Official Report 1081KB pdf
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-14322, in the name of Jenny Gilruth, on the programme for government—eradicating child poverty. I invite members who wish to participate in the debate to press their request-to-speak button.
15:02
Ending child poverty is the single greatest priority for this Government and is, I hope, a truly national mission that is supported across the chamber. I am pleased to be opening this debate as education secretary in what I hope is a demonstration of the cross-Government approach that we are taking to that mission. Ending child poverty is a job not just for me, the social justice secretary, the health secretary or any one of my colleagues; it is a mission for all of us in Government at all levels.
We undoubtedly approach that mission in what are clearly challenging circumstances. The Scottish Government’s budget is under the most severe and sustained pressure since this Parliament was reconvened in 1999. However, it is worth reminding Parliament that it is in that challenging context that we are already taking considerable action to alleviate child poverty within our current devolved powers.
We are investing around £3 billion per year in our mission to eradicate child poverty, address the cost of living crisis and break the cycle of poverty, and we know that that action is making a difference. Modelling that was published in February estimates that 100,000 children will be kept out of relative poverty this year by Scottish Government policies such as the Scottish child payment, with relative child poverty levels estimated to be 10 percentage points lower than they would otherwise have been. As Professor Morag Treanor from the University of Glasgow has observed, the Scottish child payment has been a game changer for Scotland. She noted that
“Levels of child poverty in Scotland will drop faster”
and
“further than they will in the rest of the UK, particularly England, because of this payment”.
However, there is much more that we need to do in order to fully eradicate child poverty.
The First Minister made quite a deal yesterday about the interconnected, whole-family approach that is required in order to help families, but there was no reference in the programme for government or in his speech to the whole family wellbeing fund, which was to be £500 million up until 2026. It has caused some concern that there is no specific reference to that. Can the cabinet secretary put our minds at rest and commit to that £500 million by 2026?
Mr Rennie might know that I am recused from issues to do with The Promise as my wife sits on the oversight board. However, I am sure that Shirley-Anne Somerville will respond to that specific point when she sums up the debate.
I mentioned that this year’s programme for government reinforces our commitment to work in partnership with local government and stakeholders across whole-family support, which Mr Rennie mentioned, employability, childcare, education, and housing. That is because the Government alone will not eradicate child poverty; it will take all of us, across Scotland, working together, united in focus and purpose, to deliver the change that is required.
The cabinet secretary talks about family provision. One of the family provisions that allow disabled people to go out is the provision of changing places toilets. However, the Scottish Government announced on Tuesday that the £10 million fund for new changing places toilets had been removed. How does that help families, particularly those in poverty, to go out and access services in our cities and towns?
Mr Balfour raises an extremely valid point, and I recognise the challenge in this instance. He will also recognise the real challenges that the Scottish Government faces at the current time, which are largely driven by decisions taken elsewhere that have driven inflation to such levels that we have had to, for example, settle record levels of local government pay deals. I think that that was the right thing to do, but it means that there is less finance for other projects, such as the one that Mr Balfour mentions. I also recognise the importance of that fund in my constituency and in other places in Scotland. As with all the funding that we are considering in the Government, if additional funding becomes available, we will prioritise it to support the families who are most in need.
I want to talk about some of the support and investment that we are already providing in Scotland—investment that does not necessarily exist in other parts of the United Kingdom at the current time. For example, we have established an emergency fund to support councils in removing the impact of school meal debt on families and, building on our existing partnerships in Glasgow, Clackmannanshire and Dundee, we are investing in five more place-based partnerships. We are also investing in local projects to tackle child poverty through a second round of our child poverty practice accelerator fund.
We know that breaking the cycle of poverty means supporting the next generation to thrive and helping parents to get on in fair work. Of course, Scotland is the only part of the UK to already offer 1,140 hours of early learning and childcare to all three and four-year-olds and to eligible two-year-olds, regardless of their parents’ working status. That provision of extra ELC is helping to save families, on average, £5,500 per child per year, which is what they would have to pay if they paid for that care themselves.
Will the member take an intervention?
I would like to make some progress.
We know that that approach is making a substantial difference already, by saving families money and, importantly, allowing women to return to the workplace. In 2024-25, we will continue to invest around £1 billion in high-quality ELC, and we will continue to expand access to funded childcare for families who need it most through our work in the six early adopter communities. In those early adopter communities, since 2022, we have been working with families who are most at risk of living in poverty to provide them with the school-age child services that they need, and families tell us that that funding is making a difference. It is helping to get them back into work and to alleviate pressure on household budgets.
Will the member take an intervention?
I will, but I am mindful of time, Presiding Officer.
The cabinet secretary will be aware that a survey that was conducted by Pregnant Then Screwed found that a quarter of mothers on maternity leave who are eligible for the new Government-funded childcare scheme have been told that they cannot apply for the free hours, even though they are eligible for them, and that, as a result, they will have to return to work early. How does the cabinet secretary respond to that?
I can give you the time back for the intervention, cabinet secretary.
Thank you, Presiding Officer.
I am happy to work with the member and, of course, with Natalie Don-Innes, the Minister for Children, Young People and the Promise, to resolve the matter that she has raised. However, it is important to note that the provision of 1,140 hours in Scotland is quite a different level from what is available in other parts of the UK and that, further, as a result of the approach of the Conservatives, the provision in other parts of the UK is linked to having parents in work. We do not discriminate on that basis in Scotland—we have a much more equitable offer. As I said, I am happy to work with the member to support that work further.
I mentioned that we are delivering childcare, and I want to talk about wraparound school-age childcare, which is hugely important for parents and which we are providing to support around 600 children from 500 families through the early adopter projects that I mentioned. The programme for government also highlights an example of the difference that that project in Dundee is making to one mum who has been able to get back into work with the right support and funded childcare—that wraparound approach that we know works and helps to support parents into sustained positive destinations.
It is imperative that we continue to drive an increase in the take-up of funded early learning and childcare for eligible two-year-olds. Our local authorities take that very seriously, and we will continue to work with them to focus on boosting take-up among families who are most at risk of poverty.
Over 2024-25, we will continue to support the extra time programme, investing £4 million in a partnership with the Scottish Football Association to deliver before-school, after-school and breakfast clubs through 31 football clubs spread all over the country. That funding is providing 3,000 targeted free places each week for children, who are benefiting from access to food, activities and support while their parents are more easily able to work.
I turn now to school and post-16 education. By investing in children and young people’s education to enable them to begin work or further or higher education when they leave school, we can help to break the poverty-related cycle. Through our continued investment in the Scottish attainment challenge, the poverty-related gap for young people leaving school and going on to a positive destination has reduced by 60 per cent since 2009. Further, there have been record levels of attainment in literacy and numeracy in our primary 7 pupils over the past year. As this year’s exam results show, there has been a 25 per cent increase this year alone in the number of technical and vocational qualifications achieved. That is a true mark of progress, as more young people are able to choose non-traditional routes in their qualifications to exhibit their success.
There has also been extraordinary success with the widening access agenda, in partnership with our universities, with record numbers of students from our poorest communities going on to university, supported by free university tuition. Indeed, the most recent data from the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service, from August, showed a 12 per cent increase this year in acceptances from the 20 per cent most deprived areas of Scotland. That is a record that we, our universities and, most importantly, our students can be proud of.
Our support to young people is not just academic. We understand that families need our support at this time, and we are taking strong action to reduce the cost of the school day for families. That is why we have extended free school meals, saving families £400 per year for every eligible child taking those meals. As was confirmed yesterday, we will focus the next stage in our efforts on free school meal expansion for those children who need it most. That is why, even in the extremely tough, financially circumstances that we face as a result of austerity from the United Kingdom Government, we are investing to deliver free school meal expansion for primary 6 and 7 pupils in receipt of the Scottish child payment. That is real action in our mission to eradicate child poverty, which I hope everyone in the Parliament can support.
Very shortly in the coming weeks, we will publish school clothing and uniform guidance, which will focus on measures to support schools to design and implement affordable policies that recognise the individual needs and identity of our pupils. We will continue to provide funding to all local authorities for the removal of core curriculum charges for all primary and secondary pupils, which is worth £8 million in this financial year alone.
We are investing £1 billion during this parliamentary session through the Scottish attainment challenge, helping schools to fund, for example, income maximisation officers at Braes high school in Falkirk, supporting families to access the benefits that they are entitled to. That investment is also supporting Fair Isle primary school in Fife, which is using some of its pupil equity funding for a family worker to support parents in boosting their household budgets. Elgin high school in Moray is further tackling the cost of the school day by introducing a food-to-go scheme.
Throughout this speech, I have referred to the need for joint working if we are to succeed in our mission to end child poverty: joint working within Government, joint working with councils, joint working with the third sector and working directly with our communities. I now need to touch on the joint working that would be most immediately impactful: genuine joint working with the UK Government. As the Parliament knows, the UK Government has powers at its fingertips right now that could alleviate child poverty. At the stroke of a pen, it could lift hundreds of thousands of children in Scotland out of poverty by taking the obvious step of lifting the two-child cap.
I am again asking the Parliament to come together and call on the UK Government to do exactly that. I am speaking in particular to colleagues on the Labour benches today, because I do not believe that there is a single person on those benches who truly believes that the two-child limit is the right policy. As members of the Parliament, each of us sees the impact of that policy in our constituencies every day. Today we have the opportunity to speak with one voice, and the people who sent us here will expect us to take it. The two-child limit must go, and it must go now.
There are other costs that the Scottish Government incurs, primarily those associated with mitigation. Indeed, it is worth reminding the Parliament that the Government is spending more than £1 billion mitigating the impacts of 14 years of UK Government policy, such as the bedroom tax and the benefit cap. That is action that we are proud to take to protect our people and to protect families in Scotland, but we should not have to take it. The purpose of this Parliament is not to ameliorate bad decision making from Westminster; the purpose of this Parliament should be to govern in the best interests of the people of Scotland. However, we are spending millions of pounds this year alone to mitigate UK Government welfare cuts, including the bedroom tax and the benefit cap. That is money that could and should have been spent on our schools or further ambitious anti-poverty measures.
Rather than those policies being mitigated in Scotland, the new UK Labour Government has the chance to end them at source. Indeed, Labour has some tough decisions fast approaching, because the great responsibility of Government comes with great accountability. I warn Labour colleagues that, if they are not careful, the Tory bedroom tax will become the Labour bedroom tax, the two-child cap will become Labour’s two-child cap and the child poverty to which those reprehensible policies lead will become Labour’s child poverty. There is an opportunity for the new UK Government to change course. It will find a willing partner in the Scottish Government, but emulating Tory austerity will not help Scotland’s children. Things have to get better.
Eradicating child poverty is the golden thread that runs through this year’s programme for government. It is a priority for all our portfolios. Although we have made good progress, we know that there is more to do and we remain resolutely committed to delivering the change that is needed. We will leave no stone unturned across Government as we seek to lift every child out of poverty. I ask each member of every party in the Parliament to work with us on that national mission.
