The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 1809 contributions
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 4 June 2024
Maggie Chapman
Scottish Government figures show that take-up of benefits such as the Scottish child payment is lower in rural areas, including Aberdeenshire in the north-east. Ruth Boyle from the Poverty Alliance recently highlighted that fact at a meeting of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, and she noted that the cost of living is 15 to 30 per cent higher in those areas, too. What action is the Scottish Government taking to tackle that rural premium and to ensure that take-up of benefits in those areas improves, so that we can tackle rural child poverty?
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 4 June 2024
Maggie Chapman
I thank everyone who has worked on the bill, in particular the Social Justice and Social Security Committee. I also thank the Child Poverty Action Group, the Poverty Alliance and the Law Society of Scotland for their briefings for the debate and for the ministerial statement earlier today.
The bill deals with a range of important issues and lays the ground for care experience assistance, including a care leaver payment, which I and other Scottish Greens very much welcome and hope will not be long delayed. We are supportive of the bill, although we have some remaining questions—in particular, on the provision of information for audit. I will return to that issue later. For now, I want to focus on what is, for us, one of the most significant and potentially transformative aspects of the bill: the provisions that relate to the Scottish child payment.
We are proud of the role that the Scottish Greens have played in the development of the Scottish child payment to what it is today, on both the level of the payment and the number of families who are able to receive it. We know that it is already making an immense difference to the lives of those families, as was recently detailed by academics and policy experts in their evidence to the Social Justice and Social Security Committee. If anyone still doubts the efficacy of the payment, I urge them to read the Official Reports of those meetings. As Professor Ruth Patrick pointed out, the system of cash payments not only reduces the stigma that is associated with other types of assistance; crucially, it recognises and values parents’ own expertise.
Sadly, in practice, the Scottish child payment is not operating as it was originally intended to operate—as an extra payment that allows parents to give their children something more than the bare essentials for survival. Instead, very often—too often—it has to meet those bare essentials, to mitigate the effects of other events and policies.
One such event was the pandemic and what Jack Evans of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation described as the erosion of financial security that that produced. However, far more devastating was the epidemic that came afterwards—the crisis of greed that translated into unaffordable prices for the basic costs of living.
That oppression still continues, because as Stephen Sinclair of the Poverty and Inequality Commission explained to the committee, although inflation as a whole is lower than it was, the rate for essentials such as food and fuel, which account for a higher proportion of spending for low-income families, is higher than the headline figure.
The third factor—and the most destructive of all—is the UK Government’s social security system. As Ruth Boyle of the Poverty Alliance explained, that system
“is pulling people into poverty”,
with
“90 per cent of people who are in receipt of universal credit ... going without essentials”.—[Official Report, Social Justice and Social Security Committee, 30 May 2024; c 10.]
Ruth Patrick spoke of the way in which the two-child cap represents
“a divorcing of the relationship between need and entitlement.”—[Official Report, Social Justice and Social Security Committee, 23 May 2024; c 13.]
That relationship is fundamental to the working of a decent and just society.
Professor Danny Dorling described the UK as
“appalling in comparison with every other country in Europe”.—[Official Report, Social Justice and Social Security Committee, 23 May 2024; c 8.]
Last year’s UNICEF Innocenti report found that the UK had the largest increase in poverty out of the 39 countries that it surveyed, and that the rate of child mortality—the grief of generations—is now once more rising in the UK.
We welcome the space that will be created by the bill to place the Scottish child payment on a new footing, which will potentially make it not only a top-up that is dependent on other entitlements, but a stand-alone payment. It could be made available to those who cannot receive it at present, including families in the asylum system and young people over 16. As the Poverty Alliance highlighted, it could also be a vital step towards the implementation of a minimum income guarantee and all that that means for dignity, financial security and wellbeing for everyone in Scotland. We welcome the bill as a step along that journey.
15:26Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 30 May 2024
Maggie Chapman
I thank the cabinet secretary and her team for all their work on the bill over the past couple of weeks. I am grateful to her for the conversations and correspondence that we have had on various issues and I am grateful to the legislation team for all its work on this emergency legislation.
