Seòmar agus comataidhean

I apologise to Jeremy Balfour for not hearing him properly the first time.

My immediate response to Jeremy Balfour’s question is that it will be tough. In our report, which I hope everyone looks at, I have laid out the extensive actions that the Government has taken. However, in my statement, I also said clearly that all those actions and all the investment, even taken together, will not be enough. That is why we have committed to redouble our efforts across the Government and to look at everything that we do through a child poverty lens to see whether it works to reduce child poverty. That will be crucial.

I also make the point to Jeremy Balfour that although we could end up with all that work being on the right trajectory to hit those targets, we could be prevented from hitting them because of the actions of the UK Government—for example, in reducing the £20 universal credit uplift. I implore him and his colleagues to make representations on that to the UK Government, because it would be a travesty if the Scottish Government makes progress towards meeting those targets but is held back by UK Government welfare policy.

Maggie Chapman makes a very important point about awareness of the Scottish child payment. She may be aware that, from the start, Social Security Scotland has promoted awareness of entitlement, which is perhaps a bit different from the position taken by the Department for Work and Pensions.

It is very much Social Security Scotland’s job to promote awareness of entitlement. However, that is not just Social Security Scotland’s job; it is everyone’s job. It is the job of health visitors, teachers, social care staff and general practitioners who come into contact with families who they think may be eligible to make sure that awareness is heightened. For example, one important project involves the co-location of benefit advisers in GP surgeries. We should miss no opportunity to make sure that families are aware of their entitlement to not just the Scottish child payment but all the other benefits that they may be able to claim.

I hope that Pam Duncan-Glancy will not mind my sharing that we had a constructive discussion about issues to do with the minimum income guarantee when we met last week.

I want to get the steering group up and running—as Pam Duncan-Glancy is aware, that is one of our commitments for our first 100 days—and I want then to consider the feasibility of introducing a minimum income guarantee. We discussed the fact that that could encompass not only cash but in-kind support across a myriad of areas of government. That work is important, so I assure her that I want to see it progress at the earliest opportunity.

As I said to Miles Briggs, we want to bring forward the doubling of the Scottish child payment as quickly as possible. However, I am sure that Pam Duncan-Glancy will recognise that, even in the first 100 days, we have brought forward delivery of bridging payments of £520 a year until the end of 2022, by which time we have committed to rolling out fully the Scottish child payment to those who are currently not eligible. That fulfils one of our first 100 days commitments, so it is not a fair accusation to say that the Government is not moving fast enough to put money into the pockets of the families who need it most.

I thank Neil Gray for his question. I very much enjoyed working with him on the Social Justice and Fairness Commission.

The Scottish Government analysis that was published in November estimated that removing the £20 uplift and reinstating the minimum income floor would reduce benefit spend in Scotland by £476 million in 2021-22. Although the UK Government has extended those measures to the end of September, the scale of the loss to families will be hugely significant if the uplift is cut.

As the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has highlighted, even with the uplift, families who are unable to work are still £1,600 per year worse off now than they were in 2011. That is why we have written to the UK Government seven times calling for it to make the uplift permanent and to extend it to those who are in receipt of legacy benefits.

Neil Gray also made a point about rent arrears. Given the importance of the issue, which I recognise, the Deputy First Minister announced the establishment of a tenant grant fund to add to the other measures that we are taking to help people who have been impacted by Covid-19 during the pandemic in relation to rent arrears.

As I said in my statement, the expansion of early learning and childcare is now set to be completed from August this year. Of course, half of councils are already delivering the expanded offer of 1,140 hours to families. Given the importance of the issue, we have set out the next stage of our ambition to further expand childcare and develop a wraparound childcare system before and after school, all year round.

The member makes an important point about two-year-olds. As I said, one of the three key pillars is about cash and in-kind support. Wraparound childcare is one of the most important aspects of in-kind support for families, and it can make a big difference in lifting them out of poverty. I will be working with my Cabinet colleagues to ensure that that is delivered.

Tenant participation must be at the heart of developing the new rented sector strategy. Our regional network of tenant organisations already helps us to involve tenants who live in the social rented sector, and we have committed in “Housing to 2040” to establishing a tenant participation panel for private tenants. The forums will help us to ensure that tenants’ voices are heard in the development and delivery of the strategy and future policy making.

I am keen to meet tenant representatives and organisations that support tenants. Invitations for meetings with shortly be issued to representatives of both those groups as we begin work on the rented sector strategy.

I think that I caught the gist of that question. I am keen for the PRS resilience group to continue. It provides a useful forum for open discussion of the issues and challenges that face everyone, including tenants in the private rented sector, so it is wise for the forum to continue for the foreseeable future.

Our national planning framework 4 position statement indicates our policy aim of facilitating significant expansion of green infrastructure, which includes that within housing developments. That is further supported by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019, whereby local authorities will have a duty to prepare open space strategies, helping to ensure that places are greener and healthier.

The member raises important questions about rogue factors and the impact that they can have on shared green spaces. The best that I can do is to write to the member, setting out some of the detail of how we might take those issues forward. I will ensure that officials do that in the next few days.

We engaged with residents, local authorities and tourism representatives from across Scotland, including island communities, as part of our 2019 and 2020 public consultations. In 2019, we also commissioned independent research on the impact on communities of short-term lets. Five case-study areas were selected, which covered a mixture of rural, urban and island areas; Skye was the island case-study area. An island communities impact assessment was carried out in 2020 and published in December 2020, as part of our consultation report.