Chamber and committees

That is an important issue, which I recognise has been raised by carers. It comes under the catch-all of the fact that carers allowance and the carer support payment are income replacement benefits, as is the state pension. Therefore, we have a number of benefits that, in effect, seem to be there for the same purpose: income replacement. However, it is still important that people apply for the carer support payment—even if it is just to have the underlying entitlement—because it is the gateway to accessing other support, some of which is still reserved. We are keen to do more to encourage people who have underlying entitlement to apply so that they can access that other support.

There has been a call to extend the carer support payment to those who already receive some other income replacement benefits, but that would be a major change, and, as the committee is aware, no major change in social security comes without a requirement for a hefty investment.

I will give an example for context. Around 80,000 people are eligible for and get a carers allowance payment. Another 40,000 people have underlying entitlement. If the ask is that all those people get a carer support payment, significant investment would need to be undertaken. I recognise that there is that call, but such changes would need to be undertaken after case transfer and when the Government, the Parliament and stakeholders had all had a very open discussion about the affordability and sustainability of that, particularly when there are a number of calls to be made—which people are understandably making—after case transfer is complete.

I hope that that gives the context of the scale of what it would mean to make that change.

Good morning. As we all recognise, unpaid carers make an immense contribution to our society, but we also know that caring can be challenging for carers’ health and wellbeing and their ability to have a life of their own outside caring.

That is why improving support for unpaid carers is a priority for our social security powers. Despite our fixed budgets and limited powers of devolution, we have transformed social security provision in Scotland, delivering a system that is based on the principles of dignity, fairness and respect.

We launched the carers allowance supplement in 2018 to address the fact that carers allowance was the lowest of all the working-age benefits, and we launched the young carers grant in 2019—two benefits that are unique to Scotland.

The draft regulations before the committee make provision for the carer support payment, which is the 14th benefit provided by Social Security Scotland, replacing carers allowance in Scotland. We have engaged extensively with carers, support organisations and the wider public to design the carer support payment so that it meets the needs of the people who will use it. I am grateful to everyone who contributed their views and to the members of our carers benefits advisory group and the former disability and carers benefits expert advisory group, in particular.

The regulations will remove barriers by extending entitlement to many carers in full-time education who are currently unable to get carers allowance. Once our new benefit is available nationally, it will benefit up to 1,500 more carers. From its launch, the carer support payment will also provide an improved service and signposting, which are designed to help carers to access wider support in social security and beyond.

Carers allowance is the most complex benefit that we have replaced in terms of its links with wider support, particularly the benefits that remain reserved to the UK Government. I am grateful to officials from across the UK for all their hard work in getting the transition right.

The regulations make provision for an initial pilot scheme from November in Dundee city, Perth and Kinross and the Western Isles. As I set out in my letter to the committee, our intention is to extend the benefit to additional local authority areas from spring 2024 and that it will be available nationally from autumn 2024. That will allow us to test the important links with wider support and to deliver continuous improvements to our service. I look forward to coming back to the committee with further regulations in due course, to make provision for the wider roll-out of the benefit.

The regulations also provide for the transfer of the benefits of carers who are already in receipt of carers allowance without any need for them to re-apply, and they ensure that those who are in receipt of carers allowance and the carer support payment continue to get our carers allowance supplement in the same way during the roll-out and transfer periods.

As soon as is practicable after case transfer is complete, we will start to make further improvements, initially by incorporating the carers allowance supplement into carer support payments, so that carers get their extra payments more regularly; extending support when a carer loses the person they care for; and providing extra support for carers with multiple caring roles—a carers additional person payment.

I extend my thanks to the Scottish Commission on Social Security for its formal scrutiny of the draft regulations earlier this year. Its recommendations have been accepted and have strengthened the detail of the regulations that are before us today.

I am grateful for the opportunity to assist the committee in its consideration of the regulations, and I am happy to provide any additional information that the committee might require.

I listened very carefully to what was said, because we want to support carers of all ages. Our completion of the regulations that are before the committee was based on our previous consultation work. For example, the concerns that the disability and carers benefits expert advisory group fed back stressed the importance of ensuring that financial support does not inadvertently lead to some young carers finding themselves in unsuitable caring roles. In addition, when we consulted on the young carers grant, similar concerns were raised with us about young carers having age-appropriate caring roles. The national carers strategy, too, looks carefully at the fact that caring can be a very positive experience for young people but can also put pressure on them.

I hope that that has explained where our rationale and thinking have come from, but I have listened carefully to what was said last week and to the fact that the issue has been raised. The Government is very happy to continue to work with carers organisations to see whether further evidence can be collected and work done with them to test that out more. Obviously, that will not happen in time for the going through of the regulations, but I hope that the committee will be reassured that I take it seriously and that we are keen to work with stakeholders to make sure of things. Some are concerned about our putting that in place, but others are concerned that we might not do so, and we need to find a way through that. I am keen to work with stakeholders on that and to go into more detail about the concerns that they raised last week.