My amendments deal with three principal issues. The first issue is the legal avenues that exist for the survivors of this injustice who might wish to pursue the individuals or corporations that are responsible for their situation. Such pathways might include, but would not be limited to, actions for malicious prosecution and actions in respect of the human rights of those who have been deprived of a fair trial and of their health, livelihoods and freedom. Those are complex legal issues, and it is not right for those who have already been utterly let down by the legal system to have to navigate them alone. Therefore, my amendment 8 calls on the Scottish Government to produce a review of those options.
Neither is it right that survivors who are seeking justice should effectively be barred from doing so by the immense cost, both financial and emotional, of complex civil proceedings. Amendment 9 therefore asks the Government to review what support is available in the circumstances and to consider whether further resources should be made available.
On the second issue, as I and others have reiterated throughout this process, we need, collectively, to look at causes as well as consequences. The second issue is therefore what we can do to ensure, as far as we can, that this never happens again. Amendment 10 would require the Scottish Government to produce a review of the legal processes that led to such egregious miscarriages of justice and to consider, with the expert assistance of the Scottish Law Commission, whether any changes in the law are necessary. That might include factors such as the powers of bodies such as the Post Office or other agencies to bring prosecutions, the evidential thresholds that are required for prosecution and the legal issues that are raised by the interaction of corporate failings in accountability and transparency with the interests of justice.
The Scottish Law Commission is an independent body that takes its own decisions as to what areas of work it engages in, but amendment 10 would not require the commission to adopt this area as a priority; it would only require the Government to seek the commission’s help. It would be entirely up to the commission how it would respond to that request.
The third issue is what powers and remedies are available to prosecutors in Scotland to pursue those who are responsible for these miscarriages of justice. Amendment 11 would require the Government to report on the issue and to consider, again with the expert assistance of the Scottish Law Commission, whether we need any changes in the law in that regard. Again, I am fully aware and respectful of the independence of the Scottish Law Commission, and I reiterate that the amendments would not in any way fetter its exercise of independent judgment and prioritisation.
I move amendment 8.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 30 May 2024
Maggie Chapman
I will be brief. First, I thank Martin Whitfield for his supportive comments. I am disappointed that the cabinet secretary has taken the position that she has taken. This emergency legislation is about justice for those who are wrongly convicted in the Post Office Horizon scandal, but justice does not begin and end with the quashing of their convictions. We believe that it is right that we provide information and support for those who wish to seek justice beyond the quashing of their convictions—for instance, in relation to malicious prosecutions and other legal remedies.
None of my amendments would require the Scottish ministers to instruct any agency to act in a certain way or to investigate criminal offences, so the concerns that the cabinet secretary has raised in her remarks are not what my amendments are about. The amendments are about providing information and support for legal redress for the survivors of these miscarriages of justice.
I press amendment 8.
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 30 May 2024
Maggie Chapman
It is clear that our social security and benefits ambitions in Scotland have a quite different foundation from those elsewhere on these islands, but we must continue to improve. What work is being undertaken to ensure increased and improved understanding of chronic but very variable conditions across our social security system, so that people do not have their needs judged based on their best days but are instead supported to cope and thrive on their worst days?
Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 30 May 2024
Maggie Chapman
I am pleased to speak on behalf of the Scottish Greens in support of the Post Office (Horizon System) Offences (Scotland) Bill. It is right that we take this extraordinary step and exonerate those who were wrongly convicted as part of the Post Office Horizon scandal.
We have come to stage 3 of this important bill even more quickly, perhaps, than some of us had expected, but I am glad that Westminster made the matter a priority in the last week of its Parliament. To misquote the Scottish play, nothing in this UK Government’s life became it like the leaving of it. The timing means that the bill will be passed just days after the Post Office’s former chief executive gave evidence at the public inquiry into the Horizon IT system. We could not have had a starker reminder of why the bill matters, for the evidence—both what has been said at the inquiry and what has not been said—shows that, however unprecedented the situation is, it was not unlikely to happen.
