Seòmar agus comataidhean

We did not ask to mitigate the two-child cap in the past. The Scottish child payment was established in phases because of the important work that had to be done with the DWP to allow data-sharing arrangements and to ensure that the framework existed to allow that to happen.

The progress of the Scottish child payment from policy inception to delivery was the quickest of any benefit that has ever been delivered within the UK. I am exceptionally proud of that record, but that was the beginning of a delivery that had to happen in phases to get the payment for children up to the age of 16, because of the work that had to be done with the DWP. There were important aspects to the timing of how the Scottish child payment was delivered. The fact that it had been introduced did not mean that the work stopped—work on the various phases had to continue.

Yesterday’s discussions with stakeholders were exactly about how we use the budget to move forward with the councils that are in greatest need. In relation to greatest need, we talked about the families behind the regulator’s discussions about systemic failure. As Mr Griffin and the rest of the committee well know, when we talk about systemic failure, we are talking about families and children in unsuitable temporary accommodation. I am particularly mindful that, when we talk about figures and the use of the budget, we always need to have in mind how we can alleviate issues for those in greatest need. That is exactly what yesterday’s discussion was about.

What I am saying is that, right across the UK, we are seeing an increase in the number of people who are coming forward for disability payments and that, on top of that, in Scotland, we are also seeing people coming forward because of the ease of the system. There are two different aspects to it.

There may be more people throughout the UK who are applying for disability benefits in general. We will then also see an additional increase on top of that, because of the lack of barriers to entry to our system.

We have not asked for information about the two-child cap, but I return to the fact that the difference is that we now have the Scottish payment, which makes that much easier. The key difference from the conversations that we had about the issue many years ago is that the Scottish child payment is now in existence, which means that the process, which is still complex—certainly, it is much more complex than was suggested in comments that were made yesterday—will be eased.

Do you mean the cost of the agency agreements?

We estimate that it will require an extra £5 million to meet the cost of national insurance contributions within Social Security Scotland. The committee will be aware that there is a staffing level of around 4,500 full-time equivalents, which is a significant workforce. The net impact of that increase will have to be met.

The overall net impact of the increase in employer national insurance contributions for the Scottish budget remains unknown. We are still waiting for clarity from the UK Government on what additional funding it plans to provide. I am sure that the committee can appreciate that such a level of uncertainty about something that has a significant impact, not just on the agency but across the public sector, is of great concern.

It is estimated that the change could add more than £500 million in costs for directly employed public sector staff. However, if we include the staff who deliver public services more widely, such as general practitioners and dentists, it will increase to more than £700 million.

The committee will, I am sure, be aware of the letter that the First Minister and the president of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 3 January, which was widely supported by many organisations in the public sector and the voluntary and third sectors, raising concerns about the ENICs decision and seeking clarity on that funding. That clarity is key as we look to finalise budgets. I am sure that the committee would wish the Government to get on with spending our budget from 1 April, but the lack of clarity does not help.

Certainly.

We are determined to do everything that we can to decrease the use of temporary accommodation, particularly for children.

It is not just a challenge for the Scottish Government; stakeholders have said that one of the biggest drivers of homelessness is the local housing allowance. It is disappointing that it seems that the local housing allowance will be frozen, after an initial change. If we want to reduce the number of people who are homeless, it is not just about impacting on the number of people who are in temporary accommodation, but about trying to prevent homelessness in the first place.

In the budget, we will do everything that we can to drive that level down. Decisions could be made elsewhere that would assist us in that work as well.

It is a really fair point. Part of the reason for having pilots is to demonstrate impact and therefore to be able to make the point to a service provider that it might wish to continue the approach in its mainstreaming budget, if it has had such a significant impact.

Another useful aspect of the pilot schemes is that they demonstrate not just that an approach is good for the client and the people who we are here to serve but that there are potential savings to be made in relation to other public services. For example, temporary accommodation is exceptionally expensive, so in addition to the moral reason for driving down the use of temporary accommodation, it is exceptionally useful and effective for us to do that for budgetary reasons, because councils and service providers will not be spending money on temporary accommodation. Therefore, if we can get the right prevention duties in place, there are ways to save money.

Thank you, and good morning. I am pleased to be here to give evidence as part of the committee’s post-legislative scrutiny of the Child Poverty (Scotland) Act 2017. This is a very important part of the committee’s and the Parliament’s work, and I look forward to reading the committee’s recommendations in due course. Ending child poverty is the foremost priority of the Scottish Government, and of the First Minister, and I look forward to setting out some of the impacts that the act has had in driving that mission forward.

I am heartened that, in the evidence that the committee has seen and heard so far, there is wide agreement that the act has had a positive impact. It has had a positive impact on focusing efforts and investment on tackling child poverty; on ensuring that child poverty reduction remains a high priority in all sectors; on fostering collaboration between organisations at local level; and on driving the delivery of policies that serve to support people in poverty across Scotland.

The act has led to a sharpened and intense focus on child poverty in the Scottish Government, and it has helped to shape policy with regard to how we deliver employability support, childcare, transport and a host of other policies that span all ministers and portfolios. Ministers have collaborated increasingly closely over this time, and that has culminated in the recent formation of a Cabinet sub-committee on child poverty, which has elevated our oversight arrangements and further strengthened our approach. The sub-committee builds on the learning from the actions that we have taken, and it will create more opportunities to co-ordinate policies and maximise our collective impact on child poverty. That is essential, because the scale and nature of the challenges that we face have changed dramatically since 2017 as the result of Covid, the cost of living crisis and other global events.

I have spoken to the committee many times about our transformation of social security provision in Scotland, which is establishing a radically different system that is built on dignity, fairness and respect. The act has been an important impetus for some of that work, and the Scottish child payment is an example of a policy that was designed and delivered with the clear ambition of reducing child poverty and which is now delivering crucial support to families.

Scottish Government modelling from February this year suggests that the Scottish child payment will keep 60,000 children out of relative poverty in 2024-25. In total, it is estimated that Scottish Government policies will keep 100,000 children out of relative poverty in that time, with relative poverty levels 10 percentage points lower than they would otherwise have been.

I was glad to hear in the evidence to the committee how policies that are implemented at local level are bringing critical support to families and how the act has transformed the way that national and local government, third sector organisations and all our partners in this national mission engage with one another to drive forward progress and create a fairer, more equal Scotland. That is the collective approach that was envisioned for the act from the beginning, and I hope that, through the inquiry, the impact of the act has been clear for members to see.

Much has been achieved since the act was introduced, but, collectively, there is still so much more to do to improve the lives of those families who experience poverty, and I am grateful for the time with the committee to discuss that further.