This is an important area, and the fact that it is a cross-cutting area of Government is demonstrated by how many ministers you have had along today—indeed, you could have had more ministers along, although I am not suggesting on behalf of other ministers that you should do that. [Laughter.] The point about how we ensure that we co-ordinate that work and facilitate its implementation is a serious one. It is also important that we ensure that we prioritise work on child poverty across Government.

I will give a couple of examples, and if Mr O’Kane would like further detail, I can provide it. We have a programme board at official level across Government, which looks at the key action points in “Best Start, Bright Futures: Tackling Child Poverty Delivery Plan 2022 to 2026”. That board reports regularly on implementation challenges and opportunities that arise to see what more can be done and when.

I will also chair a ministerial group across Government to ensure that ministers have oversight of that work, and our intention is for that to meet quarterly. That is on top of what the programme board is already looking at, in order to make sure that we work together. You would expect us to have regular discussions on key areas when we meet bilaterally and when we meet in Cabinet, but we are keen to have the ability to take a step back and have real-time discussions across ministerial portfolios.

We have a number of evaluation strategies that look at the impact of what is happening and provide further analysis of whether change in portfolios is required. Those are some of the aspects of the programme board. I hope that that gives Mr O’Kane a flavour of what is going on, but if he would like further detail, Julie Humphreys and I can furnish him with that.

We will absolutely not. Whether that should be done was never even considered when we looked to introduce the Scottish child payment, because it is an inherently unjust way of delivering a benefit. Members will know from their constituency mailbags that our constituents’ life circumstances can change in the blink of an eye. To suggest that we should use the benefit system to, in some way, punish people who have three, four or more children is deeply disappointing, particularly when we see the number of families who have more children that are in poverty. That is exactly why those families are one of our priority areas. We would never even consider that, given the impact that it has on families in Scotland.

I will add Mr Doris’s requests to the long list of suggestions for how I could spend money that is currently already fully committed in the social justice portfolio and across Government.

We are keen to work on that area, because I think that it will benefit the Government, too. We have done a little bit of that, and I have no doubt that we will do more of it when we come to our budget scrutiny, given the many asks that are made of Government and the many challenges that the Government faces in delivering on those asks. Such considerations are not just financial but practical with regard to how long it will take to implement a policy, whether primary or secondary legislation will be required or, indeed, whether changes to the agency’s social security system will be required. We are very thoughtful about such things.

I would think that a great deal is already being published. I would be happy for Julie Humphreys to come in, as the work that we do around this annually is really important.

It is an area of great concern. The levels of homelessness and the number of families in temporary accommodation are a particular concern. That is why the Government established a temporary accommodation task and finish group, which set out some actions for the Government to take. We have responded to that—I gave some examples in relation to the £60 million that was made available this year to support the national acquisition plan and to ensure that we work with social landlords to deliver a new programme of stock management. We see that working very successfully in particular local authorities, although it is not being used to the same extent right across the 32 council areas. Every council will have its own stock management process and policies, but, where that policy has made a clear impact, it serves as an example of local government and national Government working together to share good practice.

We will continue with the affordable housing supply programme, and we are working with particular local authorities that have hotspots—as Mr Balfour mentioned. Edinburgh is a key example. We are working with the local authority and asking about the specific support solutions that it would wish to see in place. Clearly, we have to work in the financial context that we are all in, but we are working at the national level and with particular local authorities where either there is good practice or there are specific housing needs. The Minister for Housing is meeting housing conveners and many others from local authorities to take that work forward with each local authority that requires it.

I appreciate where the member is coming from. All the consequentials that are given to the Scottish Government are used. If the member wishes to see more money going into childcare, the simple fact is that it will have to come from somewhere else, and that will have to be taken into account. The consequentials are not sitting unused. We have already invested in childcare, as Ms Don has said, but the money must come from somewhere, if the member is suggesting that more should go into childcare.

We work closely with the UK Government, despite our many differences on policy issues. The area around devolved social security is a joint programme, so we need to work very carefully.

This is just a simple matter of fact about where the powers lie in devolution and about what we can do without there being consequences for reserved issues. It is a statement of fact that we have all worked hard to see where the boundaries could be pushed, but no one wants to get into a position where we are endangering people’s benefits.

I am afraid that the parental transition fund has just run its course as a concept. However, the principle behind it was to support parents, and we have already tried to do what we can in that area. From the member’s time on the previous Social Security Committee, he will be well aware of the job start payment and the work that we undertook on that. We do what we can within the powers that we have, but there are limits to that. Then it is about making sure that what we have can be used most effectively. That goes into Neil Gray’s responsibility on employability and further support that we can give.