Chamber and committees

Thank you for joining us. You raised the issue of the data. Could you give the committee an update—either now or in writing—on the data from the DWP that is required for the wider roll-out? It would be good to hear about that. I am also keen to know a bit about why, in the first place, it was decided to go for a first-come, first-served basis for the payments.

It is nice to see you again and good to do so in person.

I fully acknowledge that the results of the client survey were relatively—in fact pretty overwhelmingly—positive, but I am keen that, where it was suggested that improvements are necessary, we nip those issues in the bud quite quickly, so I have a couple of questions about that. In particular, one in four people felt that they were not able to challenge the decision that was made by Social Security Scotland. What are you going to do about that, given what we know about the inability of people to challenge decisions in other areas of social security, in particular DWP decisions? I am also keen to know about the redeterminations that were made, as half of them were successful. That is quite a lot. I know that there were not many redeterminations, but given that half of them were successful, I am keen to know what you are going to do to address the problems in the original decision making.

I have another couple of questions on this theme, but I will come back to them.

Awareness about referrals, yes.

That would be helpful. Thank you.

My colleague Pauline McNeill said in a meeting of the Social Security Committee in the previous parliamentary session that there needs to be quite a bit of scrutiny of the proposals and understanding of shared care and that there therefore needs to be comprehensive guidance. SCOSS has highlighted that there could be potential human rights issues if the level of discretion is increased. Can you set out why you have left the detail on the types of circumstances to be taken into account to Social Security Scotland and have you given it any direction about what the guidance would include?

That is reassuring. I am pleased that there is not an arbitrary cut-off for overturning. Thank you for that.

I think that, if we are to get to a much more automated system that is less reliant on individuals having to talk to too many people at once, we probably need to tighten up the process of referral to other agencies. I note that you are now part of the tell me once programme. What are your plans to address the capacity of staff to refer on to other agencies? What can you learn and what do you know about the tell me once process? I know that it is used when someone dies, but is there anything in it that you can replicate for use at the other end of the scale, so that, when people apply for their benefit, they need tell a state organisation something only once?

I have a number of questions specifically around supporting groups that are most likely to experience fuel poverty, including disabled people and people in various regions of Scotland, such as rural regions, and what the fuel poverty strategy says on that. I am keen to hear more from Alastair Wilcox about what else, apart from increasing incomes, we can do to address that.

I also have a question for Robert Leslie about rural fuel poverty. As you know, some local authorities have said they have concerns with the Government in relation to the £6,000 grant limit for retrofitting social housing. Notwithstanding the point that you made about recruitment, how do you think that the Government could provide sufficient support to local authorities?

Finally, do you have any thoughts on innovative retrofitting financial solutions, such as the people-powered retrofitting programme that is happening in Portsmouth?

Yes, please.

Good morning, minister, and thank you for setting that out. My question is probably quite basic. Why, given that South of Scotland Enterprise was created in 2019, are we adding it to the list only now? Has the Government done any assessment of the time that we might have lost in that, and of whether there is a risk that we could have lost some vital work?

Thank you. As a person who has experienced quite a lot of oppression and discrimination in my time, I understand how someone can internalise a view to such an extent that they believe that they are consenting to something that is the right thing to do.

However, my understanding from witnesses that we have heard from is that the support that you described in relation to the two people you mentioned would not be prohibited. For example, Dr Moon, whom Anthony Horan mentioned, said:

“Affirmative therapy is the way that therapists work flexibly with clients—children and adults—to ensure that they are in a safe space with an accredited registered therapist”.—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 21 September 2021; c 26.]

Vic Valentine told us that affirmative therapy

“is about holding the space for the individual to find out who they are and ensuring that they can come to that decision themselves.”—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 14 September 2021; c 5.]

It is not about forcing someone down a particular route; it is about holding the space, so that the person can have the conversation.

In that context, do you accept that affirmative therapy could help people to have more supportive conversations, particularly with their families, and begin to address some of the discrimination and oppression that children and adults have experienced, in some cases as a result of deep-seated homophobic and transphobic views?