I move,
That the Parliament notes the actions set out in the Programme for Government 2024-25 that focus on eradicating child poverty as the single greatest priority for the Scottish Government; recognises that sustained and cohesive effort is needed across all levels of government and in all parts of society to deliver on this national mission, especially at a time when the public finances are under acute pressure after 14 years of austerity; welcomes continued investment of around £3 billion in 2024-25 to eradicate poverty, mitigate the impacts of the cost of living crisis and invest in prevention to break the cycle of poverty; notes analysis of the Child Poverty Action Group, which estimates that low-income families in Scotland will be around £28,000 better off by the time that their child turns 18 when compared to other families across the UK; further notes modelling that estimates that 100,000 children will be kept out of relative poverty this year as a result of Scottish Government policies such as the Scottish Child Payment; recognises the Scottish Government’s commitment to working constructively with the UK Government to end child poverty once and for all, and agrees that the UK Government has the opportunity to lift thousands of children out of poverty in Scotland by taking action in the Autumn Budget to remove the two-child limit.
Thank you, cabinet secretary.
I advise members that we have a little time in hand, so I encourage members who have not yet pressed their request-to-speak button but want to speak in the debate to do so now. I also encourage members who wish to make an intervention to press their intervention button, not least because it is helpful for those who join us online.
15:16
I thank the many organisations that provided useful briefings ahead of the debate.
Yesterday, during the programme for government statement, the First Minister said:
“No child should have their opportunities, development, health and wellbeing and future curtailed by the material wealth of their family—not ever, and certainly not today, in a modern and prosperous society such as Scotland.”
I agree. We all want a Scotland where everyone and every child can realise their potential.
The programme for government was an opportunity to take stock of the Government’s successes and failures. I agree with the First Minister when he says:
“families thrive when they are supported by co-ordinated holistic services that meet their needs and are easy to access.”—[Official Report, 4 September 2024; c 24.]
That is why I am disappointed that health and housing have had such a low priority in the child poverty actions and are not even referenced in the Government motion.
After 17 years of the Scottish National Party being in government and having full control over those policy areas, the facts speak for themselves. The percentage of children in Scotland who are waiting more than 12 weeks for medical care has increased by almost 50 per cent. The total number of children on waiting lists sits at more than 10,000, which is a 114 per cent increase. To borrow from the cabinet secretary, those are SNP waiting lists. The number of children who are homeless and living in temporary accommodation has reached more than 16,000—that is SNP child homelessness.
The Government is not making the progress that it promised. The health and housing situation for children—often the most vulnerable children in our society—is only getting worse. There is a cross-party consensus in the Parliament and, perhaps more importantly, in the charities and public bodies that work in communities across Scotland, that we should take action to make change in that area.
The Government motion states:
“sustained and cohesive effort is needed across all levels of government and in all parts of society to deliver on this national mission”.
I agree with that. However, if ministers are serious about eliminating child poverty and about that being the Government’s number 1 priority, we need a renewed focus on outcomes, not on Government processes, which is all that we have seen to date.
Alongside Jackie Baillie, I recently co-chaired a parliamentary round table that was organised by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health to discuss the recommendations in its report “Worried and Waiting: A review of paediatric waiting times in Scotland 2024”. I have to say that, along with many MSPs who are in the chamber, I was concerned by what the professionals had to say. I make the sincere plea to the First Minister to meet the RCPCH urgently to consider some of its recommendations on the need to make child poverty and child health outcomes go hand in hand. We need action. The waiting times that we see are the next big scandal facing the Government.
I know that, since the pandemic, many MSPs will have started to receive examples in their casework of unacceptable failures to deliver health and mental wellbeing care and support on time. We need to see action on that. I request that the First Minister urgently looks at the recommendations that the royal college has outlined, which it would be fully realistic and affordable for the Scottish Government to take forward. One of those recommendations is to conduct a full review of the child health workforce to ensure that it is sufficiently resourced and funded, and specifically to look at the creation of a bespoke child health workforce strategy. We can all agree that those things would make a difference. I would also ask the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to consider the challenges and make a statement to Parliament on them, because they are only getting worse on the Government’s watch.
I have been disappointed to date in the limited progress that has been made by Government to end the practice of children and young people being placed in adult mental health services. I have held round-table meetings and we have had meetings all summer, yet ministers have not acted on the challenges and the practice continues. We need leadership. I hope that the health secretary, although he is not here in the chamber, will look at how we act on that.
The housing emergency is one of the key areas that the Government needs to act on. I welcome some of the changes to the Housing (Scotland) Bill outlined in the programme for government and I look forward to meeting the Minister for Housing to discuss them. In many ways, however, the changes that have been proposed are fixing the mess that was created during the period of the SNP-Green coalition Government. During the consideration of the national planning framework, I, alongside industry leaders, warned ministers that without a pipeline of land supply for new homes, we would see housing developments and home completions significantly reducing, which is what has happened.
As the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations points out in its briefing, the pipeline of new social homes is slowing to worrying levels. Housing association starts were just 2,073 homes in 2023, which is the lowest number since 1988. The proposals that the Government is now making look almost identical to what I tried to get into the national planning framework, so I welcome much of that. However, the mid-market rent sector has collapsed in Scotland and the pledge for 2,800 homes is low in comparison with what can, and should be, achieved.
The rent controls policy, although politically well meaning in the short term, has had long-term consequences, which we need to accept. As a result, renters, particularly in the capital, are being priced out of homes—that is especially the case for new tenants who are trying to find a home.
Missing from the actions to tackle the housing crisis are new actions on void and empty properties, and I know that many SNP members who serve on the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee are as frustrated about the issue as I am. In Edinburgh, there are 3,000 council-owned properties that are sitting empty. That is totally unacceptable. That number has remained at that level for years now, including during the housing emergency we are experiencing in the capital. One of my requests to ministers is for them to take forward a joint piece of work with councils to urgently audit and allocate those properties to get them back into use.
The member mentioned that he was due to meet the Minister for Housing soon. I am sure that during that meeting, the minister will furnish him with the details of the work that we are undertaking with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to look at the issue of voids. That includes what national Government can do and what the responsibility of local government is because, quite frankly, there have been voids in some councils for too long, and it is their responsibility to tackle them. We are also looking at what energy providers, for example, can do, because one of the main challenges relates to the meter changes that need to take place. We are working on the problem, and will furnish the member with more details.
I will give Miles Briggs the time back.
I welcome that, and I have been in constant discussion with the Minister for Housing.
We also need to look at the new models that have not been taken forward. For example, during the summer, I met the charity Right There in Glasgow. It works to prevent people from becoming homeless and being separated from their loved ones and it has taken over the leases of properties. Many charities are looking to provide extra-care housing, which would make a huge difference. In the past, councils have used such models, but we have not seen as many of those types of models being used. I hope that a new model can be used, because there should be no homes that sit empty for years on end, as there are in the capital. Perth and Kinross Council should be praised for the work that it has been doing with the PKC lets initiative in order to bring empty homes back into use. However, we need to see changes.
I turn to yesterday’s announcement that SNP ministers plan not to deliver on the commitment to expand free school meals to all primary-age pupils. The Scottish Conservatives championed that policy at the 2021 election, and there was—I believe—cross-party consensus that it would have a positive impact on child poverty and address stigma, as was raised during First Minister’s question time today. The promise to expand eligibility to all pupils was made in last year’s programme for government, and MSPs on all sides of the chamber were working to deliver on that.
We on the Conservative side of the chamber want to see the policy delivered, and we have looked to models to support the continuation of that, not just during the school week but in the summer holidays. I am extremely disappointed, therefore, that ministers have taken that action, and I hope that we see a change in that regard.
The First Minister said yesterday that the
“Government does not command a majority in this Parliament”.—[Official Report, 4 September 2024; c 23.]
Scottish Conservatives want to work cross-party in the Parliament to ensure that there is progress on the issue of free school meals, and that that is fixed at the time of the budget, if not before. Resources have been allocated to councils, and I hope that the First Minister will be open to looking at how we restore and deliver the policy and at the costs that are associated with its delivery—through, for example, a cross-party committee.
Finally, I am disappointed that the Government has decided not to proceed with a learning disability, autism and neurodivergence bill, nor with a human rights bill. Ministers had made pledges to many MSPs that both those bills would include important changes and legislative vehicles to deliver reforms—where they will now go, we do not know.
You need to conclude.
Finally, I note that the programme for government was a missed opportunity to develop opportunities to end child poverty. We need to work across parties to do that.
I move amendment S6M-14322.2, to leave out from “14” to end and insert:
“17 years of financial mismanagement by the Scottish Government; notes that 26% of children live in poverty in Scotland, and that this rate has remained largely unchanged since 2007; recognises that the number of children in temporary accommodation has reached 10,000, which has increased by 138% since 2014; urges the Scottish Government to recognise that child poverty has a detrimental impact on the health of children, and notes that, by September 2023, the percentage of children waiting over 12 weeks for medical care increased to 49.8%, and that the total number of paediatric waits was 10,512, which was a 114.6% increase from October 2012; calls on the Scottish Government to recognise that the poverty-related attainment gap poses another barrier for children, and notes that, in 2024, the pass rates at National 5, Higher and Advanced Higher were at record low levels since 2016; urges the Scottish Ministers to accept the findings of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee’s report, Addressing Child Poverty Through Parental Employment, and calls on the Scottish Government to deliver a holistic strategy for tackling child poverty, which ensures that no child in Scotland goes without safe housing, modern and efficient local healthcare, and high-quality educational opportunities.”
15:26
As always when we debate child poverty, I start by highlighting the consensus that—as we have already heard this afternoon—there is no more important mission or goal, and no more important subject that we debate in the chamber.
The goal to eradicate child poverty, as the Government’s motion sets out, is laudable, and members will find no disagreement from those of us on the Labour benches on the need for a national mission in that regard. However, we have to be realistic, because this is a debate on the programme for government, and reflect that the Scottish Government has been saying that it wants to take meaningful action on child poverty for the past 17 years.
Indeed, the First Minister said yesterday that he has been in this Parliament for every single programme for government. I have been in Parliament for only four programmes for government, under three SNP First Ministers; two of them were in the chamber earlier, and I know that the current First Minister has had to go to another engagement.
The reality is that, each time that there has been a programme for government under those successive First Ministers, tackling child poverty has been at the top of the agenda, and yet we know that, year after year, things have not been getting better—in fact, they have often been getting worse. We have had reannouncement after reannouncement of policy, and very little in the way of new and innovative thinking. That is borne out by much of the commentary that we have seen in the past day or so on the programme for government.
We should look at the numbers: 30,000 children are in relative poverty, which is more children in relative poverty than when the SNP came into office 17 years ago. It is 260,000—
Will the member take an intervention?
In a moment—I will just make this point.
