Seòmar agus comataidhean

Would the minister like to wind up?

As no other member wishes to come in, I call the minister to wind up.

Amendment 549, in the name of Pam Gosal, has already been debated with amendment 271. I call Pam Gosal to move or not move amendment 549.

I call Paul O’Kane to speak to amendment 639 and other amendments in the group.

Amendment 48, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 49 and 50.

I, too, congratulate Kenny Gibson on securing the debate, and I welcome the WASPI women to our Parliament.

To add context to my contribution, I feel that it is important primarily to set out the circumstances as they might have been a few decades ago for many women across Scotland, especially women who are of pension age now.

We already understand—and it is widely accepted—that women have disproportionately borne the burden of care responsibilities. Women, in particular those in low-income or part-time employment, have also long been disadvantaged in the working environment.

I thank Close the Gap for its briefing, which sets out clearly how the pension system was designed around the model of a male breadwinner role in a way that fails to account for the disrupted work patterns of women who have care-giving responsibilities. Although we have moved on in attitudes and employment practices to help to alleviate that inequality, progress has been slower than is acceptable, and throughout the time of the WASPI women’s working years, the world really has become a different place.

Because they often have to care for children and other family members and are usually the first to sacrifice employment altogether because of family commitments, women retire with significantly less savings than men. On average, women have £123,000 less in pension savings than their male counterparts. A woman who is aged 25 today would need to work a staggering additional 18 years in full-time employment to retire with the same pension pot as a man. The stark fact is that two thirds of pensioners who are living in poverty are women and half of them are single.

That injustice stems from a series of failures, and the decision to raise the state pension age for women who were born in the 1950s without proper communication or consideration of its impact only exacerbated the impact of those failures. Women were left unprepared and unable to make the necessary financial arrangements, and many faced, and continue to face, significant hardship as a result. Notwithstanding the emotional distress that has been caused by the woeful handling of the fiasco, the ombudsman was clear that the women who are affected are owed compensation.

Let me share the story of Olive Sharpe. Olive is the co-ordinator of the Banff and Buchan WASPI supporters group. Like thousands of women who were born in the 1950s, Olive worked hard for her entire life. She planned her retirement around the understanding that she would receive her state pension at the age of 60. That promise was broken, and Olive was left scrambling to cover her expenses when the state pension age rose unexpectedly for her. Fast forward to recent months, and a glimmer of hope was offered to those WASPI women. In opposition, Labour promised the world. The leader of Scottish Labour said:

“Under my leadership, WASPI women will finally receive the justice they deserve.”

After promising the world to get elected, what did Labour offer our WASPI women? Absolutely nothing. Is that truly what Scottish Labour thinks of WASPI women and what they deserve? Labour said to vote for it for change and all we have seen is short change. The decision is an affront to justice and it perpetuates the systemic inequality that women face in retirement.

Olive’s story is one of resistance and resilience, but it is also one of unnecessary hardship that has been caused by a failure of governance and a lack of compassion. Her story is one among hundreds of thousands across Scotland. Last night, when I spoke to Olive Sharpe, she urged Labour to reconsider and asked me to put a question to Scottish Labour. Does the current UK Government, which supported the WASPI campaign since the beginning, really wish to add its failure to this maladministration?

Westminster has shown us yet again that, whichever party is elected in London, the people of Scotland and—in this case—the women of Scotland, are continually let down. It is time that compensation was paid and that WASPI women truly get the justice that they deserve.

Our second agenda item is our annual evidence session with the Scottish Human Rights Commission. I refer members to papers 1 and 2. I welcome, from the commission, Professor Angela O’Hagan, its chair, and Jan Savage, its executive director.

I invite Angela O’Hagan to make a short opening statement, after which we will move to members’ questions.

That is great. Thank you both very much. That concludes our formal business. We will go into private session to discuss the final items on our agenda.

Thank you very much. We will move to questions. You touched on a few of your priorities, but what are the commission’s top priorities for 2024-25, and on what basis were they set?

I am happy for Professor O’Hagan to come in.