Chamber and committees

Before I answer that question, I just want to thank my colleague Fulton MacGregor for showing those cards; it is much appreciated. I am happy to work with him to seek the views of the people in his constituency at any convenient time.

On the question about organisations, one of the things that strikes me most about the problems with transitions is how chaotic they can be, because people are working with so many different organisations. I honestly cannot explain adequately how that role of project manager of one’s life becomes almost overwhelming in that moment. Sometimes, the only people who know what any one organisation does at any time are the disabled person and their family, which is really hard work when they should be focusing on what the young person wants to do in the future and on ensuring that that support is in place.

I hope that, as is the case for most legislation when we seek to implement it, the Government will engage with all those different agencies and that those agencies will engage with the Government, as well as with young disabled people and their families. To name a few important organisations in this regard, it is important that education authorities, local authorities, health and social care partnerships as well as housing authorities can work together, as all those areas have an impact on a young disabled person’s transition.

I believe that the introduction of the bill is a unique opportunity to take the confusion and complication out of some of the process, by saying: “These are the organisations at play; these are the different responsibilities that they each have; and this is how we can work together in one single co-ordinating point, in the plan for the young disabled person.” It will be transformative.

Thank you, convener, and thank you all for inviting us here today.

I start by putting on record my thanks to Johann Lamont, who served as an MSP in the previous session of Parliament and who introduced the bill during that time. As members will be aware, the bill was very well supported but, unfortunately, it ran out of time. I thank my colleague Johann Lamont very much for the considerable work that she did on the bill. I also thank Inclusion Scotland and Camphill Scotland for their support along the way with Johann Lamont’s bill and, in the current session, their support for me. We could not have got here without the work that those organisations have put in.

I am really excited about the proposed bill. I think that we have a real chance to make a difference, and members around the table can play their part in that today. I remember my transition from school to adulthood. It was stressful, drawn-out and confusing and, more worryingly, every one of my aspirations was met with countless barriers, inaction and delay. My family and I spent years as project managers of our own lives, co-ordinating various services and systems rather than living our lives.

That was almost 20 years ago—although I know that you would never think it. Everything that I have heard since then from young disabled people and their families suggests that things have not improved and indeed have in some ways got worse. I do not want another young disabled person to be held back for another minute because of our inability to plan for them or support them. That is why I am proud to bring the proposal for a bill to Parliament today.

Empowering and supporting young disabled people at this point in their lives is not just something that I care deeply about because it will mean that people will be able to play their full part in the community; it will open up employment opportunities for them and it will create a fairer society. It is also something that I believe we have to do to create a Scotland where everyone has a fighting chance to live up to their potential.

For me, the facts speak volumes. Young disabled people are five times more likely than non-disabled young people are to leave school without any qualifications. The disability employment gap has widened from 32 percentage points in 2019 to 33.7 percentage points in 2020. Over the year, the employment rate for the non-disabled working-age population decreased by one percentage point to 80.6 per cent, whereas the same rate for disabled people decreased by 2.1 percentage points to 46.9 per cent.

At the age of 16, the aspirations of disabled and non-disabled people are broadly the same but, by the age of 26, disabled people are more likely to be out of work, more likely not to be in education and three times more likely to feel hopeless, believing that, whatever they do, it has no real effect on what happens to them. It is clear from the statistics that we have to take action. It is clear from the people who spoke to us during the development of the previous bill and throughout the process that we must act now. We are failing people at a crucial point in their lives, and I believe that we have a duty to give them a fighting chance to achieve their goals. The proposed bill will go some way to doing that.

We are stripping people of their hopes and dreams, even before they have started to make those a reality. They deserve better. Young disabled people cannot wait. They have been consulted for years and have been saying the same things for years. That is why I ask the committee to support our statement of reasons and not to ask us to go back out and consult the same people and ask them the same questions, so that they can tell us the same stories that, sadly, they have been telling for decades.