That is 260,000 children in total across Scotland, according to the most recent figures. They will go through the important years of their lives without many of the essentials that they need.
I give way to the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills.
I am listening to the member recount the challenges that the Scottish Government faces. I hope that he will also be mindful that the Scottish Government does not exist in a financial silo. In February this year, the Child Poverty Action Group noted that “Holyrood policies are working”, but that the
“UK government must also invest in social security to reverse long-term damage to living standards, starting by scrapping the two-child limit and benefit cap, and restoring the value of child benefit.”
Does the member agree with that?
The cabinet secretary and I debated issues around child poverty five or six times in the chamber pre-election, and each time that we did so, I made it clear that the financial decisions and ruinous policies of the Conservative Party have led to an exacerbation of poverty. That is what the new Labour Government, eight weeks in, is going to set about beginning to fix.
We have to fix the foundations of our economy, and ensure that—crucially—work pays. That is why one of the first actions that the Labour Government took was to instruct the Low Pay Commission to look at how we make the national minimum wage a living wage, and at how we implement a new deal for working people that will create security at work and ensure that zero-hours contracts are gone and people do not have to worry about working two or three insecure jobs.
We already know—and, crucially, the organisations that the cabinet secretary referenced would agree—that in-work poverty is a serious issue that we need to deal with if we are to address child poverty. She made a point about the role of the social security system at UK level. We now have a child poverty task force at UK level that is considering reform of universal credit, which does not work and needs fundamental reform. That is the work that Labour has undertaken, within just eight weeks of forming the UK Government.
However, as I have said, the SNP has had 17 years. Quite frankly, the numbers that I have read out illustrate 17 years of failure on many of those policies. Reading the programme for government, we have a sense that there is no new thinking and very little imagination. We have seen the broken promises that have been made, which members across the chamber have already referenced.
It is not just the Labour Party that has formed such an analysis of the Government’s work on those issues. Indeed, the Scottish Government’s own Poverty and Inequality Commission has said that progress to reach the legally binding targets that were agreed by all parties in the chamber has been
“slow or not evident at all”
and that
“without immediate and significant action, the Scottish Government will not meet the 2030 targets”.
Therefore, much more needs to happen to drive our progress towards those targets. In their speeches, members will outline much of that in more detail, but it is clear that we need to have more funding and support for local authorities to ensure that they can deliver at local level on tackling poverty and inequality for children and young people. We need to ensure that we continue to move forward on early learning and childcare. I do not think that the reannouncement of reannouncements on pilot funding will be enough to move the dial in that area.
Alongside the work that the UK Government is doing on wages and on secure work, we need to ensure that more people in Scotland can get into work. In particular, we need to support the work that is being done across the third sector, in very difficult circumstances. Just this morning, the Social Justice and Social Security Committee heard about the challenges that exist in the third sector, and I urge the cabinet secretary to read that evidence. We must ensure that the excellent work that is being done, in particular to help women to return to the workplace, is being well supported and well funded.
More of the same is not going to cut it. This morning I was surprised to hear the Deputy First Minister on “Good Morning Scotland” saying, of the programme for government in relation to child poverty:
“It does not always take brand-new initiatives. Sometimes it is just about focusing on the things that are working really well.”
It would be useful if the cabinet secretary could explain what could have been working so well when 30,000 more children have been living in poverty over that 17-year period.
Will the member take an intervention?
I think that I am now in my last minute, but I will take the intervention if I can have the time back, Presiding Officer.
Yes, indeed.
Despite the circumstances that we are in with the finances, the Government’s programme is keeping 100,000 children out of poverty. I would say that that is a success. We could do more if only we were without the shackles imposed by Westminster.
It would be useful to understand how that figure has been arrived at, because the Deputy First Minister had trouble articulating it this morning on “Good Morning Scotland”. It would also be useful if, in her summing up, the cabinet secretary could explain how the modelling has reached that figure, because a number of organisations are concerned about the number that she has used.
I am aware that I need to conclude, Presiding Officer. I imagine that there will be much more to say in the coming weeks and months as the programme for government begins to move forward. I am very clear that members on this side of the chamber will work constructively with the Government, as it has sought to do with the UK Government. I encourage it to engage with the child poverty task force at UK level and to support action to create a new deal for working people and improve wages across the UK. There can be no more important issue than tackling and eradicating child poverty, and we must focus all our energy and resource on that.
I move amendment S6M-14322.1, to leave out from first “notes” to end and insert:
“agrees that child poverty should be a national mission for the Scottish Government, but deeply regrets that, after 17 years of a Scottish National Party (SNP) administration, there are 30,000 more children in poverty; acknowledges that child poverty rates across the UK have risen under the economic mismanagement of the previous Conservative administration, but also recognises that Scotland has its own legally-binding child poverty reduction targets that the SNP administration is likely to miss, despite successive First Ministers declaring action on child poverty to be a priority; notes the damning assessment by Scotland’s Poverty and Inequality Commission that progress from the SNP administration in tackling child poverty “is slow or not evident at all”; is deeply concerned by the Scottish Government’s decision to cut measures that act as barriers to poverty, including cuts to the affordable housing budget, parental employability schemes, the Fuel Insecurity Fund and the freeze to the Scottish Welfare Fund; condemns cuts to education funding, including the Pupil Equity Fund, digital device provision and attainment funding in the poorest local authorities; agrees that there is a need to tackle in-work poverty and so welcomes the work of the UK Labour administration to strengthen workers’ rights, review Universal Credit, build a fairer social security system, and deliver a pay rise for 200,000 of the lowest-paid people in Scotland with a genuine living wage; welcomes the establishment of a cross-government Child Poverty Ministerial Taskforce by the UK Government, and encourages the Scottish Government to work collaboratively to tackle the root causes of poverty across Scotland.”
15:34
This is a time of want and of need. People are afraid. Some are angry, and some are beyond desperate. Far too many children are hungry, cold, sleeping in unsafe places and excluded from going on the ordinary trips and having the toys that their classmates take for granted. Westminster politicians who, before they were elected, were telling stories of cohesion and solidarity are now in government, speaking the language of austerity. They wear their self-imposed fiscal policies like medals of military virtue, justifying cuts that bite to the bone.
Scotland, it seems, is imprisoned in a cage of consequentials, unable, as is claimed, to break the consensus and do what its people—its children in poverty—need it to do. I am not talking about 2024, although I could be. Thirteen years ago, in 2011, the Christie commission published its powerful, wise and widely acclaimed report. It was a time of conscious austerity, when social, economic and political pressures weighed heavily on Scotland’s communities. We were warned that budgets would buckle unless Scotland embraced a radically new collaborative culture—one that recognised the devastating effect of inequality and learned to prioritise preventative measures.
Tragically, that has not happened. As Mary Glasgow of Children 1st pointed out three years ago, marking the 10th anniversary of the report,
“While Christie couldn’t predict the pandemic, he clearly understood that when public finances were tightest, the need for investment in prevention was greatest. Yet when budgets are squeezed, preventative spend is always the first to go.”
We can see that now, urgently highlighted by the programme for government briefings that we have received from civil society—those who see, day in, day out, the excruciating impacts of not doing prevention properly; of not breaking those cycles of deprivation and trauma; and of condemning another generation, and another and another, to the waste and misery of poverty, the vastly unequal risks of poor physical and mental health, victimisation, incarceration and early death.
As the Child Poverty Action Group reiterates,
“Prioritising further action to tackle child poverty is a long-term investment, not just for families, but for Scotland’s economic security and the sustainability of public services.”
The Coalition of Care and Support Providers in Scotland shared a striking example of prevention in action—the way in which short breaks for children with disabilities can forestall the need for much more overwhelming, expensive and potentially damaging forms of intervention later in their lives.
“Mend the roof while the sun shines”, folk wisdom tells us. However, if we have not done that—if the sun never quite seemed bright enough, and if there was so much to be done to tidy the front garden—we need to get out in the rain and do it.
This is not about blame—opportunities have been missed by everyone—but this is, in every sense of the word, a crisis. The Scottish Trades Union Congress general secretary, Roz Foyer, said that the cuts announced this week mean that
“workers and communities across Scotland will be scarred for generations to come.”
Scotland’s children do not need any more scars. They need, as an absolute minimum, the policies that are set out in our Scottish Green amendment: an increased Scottish child payment to the value of at least £40 per week for every eligible child as soon as possible, but definitely by the end of this parliamentary session; support into employment for parents, especially lone parents and those from minoritised communities; a full, independent and then implemented review of childcare in Scotland, so that we can understand exactly what is needed where, as called for by Pregnant Then Screwed and many other organisations; and, of course, the completed roll-out of universal free school meals in primary schools, as had previously been promised.
This is about children’s rights—not just a pious aspiration to ending their poverty but a solemn, serious obligation on the part of the Government to make their lives liveable. Incorporation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child was the beginning of that process, but children’s rights do not stand alone. They cannot be fulfilled unless their parents’ and carers’ rights are protected, too. As Engender rightly points out, women’s poverty and children’s poverty are “inextricably linked”. Those include rights to life, to a decent standard of living, to privacy, to health and food, to a clean environment and to protection from discrimination.
We are all vulnerable, although some of us have thicker armour to wear. We all need respect, care, safety and pathways to remedy when those are withheld. That is why UNCRC incorporation should have been followed by a Scottish human rights bill, which was promised for so long and worked for so hard by many people and groups from across Scotland, while the world watched on with hope and encouragement. It is a bitter disappointment that both that bill and the one that would have protected Scotland’s children from pernicious and toxic conversion practices are missing from this week’s programme for government.
Poverty is a breach of human rights, as is so clearly articulated by the Poverty Alliance. We have a moral and ethical obligation to act to protect, support and love those who should expect to inherit the earth. Each and every one of us needs to work together to fulfil that vision and requirement.
I move amendment S6M-14322.3, to leave out from “; further notes” to “once and for all” and insert:
“, but also notes the Child Poverty Action Group’s finding that Scottish Government policy is not yet adequate to ensure that child poverty targets are met, and that bold, decisive action is required; believes that part of that bold, decisive action must include increasing the Scottish Child Payment to at least £40 a week by the end of the current parliamentary session, providing accessible employability support, especially for lone parents, and establishing an independent review of childcare in Scotland to ensure the provision of what is most needed, as well as robust rent controls to complement affordable housing; notes with deep concern the apparent change in position from the Scottish Government on free school meal provision for all primary school children, with the Programme for Government only committed to expanding free school meals to those in receipt of the Scottish Child Payment in P6 and P7; calls on the Scottish Government to urgently confirm whether it is still its intention to complete the full roll-out that was previously promised; believes that the previously promised Human Rights Bill for Scotland would have provided the framework for improving Scotland’s public services, delivering its minimum core obligations, and thereby eradicating child poverty; expresses its deep dismay that the Human Rights Bill does not appear in the Programme for Government; calls on the Scottish Government to ensure that the burdens of its financial decisions do not fall upon the shoulders of Scotland’s most marginalised people, including families in poverty”.
