been made across Parliament, because, with very few exceptions, the delivery through the secondary legislation on the eligibility methods for social security has been supported on a cross-party basis. Those proposals from the Scottish Government have been supported, with very few exceptions, on a cross-party basis. We have made conscious choices to have certain eligibility criteria for different benefits or to have benefits that are only available in Scotland and not elsewhere. I do take that point.

A number of different evaluation measures are in place. I can point to one in particular, which is a report by the chief social policy adviser last year that looked at the evidence from Social Security Scotland about achieving a fairer Scotland through reducing poverty, household poverty, material deprivation and debt and considering health and wellbeing. That report by Professor Linda Bauld looked at the impact of social security payments on individuals.

The Government has important work to do to look at where the payments are going and the impact that they are having on individuals. That does not mean that that money cannot be spent in different ways across Government but, as part of social security, we are keen to look at the impacts that those payments have.

I am happy to bring Ian Davidson in to give further detail on that, but those discussions started immediately. We have looked at the issue that COSLA raised and are content that we foresee no issues at present.

Those are the decisions that, in effect, add pressure.

It might be better. There are two aspects to consider here. I still say that, if we wish to change the trajectory, we will have to change eligibility. If I understand what is behind your question, convener, if others make the case that disability payments should be made only to people who are out of work or that they should be means tested in some way—