Chamber and committees

There are wider considerations in Mr Balfour’s question around the qualifying benefit, which also relate to the regulations that are before us today. Of course, under the agency agreement, the DWP continues to deliver the carers allowance and the supplement and, this year, the additional payment, so the considerations are around the qualifying benefit.

The points that Mr Balfour raises are pertinent and important with regard to the development of the Scottish carers assistance in the period ahead, and we will publish our consultation on that shortly. These are points of consideration. I am happy to respond with any further points of information or interest above what I have said, but I can say right now that those issues will be considerations in the period ahead as we look at the development of Scottish carers assistance.

I can emphasise that, from a Scottish Government position, we are making it very clear to the DWP when we require to receive the data and how we require to receive it to meet that deadline. I do not want to say anything more at this stage, as officials are engaged in good faith on the matter. However, I will certainly update the committee in due course as appropriate.

I thank Miles Briggs for that important question. A situation where two parents are in receipt of a qualifying benefit for the same child should not be possible. If a situation arises where both parents have an exact 50:50 split of care and both are in receipt of a qualifying benefit, we would trust that the process of applying for the qualifying benefit would provide clarity by awarding the child element to the parent responsible for the child. Where that fails for any reason and triggers a competing claim for the Scottish child payment, the rules that allow the Scottish ministers to consider the circumstances of the child will apply. The evidence that will be considered by the Scottish ministers in determining awards in these cases will be set out in the published guidance. The guidance will be important in relation to those questions.

I will do that to the extent that we can within the considerations of the process and the issues around procuring and initiating such a review that we have to consider. However, we will certainly do that as much as we can.

I thank Marie McNair for that important question. First of all, as I said at the beginning, it is unfortunate that the DWP does not have a similar strategy. I respectfully note that, if the DWP were to change its position and introduce a similar strategy, that would be a welcome step forward for social security as a whole in terms of promoting benefits in social security and changing the culture, which I talked about earlier. We would like to work more closely with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on that in order, for example, to encourage a more collaborative approach to supporting take-up of all benefits. Unfortunately, however, we have not yet seen an appetite for that.

In 2020, there was a joint letter from the then Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and Older People and her Welsh and Northern Irish counterparts urging the DWP to take a more strategic approach to increasing benefit take-up during the pandemic. That letter was unanswered. Although I appreciate that it was a busy time for all, the devolved Administrations put forward a good suggestion.

As the committee would expect, I have been building up my relationship with UK ministers, including Chloe Smith, the new Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work. I look forward to further constructive engagement with her on a number of matters. The matter is certainly something that we might discuss in due course.

However, it would be a welcome step forward if the UK Government were to implement such a strategy. We could provide evidence and examples of the difference that it makes—not only in practically engaging clients and helping with take-up, but in bringing us together, as members of the Parliaments and as a society, to promote social security, the benefits that it provides and the collective enrichment and improvement that it facilitates in our society.

Throughout the application process and in communication with clients, they are advised of the process, what steps are available to them to request a redetermination and what support will be available to them. As we roll out the advocacy service, a key part of its work and the wider collective work will be ensure that people are aware of and advised about the service, and that they use it.

The information is built into communication throughout the process; it is part of the wider communications on the website and of any engagement that we have. We ministers are keen to emphasise at junctures such as this meeting the steps that are available to people if they feel that the wrong decision has been made. They have the option to request a redetermination or to make an appeal, and that is clearly put to them, as is the support that is available to them through that process.

I was grateful to have a session with the committee a few weeks ago on the advocacy service. Since then, the procurement process has moved into the final stages and the service is in the process of being rolled out. At that meeting, I committed to speaking again to the committee about the advocacy service, because I was sure that it would be of interest. I am looking forward to meeting VoiceAbility, the organisation that we have contracted to deliver the service, later this month. Ruari Sutherland, who has led on engagement with VoiceAbility and the procurement process, might have something to add.

Thank you for highlighting that example; indeed, such examples exist right across the country. I have already spoken about my anecdotal experience as a constituency MSP and as a minister engaging with stakeholder and individual claimants, and I think that those kinds of life events—a family registering a birth, as you have alluded to, or an individual starting nursery or school—provide really important opportunities for signposting. The approach is particularly relevant in promoting our five family benefits, which are very important.

In its corporate plan, Social Security Scotland commits to providing a joined-up service to clients, which means providing them with the best possible advice and referring them to organisations that can give any further help that might be needed. That is the overarching position of Social Security Scotland’s operation, and it is working closely with partners to support the development of referral pathways of the kind that Marie McNair has brought to light in the example that she referred to and to ensure that clients who need broader support can connect with an organisation that can provide it.

This is a complex area of work. How do we ensure that referral happens at those signposting events, that engagement is happening and that information is available? We are certainly starting from a strong position, particularly with regard to the five family benefits.

In effect, free schools meals are a passported benefit of entitlement from other benefits. We have a hybrid system here. Emma Roddick rightly emphasises the importance of raising awareness in school settings of Scottish benefits. As I emphasised earlier, there is already significant engagement with the education sector and local authorities on how we promote Scottish benefits in schools.

The challenge is that we cannot promote reserved benefits, because that is for the DWP to undertake, so as much as there is engagement with, for example, Citizens Advice Scotland and its work, it is a reality that reserved benefits are not promoted in the same way as Scottish Government benefits.

The interconnectedness of receipt of free school meals being passported from other benefits emphasises the importance of continued engagement with the education sector to promote take-up of Scottish benefits by individuals who interact with schools. That has been successful so far, but there is more that we can do and we will continue to do it.

Apologies—I meant to touch on that as well. The work on the minimum income guarantee is being taken forward by the cabinet secretary, and it has a strong focus on income maximisation. The work on the formation of the group and its evaluation is at an early stage. I look forward to seeing its findings, which can help us with the benefit take-up strategy’s implementation and the evaluative process.