Chamber and committees

Is that a missed opportunity? I totally agree with what you said. Here in Edinburgh, some of the key challenges around delayed discharges and homelessness have arisen because housing associations are not part of that integration joint board work. If the bill is going to be forced through by the Government, where will there be a pause to try to include housing, do you think, or is there not going to be one?

I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement and for a 160-page document to read in 50 minutes. I welcome many of the changes that he has outlined and the fact that he has taken on board many of the constructive proposals that the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee put forward. That should be put on the record.

The number of new homes built in Scotland has fallen by 25 per cent over the past decade, at a time when previous national planning frameworks were meant to help deliver housing targets. In the past decade, Scotland has had the lowest number of new builds completed in any decade since during world war 2. The nation faces a housing crisis, especially in the capital. It is therefore essential that we see the homes that Scotland needs being built.

Access to land is an issue that I do not think has been fully addressed in the revised draft. I put to the minister the need to create a mechanism to address future land supply issues, particularly in areas such as the capital. The majority of land being suggested in local plans as suitable for brownfield development is already in use by businesses. I ask the minister what steps will be taken beyond that suggestion to help us adapt to situations in which land for housing development is not forthcoming?

The minister mentioned planning authorities, which face increased responsibilities and serious financial pressures. How will ministers ensure that local authorities actually have the staff and resources needed to deliver NPF4?

Good morning. I think that we all understand the rationale for the legislation and, by and large, support it. As an Edinburgh MSP, I have concerns about the situation in the capital with regard to the availability of homeless accommodation, and I think that Glasgow members would have the same concerns about Glasgow. Has an impact assessment been carried out? What assessment has been made of the potential additional support services and homeless accommodation that will be needed? What work has been undertaken around that on potential referrals in the capital and in other cities?

Have the councils expressed concern to you on the issue? Several times this year, I have raised with you the issue of integration joint board funding that has meant that the capital has lost out on resources. As a result of that, we are already not in a great place here in that regard. I wonder whether those concerns have been put to you already.

Emma Roddick says that the Conservatives criticise the Scottish Government, but she will be fully aware that the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, of which we are both members, and the Finance and Public Administration Committee are also raising those very concerns with ministers. It is important to put that on the record.

Reviews are built into the system to look at such matters, and that is important. What is also important is how the system is being reformed, in the UK and in Scotland. I welcome that, and it is the work that I want to take forward in the committee.

Despite the SNP-Green Government’s motion for the debate, it must be said that the establishment of Social Security Scotland has not all been plain sailing. As Jeremy Balfour stated, we are all fully aware that SNP ministers have had to hand back to the DWP their administrative role with regard to many of the payments. I have to say, though, that I welcome the positive comments that the minister has often made in committee on the relationship between the two organisations. They have to work together, and we must ensure that they succeed in making our welfare system in our United Kingdom and here in Scotland work for everybody.

It is important to recognise the context in which today’s debate is taking place. Indeed, the minister stated it at the beginning: the global cost of living crisis is impacting on the most economically vulnerable individuals and families across the UK. That is why both of Scotland’s Governments need to work together to address the pressures and to support people through this period.

It is also why we have called for and supported the delivery of targeted benefits by Social Security Scotland. In addition, it is worth reflecting on the fact that £243 billion of support is being delivered by the UK Government and the Scottish Government together to focus direct support on the most vulnerable families in Scotland and across Britain.

I am absolutely happy to do that.

SNP ministers have not put in place the full welfare system, despite the many promises that we have heard and, indeed, as was promised ahead of the 2021 elections. Audit Scotland continues to express concern about the challenging timescales for delivering all of the new devolved benefits. I have stated previously, and I state again today, that it is in all of our interests for Social Security Scotland to succeed and to deliver efficient and cost-effective assessment and payment systems. That said—I am sorry to tell SNP members this—it is the role of Opposition parties to hold ministers to account on these matters. We must focus on making sure that the delivery of Social Security Scotland is effective and that the outcomes that we all want are indeed delivered.

A few members have highlighted certain issues that I hope that the minister has taken on board. Alexander Stewart made an important point about the digital divide and why people might not be taking up the payments that are available, and Pauline McNeill raised the important issue of the funeral support payment for those who are planning funerals. Why have 40 per cent of the people who are entitled to that payment not taken it up? It is a real issue that ministers should have tackled by now.

Sharon Dowey referred to her work on the Public Audit Committee and talked about the Government ensuring that it takes an efficient look at value for money for the taxpayer. That is important. I also point out that the Parliament’s Social Justice and Social Security Committee and Finance and Public Administration Committee have raised concerns with the Scottish Government about its data collection system not being fully in place.

Foysol Choudhury made an important point about the projected costs for Social Security Scotland and delivering our welfare system. As of today, those costs are over £290 million, which equates to 10 per cent of its total resources for delivering payments, compared with the figure of 6 per cent for the Department for Work and Pensions. I know that those costs are projected to come in line, but we have had no data to allow us to see where we are and whether all of that is, as I hope, on track. I know from discussions with Social Security Scotland that that is the projection, but we need to hold ministers to account for it.

Today’s debate presents an important opportunity to highlight the need for greater transparency, which is something that all the Parliament’s committees have been highlighting and asking for. Audit Scotland has stated that the implementation costs of the new devolved benefits have not been routinely reported on in the public domain, and that situation needs to change—and change quickly—because it makes it difficult, if not impossible, to have the kind of proper scrutiny that we all want.

With regard to some of the other points that were raised earlier, the minister highlighted 90 per cent satisfaction with Social Security Scotland, but that was as the benefit system was being rolled out. As more benefits are being rolled out, it is concerning to note that client complaints have increased by 74 per cent in the space of one year. I note and welcome what the minister said with regard to looking at the appeals system and redeterminations. It is important to be sure about why there have been rapid increases in complaints around Social Security Scotland. We all want that to be addressed.

The Scottish Government needs to make clear its long-term vision for Social Security Scotland and lay out practical steps that it is taking to make sure that the body is more transparent and accessible to the public on the delivery of the new system.

The debate has brought up another matter. Some members raised the issue of independence and what they want to see, but there is a key part of Scottish public finances that no SNP member can get away from and that can be expressed simply, in two words: the Barnett formula. We are spending £8.5 billion of Scottish taxpayers’ money because of the Barnett formula. I welcome that, because it is an important part of redistribution, and ministers and members of the SNP and the Green Party cannot simply wish that away—it is the size of the NHS budget in Scotland. Independence would leave an £8.5 billion black hole, and we need honesty from SNP and Green members over what would be cut.

One of the key things that today’s debate has brought to the fore is the future, and this week’s announcements show the future around our public finances. We must all work together to deliver Social Security Scotland and the payments for the people who desperately need them.

Will the member take another intervention?

At the Social Security and Social Justice Committee, we have heard again and again that in Scotland the SNP-Green Government is currently looking at there being a £760 million black hole in future welfare policy payments by the end of this session of Parliament. Where will that money come from, and why do you think that the Deputy First Minister did not touch on that in the two statements that he has made to Parliament?