Chamber and committees

One of the hardest things—the cabinet secretary knows about these concerns of mine—is not having access to officials in order to look at the data that the Government has. All of a sudden, money can be found by ministers—in the past, that has usually been to keep the Greens on board. Would the cabinet secretary agree that civil servants should be made available to all parties in the Parliament to discuss all the moneys to which Government has access?

I appreciate the way in which the First Minister has approached the debate. We will all be grateful to put the election to one side in order to take part. I want to ask about the number of children in temporary accommodation, which is an issue that I have raised consistently. There are now almost 10,000 children in such accommodation in Scotland. The statistic has gone in the wrong direction every single year over the past five years. Where is the Scottish Government taking action on that?

Absolutely, if I can get some time back.

Presiding Officer,

“We can all agree that the rollout of this scheme has certainly not been without its challenges over the last few years.”

Those are not my words but those of the Deputy First Minister to her constituents and businesses in the Highlands. Tourism leaders have been clear that irreversible damage is being caused by the legislation, but that seems to be falling on deaf ears in the Scottish Government. We need to see changes, and we need to see them now. The Minister for Housing has not gone far enough, which simply demonstrates how badly the legislation was drafted and implemented in the first place. I ask the Deputy First Minister to act on the issue today, by having ministers suspend the legislation until a full review can take place and Parliament can fix the problems that the Government has created.

I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement.

We all agree that the levels of child poverty in Scotland remain stubbornly high. That is why, across Parliament, we have all supported actions and policies to help to direct support. As the cabinet secretary mentioned, the Scottish Government has declared a housing emergency, but I am disappointed that the statement contains very little reference—in fact, no reference—to the fact that, under the SNP Government, record numbers of children are trapped in temporary housing. The latest statistics suggest that almost 10,000 children are living in temporary accommodation across Scotland, with the most recent figures showing an increase of 735—8 per cent—on the previous year. That is a national scandal, on which ministers are failing to achieve any progress. Average temporary accommodation stays in most local authorities now exceed 100 days, the number of children in temporary accommodation is at a record high, and the SNP Government has cut the overall housing budget.

One aspect that the cabinet secretary did not mention is where local authorities are struggling to achieve any action. Why are local authorities saying that they cannot deliver their statutory duties because of this Government?

I am pleased to take part in the debate. I pay tribute to and thank the organisations that provided helpful briefings ahead of this debate, as well as the committee’s clerks and all the witnesses who gave welcome evidence ahead of stage 1.

The bill represents an opportunity to take stock and improve people’s experience of Social Security Scotland by making what the cabinet secretary has described as technical changes. However, it is important to remember that those are changes that people have helped to shape.

The Scottish Conservatives welcome many aspects of the bill, but, as my colleague Jeremy Balfour stated, it does not provide a vision of how Social Security Scotland can and will change in the future. As the bill progresses through Parliament, we need to look at how we can do things differently in Scotland. Across the parties, that is what we all agreed to when powers to legislate for the benefits were transferred to the Scottish Parliament, but we have seen very little change.

In the limited time that I have available, I will touch on a few areas in which I can see welcome progress, although the devil will be in the detail at stage 2. For example, the changes on appointees will be important. I wrote to the cabinet secretary about allowing parents and carers to become appointees for the purpose of claiming child disability payment. I wanted to see change in that area, so I welcome the fact that that idea will be implemented.

A number of members have touched on the framework for delivering the Promise as regards welfare proposals and changes. I welcome the proposed assistance for care-experienced people, but we need to see more detail of its scope. There is one aspect that the cabinet secretary could perhaps touch on in her closing remarks. For some time, I have been asking the Scottish Government about tenancy deposit schemes, which are meant to fall within the scope of the Promise. I have not had an answer from ministers, but I hope that provision for such schemes could be made in the bill, as they would otherwise seem to sit outwith its scope. I would be interested in finding out whether there is any information on what that would look like.

As other members have done, I very much welcome the changes that are proposed to childhood assistance, to position it as a stand-alone payment rather than a top-up benefit.

In conclusion, the Scottish Conservatives want to see a distinctly Scottish approach taken to social security. The Scottish National Party Government has received extensive devolved benefit powers, but it has consistently failed to maximise or change them. I hope that the bill will present an opportunity for it to do that, and that is why we will work constructively to lodge amendments to the bill.

For example, I would like to see carers allowance payments made for up to six months after a bereavement, to allow carers who are in full-time education to continue to receive the allowance. I think that there is cross-party support for that. Certainly, Ben Macpherson, when he was Minister for Social Security and Local Government, pointed to that as something that the Scottish Government wanted to deliver before the end of the current session of Parliament. I hope that we will see an amendment to the bill to bring that about.

Although these changes are welcome, it is important to remember that Social Security Scotland has been facing growing problems, including slow processing times. High numbers of complaints are now being recorded, and a larger proportion of applicants are now being denied benefits. We need to take stock of that and of where Social Security Scotland, as an institution, currently is.

Nevertheless, the Scottish Conservatives will support the bill at stage 1, to ensure that dealing with Social Security Scotland is a bit easier and that there is a framework to take forward the changes that we all want. I look forward to stages 2 and 3, when we can—I hope—get the bill to a place where we all want it to be.

Thank you for that.

I want to touch on data, too. You have already mentioned some of the work that the Scottish Government plans to do, but what impact could that work have on councils, specifically the requirement on them to assess rent conditions in their areas? Do councils, particularly Scotland’s smaller councils, have the analytical capacity and the additional workforce to undertake that work? After all, workforce challenges are regularly raised with us.

Moreover, why is this data collection role being proposed for councils instead of being carried out at a national level? I know that different data sets are already provided at national level, but why has that not been included in the bill?

Thanks for joining us. I have a question about the understanding between tenants and landlords. To what extent do you think that tenants and landlords understand the adjudication process that you have outlined and their rights and entitlements in that?

Good morning, panel, and thank you for joining us today.

You mentioned that the principle behind the bill is to stabilise rents, but what is your assessment of the rent controls that were put in by Parliament under emergency measures and which have left Scotland with some of the highest rent increases anywhere in the United Kingdom? Does this bill not have the potential to turbocharge increases for people renting in different communities?

Thank you for that. Some of the concerns that have been raised about the bill—for example, around mid-market rent—are very important, and we should already be looking at reforming things in the bill as it stands.

We have touched on rent pressure zones, but I have a couple of questions about rent control areas. What would be the timescale and the process for developing any regulations in that respect? Also, under the rent control area provisions in the bill, what would happen in that gap after the designation of a rent control area ended? From what you have said, my understanding is that there could be multiple designations within a council area, and there is a potential risk of landlords increasing rents, especially for new lets. Indeed, we saw that happen with new lets under the emergency regulations, with the market moving; in Edinburgh, for example, we have seen very different levels of rent for the same type of flat. Globally, we have seen unintended consequences where rent controls have been used, with rents for the same property doubling.