Thank you very much for hearing about the bill. I hope that members will support our statement of reasons and will allow us to move quickly to give young disabled people a fighting chance.

Good morning, minister and others. Thanks very much for joining us, and thank you for setting that out; it was helpful.

I start on the point that you have just discussed: the role of SCOSS. I, too, put on record my thanks for the helpful work that it does in getting through what is quite complex material. However, what worries me slightly is that we are again in a circumstance where SCOSS has felt that it has not had the time that it needed to properly scrutinise the regulations. In fact, it has said that that has meant that there has not been significant stakeholder engagement, which I think is of concern.

In the past, I have written to the Government asking for details of the timetable for delivery because, since I came to the Parliament in May, on everything that we have looked at in this committee in particular, we have been told that there is not much time. I seek reassurance that you are going to plan for that delivery, that you know at what stages things are going to be done and that you will try to give the appropriate time for scrutiny rather than rush things through. We have had control of these benefits since 2018, and it is unhelpful if we are always being told that there is not much time to scrutinise things. Will you confirm that there is a plan for the further roll-out and that there will be time for scrutiny?

I am reassured in relation to the work around SCOSS, but not so much in relation to planning for future regulations and ensuring that there is enough scrutiny and time for scrutiny, so that we do not have to continually rush. As I said, we have had control of the benefits since 2018, but it feels as if we keep getting a set of regulations or a piece of primary legislation that we are told has to be done quickly. I want to do as much as possible, as fast as possible, because we need to get money in people’s pockets, but can you reassure us that the Government has a plan to ensure that everything is on schedule and that we know at what point things will come to the committee so that we are not continually rushing?

Yes, that would be helpful.

On human rights and on short-term assistance, I think that the inclusion of that assistance is really welcome, and I am pleased to say that it will make a material difference to people’s lives.

I understand that the criteria are different for the two payments, but offering someone short-term assistance at a really difficult time in their life, during a transition period, would not be giving them a guarantee to the next benefit, which has different eligibility criteria; it would merely be easing that process, in what would be a relatively sensible way, as the two benefits might not be called the same, but they are the same type of benefit. Might you reconsider the matter on that basis?

On Jeremy Balfour’s question about the deadline, I take your point that people might prefer to receive payment in January or February. It would be good to see the research on that. Maybe that means that you could just move the deadline to those dates. I feel that a deadline gives people certainty. It is also consistent with what you require people who are applying for benefits to do, as they have a number of stringent deadlines. It would be much more congruent to say, “We have deadlines, just as you have deadlines,” instead of, “You have deadlines but we have none.” I think that that would be a proper way forward.

My question is on eligibility. As we know, over half of people who are living in poverty have a disabled person in their household, and that can be a person with a disability of any severity. If we are looking to reduce levels of poverty—and levels of child poverty, as 34 per cent of children in poverty live in a household with a disabled person in it—it is really important that we look at those criteria.

There are significant levels of fuel poverty in Scotland, and we know that, regardless of age or severity of impairment, disabled people have higher costs of living and are more likely to live in poverty. This is an opportunity for us to do something to significantly address that by making the winter payment. I guess that I am making a policy point. I am asking whether you recognise that that is one way in which you could begin to reduce the poverty that all disabled people, not just those with the most severe conditions, face.

Thank you.

To follow on from the point that you made earlier about being able to do a supplementary forecast, does that mean that, if there was a decision or a policy change between budgets, the information would be available to the Government to be able to adjust its spending appropriately?

Thank you for your responses to my questions and those of other members.

Your paper notes the significant challenges around the predictions on the adult disability payment. We have heard a lot about the volatility around that. Can you tell us a bit about what you have done to get the information that you have and what further information you think could help you? I note what Claire Murdoch said about data collection from Social Security Scotland. It would be helpful for the committee to get a better understanding of the sort of data that you feel that you will need in order to be able to predict future costs.