Chamber and committees

I thank all those who contributed to the Social Justice and Social Security Committee’s inquiry, and I thank organisations for the helpful briefings that they have provided to members ahead of the debate.

It is vital that we understand the challenges that are faced by people on low incomes and the debt problems that that drives, in particular in the context of the global cost of living crisis, which is placing more and more people further into debt, with the accompanying misery that that produces.

Prior to the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, it was estimated that 600,000 people in Scotland were in debt. The real problem is that the pandemic has not only exacerbated money problems for people in Scotland, but is now driving them. Across the UK, the cost of living has been increasing since 2021. In September this year, inflation rose to a 40-year high of 10.1 per cent. Naturally, it is those in low-income households who are worst affected by that increase in inflation. High food and energy prices are among the consequences of high demand from consumers, supply chain issues and—most importantly, as we need to recognise—the fallout from the war in Ukraine.

Those who are living on low incomes are more likely to be in debt. Around half of low-income and middle-income households have at least one debt; in comparison, the figure is less than two in five for higher-income households. One of the key messages that came out of the inquiry from those with lived experience concerned the vital role that advice services have to play and the role that early intervention can and must play. The role of local authorities in supporting and providing such advice to individuals and families on low incomes is important.

Cutting council budgets and services harms the poorest in our society. Sometimes the Parliament does not recognise that enough. COSLA has already warned that further cuts to council budgets and services will mean the removal of services for the most vulnerable in our society.

Will the member take an intervention?

If there is time in hand.

I agree with Mark Griffin that there is growing concern about the lack of leadership from the cabinet secretary and the Scottish Government. Our constituents expect action. I am concerned by the reports that I am getting that people living in those buildings are being told that they, rather than the developer, will have to pay. The cabinet secretary needs to be clear about how the programme will be properly resourced and funded. The accord was meant to be delivered in September, but it is now November. Can she guarantee that that work is taking place and that people living in relevant developments are being communicated with, given that they are having conversations with factors in which they are being told that they will have to foot the bill?

I agree with Elena Whitham on that and, as I have said in committee, I hope that the UK Government can look at the issue. We have heard evidence that that needs to change. I am happy to accept that.

People with lived experience have provided the committee with a lot of key thinking on issues that we need to take forward. There is a lot that the Scottish Parliament and councils need to do to change, and I want to focus on our role.

It is important and incredibly concerning that Scottish National Party and Green ministers have now targeted employability schemes for some of the largest budget cuts without any information about the impact of that or, indeed, without providing any assurances on what the schemes will look like and whether they will be restarted. We need to ensure that ministers monitor and consider the unintended consequences of that.

SNP and Green ministers have highlighted digital exclusion in the past. That was also highlighted by Siobhian Brown, from her committee’s work. We have not seen enough on that for people who live in poverty in rural communities, in which advice services are not necessarily local. Access to those services and to the online services that are provided by many charities across the country needs to be improved. That is something that has not been touched on yet, and we need to see action on it.

Ultimately, we need to see action from every level of government. Our local councils need to be properly resourced to be able to play their role, and both Governments need to work together to deliver on the targets that we all signed up to.

Parliament has previously debated the need for more to be done to tackle child poverty in Scotland. The Audit Scotland report in September pointed to the need for the Scottish Government to take a better strategic planning approach. Audit Scotland concluded that SNP ministers need to focus on a more long-term strategy to prevent children from falling into poverty. All of us agree that it is not acceptable in 21st century Scotland to see such numbers of children living in poverty, but how we work together across the Parliament to deliver on that is important.

I make no apology for highlighting that the number of children who still live in temporary accommodation is increasing, especially in the capital. The Scottish Government is simply not doing enough to provide resources to councils to help to prevent that or to rethink policy around that area. I have asked the cabinet secretary to act on that previously. We have seen the situation getting worse, not better.

The committee heard that an area in which the greatest difference can be made is access to free school meals. The cabinet secretary touched on that earlier. We are not seeing the agreed progress on delivering that policy. There were clear commitments in the programme for government that are now not being met. I hope that, if anything comes out of this debate, it is the need for leadership from the Scottish Government on that issue and for delivery of that promise. If the Scottish ministers and local authorities respond to the issue in the same way as they did during the pandemic, for example, the policy could be delivered without further delay.

Scottish Conservatives support the delivery of free school meals. We believe that all primary school and special school children should be given free breakfast and lunch. We also support continued provision for eligible children during the school holidays. We have seen the evidence that that is a crucial way of preventing people on low incomes from dropping under the poverty line and of ensuring that children from the most deprived backgrounds are cared for and receive access to nutritious food. We have all signed up to that but we need a focus on delivering it. I had hoped that we would have seen that before the winter.

I call on the cabinet secretary to make that happen. She could chair a free school meals delivery group with COSLA to drive delivery of the policy before Christmas. I hope that she will take that on board and consider it.

Yesterday, I visited Fedcap Scotland in Livingston to learn more about the employability support schemes that it provides. I was hugely impressed by the work that it is doing and the support that it provides, which genuinely takes a person-centred approach. We often talk about that, but what does it mean? For many of the people who are furthest away from the employment market, their mental wellbeing also needs to be considered, so I was impressed with what Fedcap is doing. I do not have time to expand on the point in this debate, but we also need to consider generational unemployment in Scotland and what additional support can be given to families.

If we aspire to be a just, fair Scotland, we must afford all our citizens fair and equal opportunities. The Covid-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine are two of the chief reasons why we are now witnessing global cost of living increases and seeing more people in Scotland and across the UK fall into debt problems and face significant living costs. We want the Scottish Government, Westminster and local authorities to work together to take on that unprecedented crisis and try to provide solutions for all our people.

I hope that local authorities and, importantly, the Scottish Government can implement the report’s actions and recommendations. There is a lot of good work in the report, and I look forward to ensuring that the committee continues to pursue it.

The member is making a very negative speech. Does she welcome the fact that, between 23 and 30 November, people on tax credits will receive a cost of living payment of £324? Does the member support anything that the UK Government is doing to support people?

Thank you.

We have to look at the history and the fact that the Scottish Government has the highest budget in the history of devolution, but it decided to cut council budgets. That shows where the Scottish Government’s priorities have been and the consequences that those have.

People who are likely to experience poverty and debt are among the most marginalised in our communities. People with disabilities are most likely to face the highest excess costs in the UK. One in five disabled people and one in four families with disabled children face extra costs, which are now estimated to be more than £1,000 a month.

Other groups, including women, young parents and people who live in rural areas, were also highlighted to the committee. More needs to be done to ensure that those groups are provided with equal opportunities in order to stop them being disproportionately affected by debt.

Good morning.

A number of my questions have been answered, but I want to go into more detail on software systems, because the UK Government is mandating the use of particular software systems for planning authorities in England. Do you have any concerns about what the practical implications of that might be for Scottish planning authorities in the future? You have all touched on that in relation to communicating data, but do you want to raise any specific issues?

Does anyone else want to come in on that point, or are you in also in the dark on software systems?

Is it your understanding that the same software providers will provide systems across the UK, so that the systems are compatible? We are not necessarily talking about different providers being chosen separately. I ask that question because I know from a former life on the Health and Sport Committee that different national health service boards chose different IT systems, which meant that they could not communicate, which is why health IT in Scotland is so bad.