15:40
I am sure that Maggie Chapman is sincere in what she has just spoken about, but I wish that she had used the influence that she had during her time in government to deliver some of the measures that she has now set out, which were sadly missing from that time.
In St Andrews, which I represent, there is the Old course, where it costs £300 at the height of summer for a round of golf. Less than a mile away is the St Davids centre, which is home to the St Andrews food bank. One would never think that St Andrews would have a food bank, but it has—unfortunately—a thriving food bank. The people who use that food bank come from the town and the wider area. They are good people who want to make a contribution to their society, but they are saddled with physical illness, mental illness, disability and other factors that prevent them from working. We need their talents and skills if we want our economy and our society to flourish. That should be the fundamental basis on which we approach this debate.
The challenge is that we have roughly one in four children in poverty, and the target is to get that figure, within just five years, down to 10 per cent. The challenge is enormous, and, as Paul O’Kane said, we have had some years to try to address it—if only we had had that focus at an earlier stage. Nevertheless, it is good that the issue is the focus of this debate.
We support the measures on the Scottish child payment in the programme for government. We think that it is a good thing, but it should not be seen as a mark of success that we require such a large child payment for so many people. It should be a sign of a system failure that we require such a large payment for so many people over such a long period of time. Of course we need it, and of course it should be in place, but we should aspire for no one to require that child payment and for no one to require that level of support from the state—that should be our mark of success. I hear ministers say, quite rightly, that they are proud of the child payment, but they should not celebrate the fact that so many people require it. We should regret that fact.
Instead, I would want to focus on helping people to help themselves. I am not proposing to change the policy on the child payment, but we should be putting as much focus on the barriers for the people I know from St Andrews who are desperate to make a contribution to their society.
Two thousand people are waiting over a year to get the mental health treatment that they require. The number of suicides, according to the latest reported figures, was up by 4 per cent. However, the programme for government, in the costed statement that was presented on Tuesday, set out a £19 million cut to mental health support. That does not match up. That does not meet the needs of people who are desperate to get back to work.
Good education, as the education secretary pointed out, is a way of lifting people up. It is a great leveller and gives people from all backgrounds opportunities. I am a big supporter of moving to the vocational side of education—I think that that is very important. Early learning and childcare provision is incredibly important. However, the poverty-related attainment gap has hardly moved at all. We have had this debate before. The education secretary knows that she is not making the progress that she would want to make. The gap is not going to close, or even substantially reduce, by 2026. Yesterday, the First Minister said that he hoped that the gap would be closed a bit every year up to 2026, so that goal has been diluted significantly. At the same time, we have seen real-terms cuts to the pupil equity fund, and two-year-olds are not taking up the early learning and childcare offer that started back in 2012 and 2013. We need to have a real focus on education, as it is a great opportunity to lift people up.
On housing, the fact that 10,000 children live in temporary accommodation should be a cause of shame, because providing good housing is a way for people to thrive, and people having a good, warm, settled home means that they can contribute to society. However, the numbers of new starts and approvals for new properties are at a 10-year low, and the target for affordable homes is all but gone, according to many interest groups and housing associations. The £196 million cut has dealt a massive blow in that area.
I hope that the cabinet secretary will refer to the whole family wellbeing fund when she sums up, because it is concerning that it is not specified in the programme for government. The fund was not really matching the £500 million spend by 2026—we had a long way to catch up.
Just in case I run out of time in my closing speech, I am happy to commit, once again, to the Scottish Government providing £500 million for the whole family wellbeing fund. Willie Rennie will know the work that we have been doing to invest £110 million in that programme of activity so far. I hope that that gives him some reassurance.
It certainly does. It will take some doing to spend the £500 million by 2026, because only, I think, £120 million has been spent so far, but, if the Government is able to implement the policy, it will make a tremendous difference. That is very good and reassuring news.
The two-child cap should, of course, go. I hope that the Labour Government at Westminster gets round to making that happen when the finances are right for it, from its policy perspective. That, for me, is important, because the policy is a symbol of holding back people, including young people, from opportunities in life.
There is so much to do in this session of Parliament and so much for us to get right, whether it is on housing, mental health, education or early years. As there is so much to do in those areas, I hope that the Parliament and all the contributions from SNP back benchers will focus on the challenges that this place has rather than on those that others have, because, that way, we have a chance of reducing child poverty in this country.
We move to the open debate.
15:47
Any reasonable person would acknowledge the Scottish Government’s massive financial investment in tackling child poverty. The SNP programme for government seeks to bolt down a lot of those clear successes and to secure them sustainably for the future, but it also seeks to consider what we can do further.
We know that the annual £450 million for the Scottish child payment has made a real difference. It is part of the investment that has prevented 100,000 children from falling into poverty and it has, importantly—it often goes unsaid—made a huge qualitative difference to the lives of not just those 100,000 children but to the lives of all 329,000 children who receive the Scottish child payment.
Particular mention should be made of the range of best start grant and best start foods payments, which are a real focused investment that is sometimes forgotten about. We must look at what more we can do in that area.
The Scottish Government’s action has removed the blight of poverty for many people, and it has ensured essential cash support for many other families, given the woefully inadequate social protections of the previous UK Government, which now—genuinely disappointingly—appear to be those of the current UK Labour Government.
We know that child poverty is lower in Scotland than it is in any other part of the UK, including in Wales, where Labour has been in control since the inception of devolution there. Current statistics suggest that child poverty is 6 per cent lower in Scotland than it is in the UK—it is, of course, still far too high—and modelling work shows that relative child poverty in Scotland could be as much as 11 percentage points lower than it is in the UK. The figure is, again, still too high, but we must be doing something right in Scotland and we should not throw the baby out with the bath water—as, I think, Mr O’Kane was doing with his comment about the Scottish child payment not having been that effective. I hope that Labour remains committed to the Scottish child payment: I am worried by some of Mr O’Kane’s comments.
I do not think that Bob Doris can characterise my comments as saying that the Scottish child payment was ineffective. Mr Doris has heard me in the chamber, as has the cabinet secretary, being supportive of the Scottish child payment. Indeed, the Labour Party supported its inception and the work that we continue to do. The point that I am making is that the Government has to be very careful about the data and the model that it uses to analyse and report the general impacts to the Parliament.
Mr O’Kane’s previous comments are on the record. He just said that he believes that the Scottish child payment has been effective. I will return to that later.
It is wholly disheartening to see the Labour amendment trying to apportion blame to the Scottish Government for child poverty challenges in Scotland. Yes—we have a responsibility, but apportioning entirely to us blame for child poverty in Scotland misses the bigger picture. Now that Labour is the UK Government, that is deeply worrying, because it ignores 14 years of UK Westminster austerity, which has targeted our most vulnerable people. As the First Minister has stated, Scotland has been swimming against the tide to tackle child poverty because of detrimental actions that have been taken by successive UK Governments. Labour ignores the divergence between child poverty in Scotland and that in the rest of the UK. Quite frankly, Scotland has done far better, often with cross-party support, and we must do much more.
A key part of the motion is where it talks about
“working constructively with the UK Government”.
That is why I was disappointed to hear Labour members in the debate not necessarily embracing the positive impact of the Scottish child payment. If MPs and MSPs in Scotland, on a cross-party basis, believe that the Scottish child payment has been effective, let us join together in solidarity and campaign for a child payment for England and Wales. Mr O’Kane believes that the payment has been effective in Scotland. Why not have the same for England and Wales? At a stroke, it would release £450 million more spending every single year in Scotland for some of the stuff that Mr Rennie and others want. I hope that we can get that cross-party consensus in Scotland, because it would be really powerful.
Perhaps we can get cross-party consensus on something else, which is the axing of the bedroom tax. Let us remember that it was first introduced by the Labour Party for the private rented sector. It has been mitigated by the Scottish National Party to the tune of £618 million since 2013, and has benefited 92,000 households—£76 million has been spent this year alone—to ensure that people on the lowest incomes have enough money to pay their rent. That does not happen elsewhere in the UK. Let us have cross-party solidarity on that—bringing that money home to Scotland and helping people elsewhere in the UK.
Bob Doris talks about cross-party solidarity. Will he, today, join in solidarity with those who want all primary 6 and 7 pupils to have free school meals?
I think that Mr Briggs is a bit behind the times. When I joined Parliament in 2007, there were no universal free school meals in Scotland. I campaigned for free school meals until the end of secondary 2. Provision up to P5 is universal, and we are making progress on P6 and P7. It is disappointing that, due to UK austerity, we cannot go further. I am on record saying that I want universal free school meals in secondary 1 and S2. I do not know what I would be signing up to, but I think that I would go further than doing what Miles Briggs is calling for.
Finally, let me talk a bit about the cliff edge that is created by universal credit and its interaction with the Scottish child payment. Any review of universal credit by the UK Labour Government should consider whether it can support continuation of the Scottish child payment once universal credit is withdrawn, because that is a real cliff edge in terms of benefit loss to people who are in work. That would benefit the kind of people whom Mr Rennie talked about, such as those in part-time work who are trying to get into full-time work but risk losing the Scottish child payment. That is a big financial risk for them. Let us make sure that the two systems—the UK system of universal credit and the Scottish child payment system—talk to each other, and that the systems dovetail, so that we can work for everyone who is living in poverty, not just to lift them out of poverty but sustain them into meaningful and well-paid work.
15:53
We have heard today and, indeed, over a number of years, who the Scottish National Party thinks is to blame for child poverty. No doubt we will, no matter the outcome of this debate, hear it many more times. However, seeing as we are standing here in Edinburgh, in the Scottish Parliament, where the SNP has been in power for more than 17 years, let us start at home.
We have heard the Scottish Government talk about its commitment to eradicating child poverty. That pledge has been made in speeches, press releases, statements, manifestos and, most recently, in the programme for government. However, since the SNP came to power in 2007, the level of child poverty in Scotland has remained the same.
Despite the SNP having full control over health, education and many other key devolved portfolio areas, nothing has changed. Perhaps some of that failure can be attributed to another SNP pledge that came to nothing—the pledge to reduce Scotland’s poverty-related attainment gap. Perhaps if ministers had succeeded in closing that educational gulf, they would not now need to spend so much time talking about child poverty. Perhaps if their actions even occasionally matched their warm words, tens of thousands of young lives would have been enhanced. Instead, we are back to square 1.
As an MSP for the Glasgow region, I see the effects of child poverty as clearly as anyone. The ripples go through society and the economy. They can drag down schools, community centres and local facilities and worsen the mood of just about everyone.
Key infrastructure, including schools, is important. One way or another, most MSPs believe that education is the best way to deliver opportunity and that it is a way out of poverty. All kids deserve to go to school, where they will be cared for, educated well and nurtured. It should be that way from the moment they step inside the school gates for the first time, as so many young ones across the country have done in the past few weeks.