Anthony Montgomery, who is a professor of occupational and organisational psychology at Northumbria University, has written this week about organisational cover-ups. He has pointed out that the Post Office miscarriages of justice join “a long list” of institutional and corporate scandals, including the injustices of infected blood and the Hillsborough and Grenfell disasters. He said:
“The corporate drive to hide the truth is not random, but ... inevitable”
when protecting the company is seen as an ethical business principle, and business leaders are rewarded for making profit and shareholder value their paramount goals. He said that what is described as “bad” corporate culture
“simply means that everybody clearly understood the real vision and objectives, and committed to doing what was needed.”
That is why it is not enough to treat the Post Office Horizon scandal as a one-off freak event, to let it be quietly forgotten, and to continue with business as usual. The injustice that has been endured by Post Office sub-postmasters, workers and their families and communities is not only the injustice of a particular system that has gone wrong; it is the inescapable, final result of unfettered toxic capitalism itself.
That is why I proceeded with further amendments to the bill this afternoon. My amendments would have made no changes to the bill’s main provisions—to the urgent and essential work of quashing the terrible and oppressive convictions. They simply asked the Scottish Government to report on the law that we have, the law that we lack, and the support that we can give to those who are seeking justice.
There must be real consequences when people play with other people’s lives for profit, status and reward, and there must be real changes to a system that too often listens to the loudest voices—those amplified by privilege—and fails to hear the truth.
Today, we acknowledge that truth, we recognise injustice, and we extend our solidarity, our sorrow and our gratitude to those who have fought with courage and compassion for this moment.
I am pleased to support the bill.
16:06Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: 30 May 2024
Maggie Chapman
I will be brief in my closing remarks, because what matters today is not the party-political points that we make or our speeches in support of the bill. What matters is that we all support it, and what matters even more is that those who were wrongly convicted in the egregious Post Office Horizon scandal will have their convictions quashed.
I am grateful that the bill will pass today, and I thank all those who have ensured that it has been possible to get to this point so rapidly, while still providing real and effective scrutiny.
I am pleased to have had the opportunity to lodge amendments and speak to them, even if members decided not to add to the Westminster model on the issues that I raised.
It is vital that we learn lessons from this grave injustice, that we work to ensure that we make real change and that we remember that it is an example not of corporate systems failing but of them doing exactly what they are designed to do—protecting their own interests—and almost getting away with it.
Earlier this week, I read with interest an article that said that the Metropolitan Police is preparing for a large criminal inquiry into the issue. Of course, we have watched the public inquiry, and we wait with interest for its conclusions, but those are not for now.
In closing, I remember again all those who have been affected by the scandal—the sub-postmasters, their families and their communities. Today is for them, and it is for them that we will pass the bill.
16:26Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 29 May 2024
Maggie Chapman
It goes back to the questions around enterprise support and innovation and that link. One of the challenges—Kevin Stewart probably knows some examples of this, as well—is that engineers who are working in renewables need financial support to develop their prototypes and ideas, but they only get it for a limited time and some such things take a few years to develop. Is there a body of work that has been done, or is there work that could be done, on ensuring that we support the innovative people who want to be part of delivery of the outcomes that you were talking about? Is there a way to think more creatively about how we can allow those people to focus on their innovations and be able to live at the same time?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 29 May 2024
Maggie Chapman
It is sometimes one or two people.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 29 May 2024
Maggie Chapman
Thank you for that. Moving on to the green industrial strategy and the just transition, I hear what you say about the restrictions on what you can say during the purdah period. However, already this morning, you have talked about cross-Government working and the need for a strong economy to support our ambitions—you talked about ambitions in relation to health, education and apprenticeships in response to Brian Whittle’s questions. Do you see the green industrial strategy as being an overarching economic approach, or as being more to do with specific and narrowly focused—not in a bad way—objectives and aims?