One immediate commitment that the Government could make is to properly rolling out free lunches for every pupil in primary school, but, as we have heard today, that will not be happening. That would ensure that, at the very least, those children were not being expected to learn on an empty stomach, and it would take some pressure off the household budget for many hard-pressed families.
There is more that can be done. Violence in schools has become a problem in recent years, with a number of news reports showing increases in the number of pupils, as well as teachers, being attacked. The very fact that the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills made a statement on the matter earlier in the week proves that there must be a growing problem. We cannot have young people being too scared to attend class and teachers too frightened and downtrodden to work. We need to give schools the powers and resources to properly crack down on bad behaviour, which can ruin the experience for a whole class and drive down the overall performance of a school.
However, it is the failure to close the poverty-related attainment gap that causes the most long-term damage. Despite it famously being the former First Minister’s top priority, in the years since, it has been downgraded to something that one minister described as
“exceptionally difficult, if not impossible”.—[Official Report, Education, Children and Young People Committee, 18 January 2023; c 24.]
That dearth of ambition was played out in the recent figures that show that the gap has widened in the past year from 16 to 17.2 percentage points. That represents thousands and thousands of children whose futures are determined by where they grow up.
The conditions are not much better for their parents. The situation around childcare is a mess and is making life more difficult for parents—and, let us face it, childcare is almost always on women. In order to get back to work and to get the family bank balance up again, they need proper childcare. However, research in Scotland has repeatedly shown that parents are not getting the childcare that they want or need. Despite an expansion of free childcare provision, the system remains “fragile”, according to Scotland’s own public services watchdog.
It will be harder to change the short, medium and long-term prospects of any family if the children are not getting on as they should in school and the parents do not have the flexibility that they need in order to work. It is within the gift of the Scottish Government to find a way to solve those problems.
Research has shown time and again that the people of Scotland want the Scottish and UK Governments to work more closely together. They want that to be the case across all areas and at all times. However, never has the case for joint working and collaborative effort been more essential than it is for enhancing the prospects of the next generation. That cannot be done unless real changes are made and the dial on child poverty is shifted once and for all. My party agrees with John Swinney that that is one of the single most important objectives. It is time for both Governments to show that they really mean it.
15:59
I am really grateful to stand here today to speak about one of the most pressing issues that we face in Scotland, which is child poverty. It is a call to create a society where every child, no matter their life circumstances, can realise their full potential and where every child has a full tummy, a home fit for purpose and clothing that they feel comfortable and happy in.
Writing this speech gave me cause to reflect on moments of my own life, as I am sure that we all do when pondering issues for debate. I remember back to a time in my life when I was scared for the future of my children, when I became a newly single mother. My circumstances changed unexpectedly, and the challenges that lay ahead felt overwhelming, but because of the safety net of our welfare system, my children and I were able to remain stable. I did not have to move them from their home, their schools or their friends, and I could focus on ensuring that they had food, shelter and, most importantly, security. That support was crucial to our wellbeing. Today, five of my children are in further education and I am here in this Parliament, serving my community. Without that safety net, my story might have been very different. That is the reality for many families.
Poverty is not just a statistic; it is a barrier that can prevent children from achieving their dreams and from fulfilling their potential. When we talk about realising potential, we are talking about more than just individual success. The realisation of potential is good for the child and their family, but it goes further than that: it is good for our communities, it is good for our economy and, ultimately, it is good for our country. When children grow up with opportunities, they become adults who contribute to society in meaningful ways. A society where potential is fulfilled is a society that thrives. I am grateful that my country invested in me and my children, so that we can now pay that back.
However, potential can be realised only when the roadblocks are removed. The barriers that poverty creates, be they financial, social or educational, are often dictated by the circumstances that a child is born into. It is our responsibility to remove those barriers and ensure that every child has the chance to succeed, no matter their background.
What I have come to realise, through my personal experience and my work here in the Parliament, is how often we overlook welfare as an investment. Welfare is not a burden on society—it is a crucial investment in the health, happiness and productivity of our people. By ensuring that people have the support that they need, we are laying the groundwork for a thriving economy and a stronger, more cohesive society.
Welfare goes further than simply preventing immediate hardship. Through the provision of welfare, we are setting the stage for long-term success. Children who grow up with food security, stable housing and access to education are more likely to become healthy, productive adults who can contribute positively. The contrary causes pressure on public services and feeds the criminal justice system.
As I thought about the Scottish Government’s commitment to tackling child poverty, I pictured two possible futures for a child—one with support and one without it. Let us take a child named Scott, who was born into financial hardship. Their future could follow two very different paths.
In one scenario, Scott’s parents receive a baby box that is filled with essentials for those early months and they get the Scottish child payment. That small financial lifeline helps them to keep the heating on, to put healthy meals on the table and maybe even to enjoy a family day out. Scott goes to a nursery where they receive free, quality education, giving them the best start in life. The parents, relieved of childcare costs, can balance work and home life, and they slowly build a stable future.
In another scenario, there is no baby box and no child payment. The family struggles to afford the basics and the stress spills over into Scott’s life. With no free childcare, the parents face an impossible choice: stay at home to care for Scott or take on extra work, leaving Scot without that crucial early education. The family remains stuck in survival mode and Scott struggles to get ahead of their peers.
Free school meals and affordable housing are more than just policies. They make the difference between children like Scott having the chance to thrive and their being held back by circumstances beyond their control. The provision of such measures is not just support; it is an investment in our children, our communities, our NHS and our country’s future. When we break down the barriers of poverty, every child can have a myriad of opportunities opened to them.
As much as we seek to strive to tackle child poverty here in Scotland, we are confined by devolution. Without the full powers of independence, we are reliant on the UK Government exercising those powers that we do not hold. The UK Government’s policies include the two-child limit on benefits, the cap on universal credit and a welfare system that fails to guarantee even the most basic essentials. The UK Government could choose to remove those poverty-causing barriers and lift an additional 40,000 children in Scotland out of poverty.
At a time when Tory and now Labour austerity continues putting pressure on public finances, we must all call on the UK Government to follow in the footsteps of the Scottish Government and prioritise the eradication of child poverty. We must never forget that investing in our children’s future is not a cost—it is a benefit.
16:05
I begin by thanking Karen Adam for her very affecting and at times moving account of her own experience some years ago of the real benefits of the welfare state. It is not often that we hear how enabling and empowering the benefits system can be; when we talk about those realities, we often hear negative language about people’s experience of that system.
I do not agree that this Parliament is confined by devolution. In fact, I think that we are empowered by it. Many things have been described already today and I am sure that we will hear about more. This Parliament, and the Government that serves it, can do so much more, because it benefits from additional funding of £2,417 per head of population. We can decide how we want to spend that extra money, and we rightly do so on the Scottish child payment. Paul O’Kane clearly set out our support for that and for the difference that it makes to families across Scotland.
I welcome today’s debate on something that we were told by the First Minister is a key priority in the programme for government. When he spoke about that programme yesterday, we heard little about new ways but heard of significant reduction in means. As my colleagues have said, he is now the third First Minister to make a priority of reducing child poverty, but there has been little progress in doing so. In fact, 30,000 more children are living in poverty in Scotland than when the SNP Government came to power.
Child poverty has grown since Labour left Government in the UK, as a direct result of decisions made by the Conservative Government, both because of the choices that it made regarding funding and significant reductions in the welfare state and the benefits that are paid to people but, crucially, because of the kind of economy that that Conservative Government thought we should have—a low-wage, low-skill, low-growth economy where inequality grows within and between communities. We know that, by the end of the Parliament that just finished, and for the first time in history, families were poorer than they had been at the outset. That is a clear indication of the lost economic growth that would have made a difference to people’s incomes and bank balances.
Eight weeks into the new Government, I believe that there has been a significant departure. All Governments should be judged in the long term and by what they manage to do and achieve over many years. The SNP has had an unprecedented term in government here in Scotland. We know that no Government gets everything right and that the Labour Government will not get everything right, just as this SNP Government certainly has not, but we should be judged in the long term.
The early signs are positive. The first action that we took was to instruct the Low Pay Commission to establish a living wage. Many people who are in poverty are in work, and that scandal of low pay will be addressed through a new deal for working people and enhanced rights, which will make a significant difference. Those rights reflect some of the key problems for people accessing work and will include giving rights on day 1 and removing the problem of zero-hours contracts.
We must also address the economy as it is, rather than as we would have it be. We know that Scotland has a commitment to 1,140 hours of free childcare, but we must ensure that there is increased flexibility within that. Some of what the cabinet secretary set out in her opening remarks was about flexibility, looking at what has been done for a small cohort of people in Dundee. We would like to see the evidence about how that can make a difference. I commend to her the work of Flexible Childcare Services Scotland, which also operates in Dundee and has put provision in place so that people who are offered an extra shift at work—sometimes with no notice at all—have the option to send their child to that care so that they can realise that shift and put some extra money in their bank account, making a massive difference.
We must also ensure that there is access to proper work. The Finance and Public Administration Committee visited the University of Dundee last week. I was happy to have the committee in my home city and asked university senior management how we can ensure careers and opportunities, not only for new Dundonians from our international community but for people who have been in Dundee for many years, because we have a significant problem with people being out of the labour market. The senior management was clear that the funded pathway into employment in those kinds of jobs has been narrowed and narrowed. The upskilling fund and graduate apprenticeships have been dropped under the provisions that have been made by the Government. Those are the routes out of poverty and in-work poverty for many people.
We should be clear that—contrary to what are, frankly, the statistical contortions of the First Minister over the past 24 hours—the attainment gap is growing in Scotland. That is absolutely clear. I use the example of Dundee again. The previous Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills made cuts to attainment funding for the poorest communities in Dundee. That money was spread more widely across the country, but there was a significant cut to the money that was available to the poorest communities in Scotland.
Today, we also see the cuts to the free school meals promise. Let us be in no doubt that that is a result of the Scottish Government’s budget and its mishandling of the finances. The Institute for Fiscal Studies, the Fraser of Allander Institute, Audit Scotland and the Scottish Fiscal Commission say that that choice is a result of its mistakes. John Swinney is the third First Minister to set the destination but, as in so many ways across the many top priorities, this is a Government that has lost its way.
Marie McNair is joining us remotely.
16:10
I am pleased to speak in this debate on the programme for government and the Scottish Government’s commitment to eradicating child poverty. It is essential that that is the single most important objective of the Scottish Government. The First Minister is right to say that the material wealth of a child’s family should not hold them back in a modern and prosperous Scotland, so I welcome the intended approach that he set out yesterday and that the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills has set out today.
I take this opportunity to put on the record my thanks to all the volunteers, charities and advice agencies in my constituency, who are on the front line. They are there, and they are always there, providing support to so many in poverty.
Despite the harsh Westminster welfare regime, the actions of the Scottish Government are making a difference in tackling child poverty. As a member of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, I regularly hear from charities, academics and those with lived experience about the positive impact of the Scottish child payment. The Poverty Alliance stated that the Scottish child payment
“is having a demonstrably positive impact at an individual household and family level, with Social Security Scotland processes having made applying for this support both less stigmatising and rooted in human rights.”
The Poverty and Inequality Commission said:
“The Scottish Child Payment is undoubtedly a game changer”.
It also said that the importance to reducing child poverty of
“delivering the Scottish Child Payment and getting cash directly to families cannot be overstated”.
The commission’s view has consistently been that the Scottish child payment is the main contributor to progress in reducing child poverty at the national level.
The Joseph Rowntree Foundation gathered evidence in a 4,000-person survey and it found that two people in three felt more financially secure once they received the Scottish child payment. It is a hugely significant policy and one that is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Importantly, however, a lot of experts note that, despite the improvements from the Scottish Government in tackling child poverty, without significant action from the UK Government, we will continue to see children stuck in poverty. That has been made clear by the academic Juliet Stone, who stated:
“The Scottish Child Payment ... is for many families simply acting to offset the consequences of UK-level policies that restrict their incomes—most importantly, the two-child limit and the benefit cap. Fully addressing child poverty in Scotland therefore requires action at a UK level as well as at a national level.”
That really is the elephant in the room. Instead of waiting for the predictable heckling, jeering and relishing of a possible attack on the SNP if targets are not met, I remind all colleagues across the chamber that the targets for reducing child poverty are not the SNP’s alone but targets that were set by our Parliament. They belong to us all. They require us to genuinely contribute to finding solutions and they require both Governments to work together.
Labour MSPs can feel no joy that Tory welfare policy is continuing. Labour’s two-child policy and its abhorrent rape clause are denying children what they need to thrive. Labour MSPs dutifully campaigned for those who were elected and followed the herd, so they should at least have the decency to tell children why they are being denied basic levels of subsistence. How can they say they are serious about eradicating child poverty when they failed at the first hurdle?
The Scottish Government will not shy away from admitting that more can be done. However, without significant action from the UK Government to tackle poverty, our efforts will always be hindered. In ignoring the evidence that is readily available, Labour is failing the first big test of government by ignoring the national scandal of child poverty. That was clear in July, when it suspended the seven Labour MPs who voted to scrap the two-child cap—perhaps the only true socialist parliamentarians left in the party, and they have now been removed.
According to the Child Poverty Action Group, one in nine children are affected by the two-child limit, which is more than 1.6 million children. That policy is actively causing deprivation, and every year it pushes more children into poverty. Labour is making the political choice to keep children in poverty while lifting the cap on bankers’ bonuses—that is the harsh reality of this matter. Prioritising eradicating child poverty means doing the right thing and scrapping the two-child policy and the benefit cap.
We also need to see an essentials guarantee in universal credit. The Trussell Trust points out that almost half of people claiming universal credit ran out of food in the past month and did not have enough money to buy more. It is clear that universal credit is falling short and is pushing people into food banks.
While the UK Labour Party continues to leave children in poverty and its members argue among themselves, the Scottish Government will get on with protecting children in poverty. We will continue to lead the way in tackling child poverty because, for us, this is not just a policy goal; it is a moral imperative and one that we will remain dedicated to achieving.
Let us push forward on the issue and continue to prioritise eradicating child poverty.
16:16
I am perhaps less generous than some colleagues and less optimistic than Willie Rennie. I find myself arriving here today and wondering what the point of this debate is. I do not think that it is real. I am not sure what has depressed me most: the suggestion that we are confined by devolution or watching the glee and joy with which many SNP MSPs have pivoted their attacks from the Conservatives to Labour. It seems that some of these things are more about politics than about moral duty.
Only the Scottish Government, led by this First Minister, could have the brass neck to come here and try to hide behind the most disadvantaged in our society in order to detract from its disastrous tenure.
The First Minister talked of the past 25 years, but he is looking back through rose-tinted spectacles, because the truth is that the Scotland that we see today does not live up to the early promise of this Parliament. The blame lies squarely with the SNP, which, over the past 17 years, has squandered the opportunity to build a better Scotland. The truth is that, for many young people, Scotland is a grim place in which to grow up, and the ministers sitting on the SNP front benches have overseen every minute of that situation for the past 17 years.
We all know that, much like the promises to close the poverty-related attainment gap and to make education the number 1 priority, the Scottish Government’s latest bold ambition will remain just that and is not worth the paper that it is written on. There is little hope, only the same false promises and failed solutions from the same people who keep getting it so badly wrong.
It is true to say that the Scottish Government has shifted the dial, but only in a negative direction. Our once-proud education system is a shadow of its former self, our national health service is crumbling and shrinking inwards towards urban centres, and the promise of a good job and a fair crack at the whip is out of reach for many. Of course, it is always easier to blame someone else—or, in the SNP’s case, everyone else—but that does a disservice to this generation and to future generations.
We hear that budgets are tight, but bad decisions have been made year after year, the wrong priorities have been pursued for the wrong reasons and there has been no strategic oversight or vision. We see that again now. How can the Scottish Government announce that it wants to eradicate child poverty at the same time as rowing back on the commitment to deliver free school meals? How could the First Minister stand up yesterday, and again at First Minister’s questions today, and talk about having the right support available, through pregnancy to birth, when, in the Scotland that he leads—Scotland in 2024—some health boards do not offer in-person antenatal classes? Some of them do not even offer them online.
We live in a country where our Government can no longer get the basics right. It has lost its grip on health boards and on many of the other quangos and organisations that it is responsible for—and that is before we even consider whether the First Minister’s own drive to address child poverty is really credible. This, lest we forget, is an experienced and skilled politician who has served as Scotland’s finance secretary and as its education secretary, all the while brushing away serious challenges in the system and throwing around political insults and soundbites. I know that there has been a transformation and a whole new approach since the First Minister got the top job, but I, for one, do not believe it. The problem is that many of the challenges that we have go beyond simply money, and they stretch over so many budget years that it is laughable to suggest that changes could not have been made if the will had been there. As I say, some of the challenges do not come down to money; they are about questions of leadership.
There has been a litany of failed promises, including on tackling the cost of the school day—we heard about that again at the start of the debate—but very little has been done on it. Branded uniforms are still commonplace in most schools. There are lots of hidden costs in the school day, such as milk. There are no breakfast clubs in many parts of the country, and there is no after-school provision in most parts of the country. There are challenges for people in accessing childcare. Yes, it is good that we have 1,140 hours of funded childcare, but if the provision is not there or is not flexible enough to allow families to go to work, words in the chamber mean nothing.
We have heard from Government members, as always, about the good bits of policy, but they need to have the moral courage to admit that it is patchwork at best and that many of the measures that have been set out are sticking plasters that offer no bold or radical solutions. If that was just a one-off, we could perhaps agree that it is down to budget pressures, but we all know that the lack of vision goes far beyond that. Most families in Scotland know that, when things are tight, people focus on what really matters.
Even as the SNP Government announces a laser-like focus on eradicating child poverty—as it has done I do not know how many times—its decisions show that its focus remains all over the place. In short, this year’s programme for government amounts to nothing more than a mirage of activity in what has been a 17-year-long desert of SNP neglect. It is just a shame that the people of Scotland will have to wait another 20 months before they get the chance to call time on this waste-of-time approach.
16:22
Eradicating child poverty is the single greatest priority for the SNP Scottish Government. No one’s opportunities should be dictated by the circumstances that they are born into, and supporting every child in Scotland is the greatest investment that we can make in our future. Of course, poverty is a multi-faceted issue that requires a range of interventions, and I will touch on some key matters this afternoon.
Social security is one of those areas, and a key part of the Scottish Government’s work to tackle child poverty was the introduction of the Scottish child payment. Charities called the policy a “game changer”, and many academics have spoken of its significance. Professor Danny Dorling, for example, has talked about the impact of the payment through changing the inequality level in Scotland. He suggested that the Scottish child payment has perhaps caused
“the largest fall in child poverty anywhere in Europe”
since the fall of the Berlin wall.
Professor Ruth Patrick told the Social Justice and Social Security Committee that the payment is
“a really well-targeted policy”
that corrects the UK Government’s
“divorcing of the relationship between need and entitlement.”—[Official Report, Social Justice and Social Security Committee, 23 May 2024; c 13.]
The Scottish child payment is worth £26.70 per eligible child per week and puts money into the pockets of hard-pressed parents. The latest data shows that more than 4,400 children in East Kilbride receive the Scottish child payment, so low-income families there are benefiting directly from more than £500,000 through the payment every month.
Of course, policies such as the Scottish child payment do not exist in a vacuum. Right now, the SNP Government is mitigating the worst of the policies that the Tories introduced, such as the bedroom tax and the benefit cap. The mitigation of Westminster welfare policies has cost the SNP Government around £1.2 billion since 2010. I hope that the Labour Government in Westminster will take time to reflect on its plans, because, by keeping Tory fiscal rules, Labour will force more austerity on the people of Scotland.
In the face of Labour cuts at Westminster, Scotland’s Government must work harder and smarter to deliver for Scotland, using the limited resources that are available. The programme for government sets out some of the ways in which we can do that, particularly on child poverty.
As the First Minister outlined, eradicating child poverty and boosting economic growth go hand in hand. It is estimated that child poverty cost the Scottish economy more than £3 billion in 2023 as a result of lower productivity and the investment that is required to mitigate poverty’s harmful effects. The First Minister’s vision to grow Scotland’s economy and create jobs will, in turn, support investment in Scotland’s vital public services and ambitious anti-poverty measures. That ties in with the Social Justice and Social Security Committee’s work on parental employment.
Another important policy area is housing. We know that there are challenges on that, particularly with house building, in the current economic climate and, of course, given Westminster’s £1.3 billion cut to Scotland’s capital budget. However, the SNP in government continues to deliver more affordable housing per person than the Governments in England and Wales. We have already delivered more than 130,000 affordable homes. As the programme for government outlined, another £600 million will be invested this year to continue that work.
Will the member take an intervention?
I am sorry, but I will just move on.
With that investment in affordable housing, the SNP Government is keeping rents lower, which is benefiting around 140,000 children in poverty each year. Opposition members might not want to hear this, but Chris Birt told the Social Justice and Social Security Committee about research by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation that found that the Scottish Government’s investment in social housing has made a significant difference in keeping poverty levels lower here than they are elsewhere in the UK.
The SNP Government is delivering for the people of Scotland. We have built a new social security system with dignity, fairness and respect at its heart. We have rolled out seven benefits that are unique to Scotland, including the game-changing Scottish child payment. We have increased funded early learning and childcare to 1,140 hours per year, and we have delivered free bus travel for everyone under 22. Taken together, the SNP Government’s policies are estimated to be keeping 100,000 children out of poverty this year. We are doing that with the limited powers of devolution.
The new UK Labour Government must take inspiration from what the SNP has achieved. It should introduce an equivalent of the Scottish child payment in the rest of the UK, and it must get rid of Tory welfare reforms such as the two-child benefit cap and the bedroom tax. That would let the Scottish Government invest more in its anti-poverty measures. If the Labour Government does not do that, more and more people will see that the only way for Scotland to get change is to become an independent country.
We move to closing speeches. I am disappointed to note that two members who participated in the debate are not here. That is disrespectful to every other member who participated and it is disrespectful to the chair. Perhaps my comments could be passed on to them by their colleagues.
16:30
In the debate and in the many briefings that were circulated before it, we have heard and have had shared with us many examples of the Christie commission’s findings of the generational effects of social and economic inequalities and of the imperative—which is more urgent than ever—to prioritise prevention. The prevention of poverty, and thereby the prevention of pain, ill health, physical and psychological scars, and so much more, must motivate us all. We have also heard that the sticking plasters, such as food banks, are battling under burgeoning demand.
Poverty is a political choice—yes, we are responsible for the choices that we make. I am sure that Willie Rennie will embrace as his own all the decisions that were made when his party was instigating and perpetuating austerity as part of the UK Government for those fateful five years. There are consequences to the decisions that we take as politicians. I am proud, for example, that it was the Scottish Greens’ influence two and a half years ago that led to the mitigation of the UK Government’s benefit cap being written into the tackling child poverty action plan. Was it enough? No, clearly not—it was not nearly enough. That is why we need to heed the calls for action on the fundamentals of poverty prevention.
The Child Poverty Action Group’s briefing for the debate clearly identifies the areas that must be our focus, including social security, employment and childcare, the cost of the school day, tax, and housing. Alongside the urgently-needed increase to the Scottish child payment, we must plug the gaps in Scotland’s social security system, and we must remember that the right to decent living standards is not restricted according to nationality or immigration status. Close the Gap reinforces CPAG’s call for employment support, especially for parents who are experiencing intersectional barriers to well-paid, secure, flexible work and childcare that is free, accessible and flexible. Several members have talked about that in the debate.
I, like others this afternoon, celebrate the social security system that we have in Scotland. Social security is not a burden. It is not something that we should be ashamed of, but a mark of a decent, compassionate and humane society that values collective care and responsibility for each other, not the individualised alienation that has been the consequence of too many years of Tory rule in Westminster. We have already heard much in the chamber about the need for sufficient support for the costs of the school day, particularly school meals. Universalism matters: it destigmatises, it equalises and it endows recipients with equal respect and worth. Undoubtedly, there is more that we can do to reduce the cost of the school day, which includes uniforms, trips and activities and digital devices, which are no luxury, but an essential tool for learning.
Others, including Collette Stevenson and Miles Briggs, have spoken of the importance of decent, secure homes for all children. We need to see action on the affordable housing supply programme. As Shelter and Crisis have shown us, ending child poverty is impossible without ending the housing emergency, with almost 10,000 children in temporary accommodation. That is up 138 per cent since 2014, and another 45 children become homeless every day. I urge colleagues on the Labour benches to press their Prime Minister to end the two-child limit, and not to wait for a wholesale review of benefits. We know that it is wrong now, and it needs to go now.
We are living through a transition, whether we want to or not. The climate and nature emergencies cannot step aside and wait while a couple of Governments argue over who is most to blame. The question is whether that transition will be one of justice or of oppression. Cutting budgets for walking, wheeling and cycling and bringing back peak rail fares—none of that will grow a world in which today’s children can breathe and thrive, or in which today’s parents can model the behaviour that we will all depend on.
Our decisions matter. I would much rather see money that currently subsidises private companies or invests in unproven, unreliable or expensive technologies that will not help us to address any of the emergencies that we currently face going to vital services that our children and their families need. I therefore urge the Government to think again about these short-sighted cuts—about the losses to the budget for children’s rights, protection and justice, and its shamefully diluted position on free school meals. I ask the Government to imagine the position of carers, especially single parents, who are kept in poverty solely by the randomness of childcare provision.
I implore the Government to think again about dropping its commitment to a human rights bill and a ban on conversion practices—commitments that it once made to the most marginalised, excluded and silenced of our neighbours. The human rights legislation in particular could be an important tool to tackle child poverty. It could provide the framework for focusing public expenditure and improving our public services, helping us to deliver our minimum core obligations. We will not—indeed, we cannot—achieve the laudable mission of eradicating child poverty without meeting those core obligations.
There are stark choices to be made by a Government that is facing tough financial decisions. It is up to us to ensure that the consequences and burdens of those decisions—those financial choices—that we make do not fall on the shoulders of Scotland’s most marginalised people: our children.
16:36
I am pleased to close the debate on one of the most important issues facing Scotland today. Growing up in poverty impacts on life chances, sees pupils denied their potential and life goals, and stifles opportunity and life goals, as many members, including Miles Briggs, Karen Adam, the cabinet secretary, Maggie Chapman and others have spoken about today.
The truth is, however, that in Scotland, after years of SNP and Tory waste and mismanagement on finances, inequality and poverty have soared. There are 40,000 more children in poverty in Scotland today than there were a decade ago. Both Governments have let Scotland’s young people down.
I suspect that that is why the SNP is lining up with the Tories today to attack Labour and our plans to deliver stronger workers’ rights and wages—because it cannot stand on its own record. Unlike the Tories and the SNP, however—
Will the member give way?
I will, in two seconds.
Unlike the records of the Tories and the SNP, the record of the previous Labour Government is different. In Government, we lifted 1 million children out of poverty. Theirs is the failure that Marie McNair and others have set out—ours is a record that I am proud of.
I am confused by Ms Duncan-Glancy’s logic. Can she explain why child poverty levels are far higher in Wales under Labour than they are in Scotland under the SNP?
I gently suggest to the member that he might want to look at his own Government’s record on child poverty before he starts pointing fingers at others.
The eradication—[Interruption.] The eradication of child poverty must be a national mission for the Scottish Government, as colleagues including Paul O’Kane, Willie Rennie and Annie Wells have argued, as it is for the new UK Labour Government.
The members on the Government benches in this Parliament say that it is their priority. In fact, as my colleague Michael Marra pointed out, three First Ministers have said that it is their priority, but their actions do not back up their words. John Swinney, Humza Yousaf and Nicola Sturgeon have all broken promises to the young people of Scotland. They slashed the affordable housing budget, as my colleague Miles Briggs highlighted; froze the Scottish welfare fund; abandoned parental employability schemes; cut teacher numbers and the MCR pathways programme; and cut the employability budget by £21 million and parental employability funds by £20 million. Yesterday, they abandoned their pledge on free school meals and revised down their ambitions to close the attainment gap.
It could not be clearer that this Government has no plan, no strategy and now, it seems, no ambition on child poverty. Broken promises and low ambitions will not be forgotten by Scotland’s young people, and it is not just the stuff that their Government has failed to do that is the issue; it is the Government’s constant dogged head-in-the-sand approach that it is right in what it is doing. It was the Government’s own Poverty and Inequality Commission that said:
“The ... next progress report cannot just point to actions already taken nor propose more small-scale tests of change. The Scottish Government needs to restore faith and renew optimism”.
The Government can list policies that it thinks contribute to reducing poverty all that it wants, and the finance secretary can pretend on the radio that more of the same will work, but organisations can see through that, and 260,000 children in Scotland can talk about the reality.
Although the Poverty and Inequality Commission recognised the impact of the Scottish child payment, as does Scottish Labour, it said—[Interruption.]—and SNP members might want to listen to this:
“Progress in other areas is slow or not evident at all.”
All that can change. As many of us know, poverty is not inevitable. Change is possible. Within just eight weeks, the new UK Labour Administration has already acted. We will tackle child poverty at its roots with a new deal for working people to deliver a real living wage, while reviewing universal credit so that it makes work pay and tackles poverty. We will deliver a genuine pay rise for more than 200,000 of the lowest-paid Scots. We will tackle the cost of living crisis by establishing GB Energy, a publicly owned energy company that will drive down energy bills. We will deliver affordable public transport and housing support. [Interruption.] Any problem that gets—
Ms Duncan-Glancy, I am very keen to hear you, but I am aware of conversations happening across the chamber. I ask members to focus on Ms Duncan-Glancy’s words.
We will deliver affordable public transport and housing support, end problem debt and provide help and support for families and households across Scotland. That is the difference that a progressive Government can make, and that is what we will strive to deliver every day. By doing the work that this Scottish National Party Government is failing to do, we will spread opportunity for all.
16:41
I am delighted to close the debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives. I welcome the contributions that have been made by members from across the floor. There is cross-party support for the objectives that we are discussing today, and members fully agree that there should be a full and fervent focus on eradicating child poverty.
I note the terms of the Government’s motion, but I will speak to the Scottish Conservative amendment, because the various statistics in there paint a concerning picture of the lack of tangible movement rather than the allocation of funding. We cannot fully accept that the Scottish child payment is a panacea when 26 per cent of children live in poverty, which is a number that has barely changed in 17 years; when 10,000 children live in temporary accommodation, which is an astounding 138 per cent increase in a decade; and when the health of children is adversely affected by poverty, with the number of paediatric waits having increased by a staggering 114.6 per cent. All that falls under the Scottish National Party Government’s mismanagement. However, before I get into my particular comments—
I hear what you say about the Scottish Government taking responsibility for the 24 per cent of children who are in poverty in Scotland. Who should take responsibility for the 30 per cent of children in England who are in poverty, or the 29 per cent of children who are in poverty in Wales?
Always through the chair, please.
I am going to stick to my lines, because we are in Scotland and it is to Scotland that we will look.
I will go on to make my comments but, before I do, I will respond to some of the contributions made by other members. In her opening remarks, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills mentioned the 1,140 hours of free childcare. We all welcome those. I was a councillor in Perth and Kinross when we were putting those processes through. At every single stage, we said that everything needed to be totally funded and that there should be a completely blended offer involving the private, voluntary and independent sector and childminders. Unfortunately, although the provision has come in, it is not meeting those aims. I accept the cabinet secretary’s words, but the system is not working for everybody.
Miles Briggs talked about having a holistic approach to health and housing, which is important. I support his request for a bespoke child health and welfare strategy. I also note his comments on the worrying diminishing number of housing completions, which are at a record low, and the reduced pipeline of new social housing, which is concerning. However, I do not think that those have anything to do with the capital budget reductions.
I welcome the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice’s intervention on Mr Briggs’s point about bringing council properties back into use, which highlighted the Government’s plans with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. I look forward to hearing more detail on that work when it comes through.
As usual, Willie Rennie made an excellent contribution. Like him, I regret that we happen to be in the position of needing a child payment, and I agree with him that we need to find ways of helping people to help themselves. I also note the member’s comments on the whole family wellbeing fund, which the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice did respond to. I appreciate that, because a freedom of information request says that a lot of initial payments have gone on council funding for staff. As we move forward, I really hope to see that fund do what it is meant to do.
Many members, including Bob Doris, Marie McNair and Collette Stevenson, as well as both cabinet secretaries, have mentioned the Scottish child payment and keeping 100,000 children out of poverty. I also highlight the evidence of Professor Danny Dorling, who was mentioned by Collette Stevenson. He said that we must be careful that, when we look at the statistics, we are not just looking to move from one side of an arbitrary line to another. There needs to be more work to make sure that any analysis takes into consideration the changes that have happened, and that we do not just focus on an arbitrary line.
This is not a partisan point, but does the member agree that we heard in committee that there needs to be a comparative study in England, Scotland and Wales on efforts to tackle child poverty to work out an evidence base of what is working and to adopt it on a pan-UK basis?
Yes, I accept that that came up in committee. Again, I raise the point that we must be careful that we are not just looking at how we move across an arbitrary line. However, I accept that there needs to be more work and analysis.
As with all things, especially in government, it is the choices we make and the way we go about things that not only focus the mind but mean that either we meet our objectives or we do not. Governments will always have some form of financial pressure that will inhibit the way in which they take strategy forward into operational processes. No matter what political spin we apply in this chamber or what circumstances we are subjected to that affect the status quo—whether they are global, national or local—we are charged to do right by the people of Scotland.
Given that we are here to discuss the laudable goal of eradicating child poverty, we need to look at all the avenues that we can use to make that happen, and a more holistic approach must be adopted. Once again, I find myself giving my usual example of parental employment. We know that there is a tried and tested way out of poverty—not an indirect Government wealth redistribution process but a direct way to help people to help themselves. We also know that there are three main factors holding people back from achieving that, which are childcare, transport and retraining.
On childcare, the Government has highlighted the 1,140 hours, and I accept that, but the system is under a lot of pressure. We have restrictions to the Government’s offer being applied in councils across the country, and we have workers not being able to access a council nursery near their place of employment. We also have some council areas postponing start dates, and wraparound care, including childminders in the PVI sector, is stretched almost to breaking point.
On transport, we have bus services being cut across rural areas. Timings of bus travel are not meeting the needs of people, as more and more flexible working becomes the norm. We have peak fares returning for rail travellers because, at the reduced rate, people were let down by the Scottish Government’s own ScotRail service so much that they could not be enticed by half-price fares.
Cuts to the college sector mean that, for many, any chances of retraining are simply beyond possible.
That is a triple whammy that is halting any progression into work. Members on the Conservative benches know that not only does having more people working help achieve the goal of reducing child poverty but, at a time when, as the motion puts it,
“public finances are under acute pressure”,
it grows the economy, increases the tax intake and revenue, broadens the tax base and makes it more secure, and gives Governments additional spending for essential services in our community. It is a win-win.
The Scottish Government must take responsibility for the financial predicament that it finds itself in; accept the harsh reality, backed up by independent financial experts, that it is down to this Government’s choices; shift focus to a holistic approach, including parental employment and returning empty buildings to housing stock; and actively make a difference for the children of Scotland.
I call Shirley-Anne Somerville to wind up the debate. Could you take us to 5 pm, cabinet secretary?
16:49
I thank all members for their contributions. The programme for government shows our commitment to supporting families in Scotland and it sets out the next steps that we will take in our national mission to lift children out of poverty.
As the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government set out earlier this week, we are doing so in the context of the most severe financial challenges that the Parliament has faced in its history—challenges that are the result of failures of the previous UK Government, as the chancellor has recently stated. However, now we are told by the new Prime Minister that things will only get worse.
Despite that, the Scottish Government is building on a firm foundation. We have invested around £3 billion a year to tackle poverty, mitigate the cost of living crisis as far as we can, and invest in prevention to break the cycle of poverty. That includes the unparalleled support provided by the Scottish child payment and our five family payments. More than 325,000 children and young people were benefiting from the Scottish child payment as of the end of June. The Child Poverty Action Group estimates that, overall, low-income families in Scotland will be around £28,000 better off by the time their child turns 18 compared with families across the UK, as a result of the decisions that have been taken by this Government. That is delivery, and that is impact.
The actions set out in the programme for government build on that foundation and seek to drive progress, together with partners. We know that families will be able to thrive only if they have access to the right support at the right time. I saw the change that such support can make when I recently visited Alloa academy with the First Minister to meet young people and their families and hear more about the Clackmannanshire family wellbeing partnership. We want to work with partners, not just in Clackmannanshire but in other local authorities, to remove the barriers to progress and support the change that is needed to provide holistic support. The programme for government sets out how we will do that through our on-going work with partners and through expanding our place-based partnerships to five more areas: North Ayrshire, East Ayrshire, Perth and Kinross, Inverclyde and Aberdeen. Through those partnerships, more families will receive the support that they need when they need it.
We know that, important though that policy is, there is no silver bullet to ending child poverty in Scotland. We will only be able to do so with relentless focus, nationally and locally, and in partnership with organisations the length and breadth of the country.
The First Minister has made it clear that lifting children out of poverty is the top priority for this Government. I am pleased to say that, to drive that progress, he has decided to form a new Cabinet sub-committee on child poverty. That will ensure that the full weight and authority of the Cabinet is focused on that mission in his tenure.
By working together with the full effort of national and local government, the third sector and business, we can come together and deliver joined-up, whole-systems approaches to making that change possible. Together, we can turn the tide.
I am a bit confused about the Cabinet sub-committee. If this issue is the Government’s overarching priority, should it not be a policy priority that runs through every single portfolio? For example, is hiking rail fares for hard-pressed families not completely contrary to the things that the cabinet secretary will be setting out to do?
With respect to Oliver Mundell, I think that there is a misunderstanding about how Cabinet sub-committees work to ensure that an extra focus on an issue is given above and beyond what already happens in Cabinet. The Cabinet Secretary for Transport has already laid out some of the reasons behind her decisions on peak rail fares.
I turn to the UK Government. Although we are determined to do as much as we can to tackle child poverty, as we always have, we need to ensure that both Governments that serve Scotland do that. To that end, I welcome the announcement from the new UK Government of a ministerial task force on child poverty, which Paul O’Kane has mentioned. Its stated intention is to
“work closely with the devolved governments”
to meet shared ambitions. I stand ready to work with the UK Government on that, and I have made that approach directly to the relevant secretaries of state in meetings.
However, I say again—this has been mentioned in the debate—that along with that strategy, the UK Government needs to take action now. Here is a quote:
“no child poverty strategy will be credible unless the two-child limit is scrapped at the Autumn Budget.”
Those are not my words, but the words of Dan Paskins, interim executive director of Save the Children UK. The new UK child poverty task force has stressed that it will listen to experts. I certainly hope that it does, but I also hope that the Government listens to experts soon and takes that action in the budget, as it has the ability to do so.
Members have gone into specifics in a number of areas. I do not have time to address them all but will endeavour to cover some of them.
Paul O’Kane mentioned modelling. The Scottish Government has published the full and detailed methodology on child poverty modelling; I invite members to review that entire document. The chair of the UK Statistics Authority described that kind of analysis as
“a reasonable way to estimate the impact of Scottish Government policies.”
I hope that that gives the member reassurance and some interesting bedtime or weekend reading, if he wants to take that further.
Many members mentioned the mitigation that the Scottish Government makes, and they were right to do so. We have spent £1.2 billion mitigating the impacts of the policies of UK Governments—Tory and Labour—whether that is the bedroom tax, which we have mitigated to assist 92,000 households this year, the benefit cap or the shortfalls in local housing allowance. We have spent £134 million this year. That money could pay for 2,000 extra teachers or 2,000 band 5 nurses, but we are mitigating UK austerity—both Tory and Labour. That does not include the nearly £0.5 billion that we spend on the Scottish child payment, mitigating the inadequacy of universal credit. We are making that fantastic investment to protect people, but it should not be required, and the UK Government needs to pick that up at source.
Willie Rennie made a thoughtful contribution on many aspects. He is quite right that we should not celebrate the Scottish child payment and that it is a tragedy that people need it in this society. However, I am proud that we have stepped up to support those people—that is the area that we can be proud of as a Government. However, he is right to make that point. He also talked about removing barriers in relation to a number of issues, which I do not have time to get into today, but if Mr Rennie would care to discuss them further at another time, I would be happy to go through some of the points that he raised.
In closing, Pam Duncan-Glancy talked about what the previous Labour Government had done to lift people out of poverty. She was right—there were many successes in that. Do you know the downside, though? That Labour Government was followed by a Tory Government—for years. The bedroom tax and the rape clause were introduced; the working tax credits that Labour is so proud of are being scrapped. That is the union dividend: when Labour makes some progress—no matter how much—as sure as night follows day, a Tory Government comes along and blows it out of the water. Do you know what? Even when another Labour Government comes along, it will not have the bravery to take the early decisions on the bedroom tax and the rape clause to get us back to where we were before. That is the difficulty of pretending that a new Labour Government at a UK level will make the difference: the Tories will unpick its work, if any progress is made at all.
The context that we are in is important. Whether it is austerity, the impact of Brexit, the cost of living crisis or the impact of inflation on the Scottish Government’s budget—the cumulative inflation of 18.9 per cent over three years has made the situation difficult for the Government—we are continuing to do everything we can.
It would be easier if the two Governments could work together, and I hope that we do. However, as Jenny Gilruth pointed out in her opening remarks, Conservative austerity is becoming Labour austerity. That now infamous line from Anas Sarwar—
“Read my lips: no austerity under Labour”—
will continue to haunt him. It might have sounded good while he was practising it before the debate, but I can assure him and others on the Labour benches that we will continue to remind him of it—[Interruption.]
Let us hear the cabinet secretary.
In the eight weeks that we have had, let us look at where we have got to. The Labour Government has scrapped the universal winter fuel payment. The Labour Party, during the election, promised that it would reduce fuel bills by £300; instead, Ofgem has confirmed that bills will go up by 10 per cent this winter. I do not think that that was the change that people had in mind when they voted Labour, but it is the change that they got.
What worries me even more is what is next. Des McNulty, who used to sit in this Parliament, has been questioning the Scottish child payment. Michael Marra has, in the past, questioned free tuition fees. We have to wonder whether that is the change that Anas Sarwar was talking about yesterday.
Although this Government’s programme for government sets out our next steps to provide progress in the delivery of our national mission of ending child poverty, we need that mission to be a collective one. I hope that, right across the chamber, we can—[Interruption.]
Cabinet secretary, I know that you are concluding and I am loth to interrupt, but I would ask members to treat one another with courtesy and respect and to avoid intervening from a sedentary position.
Thank you, Presiding Officer. I completely appreciate that some of these closing remarks are uncomfortable for the Labour Party—and they should be—but I believe that we can work across the chamber, across every sector and indeed across Scotland on this Government’s national mission. That is what this Government is continuing to do, and I hope that members across the chamber, and others, will join us in that mission.
That concludes the debate on the programme for government—eradicating child poverty.
Previous
Portfolio Question TimeNext
Decision Time