Chamber and committees

I will bring in Owen Allen in a minute on the history of the considerations. It is important to recognise that the considerations around the benefit were impacted by the pandemic period. We have a work programme that we want to fulfil to meet Parliament’s expectations and those of the public, as well as our ambition and determination to devolve social security in a way that is safe and secure and as expedient as possible within that.

With regard to my answer to your previous question, I recognise and appreciate that, in most years, around the Braemar station, several cold weather payments have been initiated.

On what considerations there were about the delivery of the benefit, the overarching recognition was of the unreliability of it and the fact that it did not guarantee support for low-income households. There was a need to build in consistency by having a measure for a reliable payment that helped those in need of assistance with their heating in different parts of Scotland. It is not the only payment, because, of course, there are other supports but, within that, there should be a reliable payment to provide that support.

Owen, do you want to come in on the considerations in the development of the benefit?

Thanks, Owen.

Again, that is an important point. Considerations on uprating are, of course, for the budget process. There will be a budget statement this afternoon, and I am sure that members appreciate that I cannot comment on the uprating of this or any of the devolved benefits that are within our discretion.

As I have said, because we are increasing the number of people who will receive support from the Scottish Government, we need to receive a large data scan from the DWP, and we are working collegiately with it on that. When we receive that data, we will need to assurance-check it, make sure that we do all the appropriate system testing and alignment that has to happen to deliver our benefit and then deliver the benefit from February. The DWP has committed to providing that scan to us before 31 January. We are grateful for that, because we need the scan in order to deliver the benefit.

By making a comparison with the 14 days for the cold weather payment, you are not appreciating the fact that we are actually initiating our benefit this year. As I have said, there will be flexibility in future years if we want, for example, to change the payment to a different juncture in the calendar—to November, December or January, say—but that would be contingent on agreeing with the DWP to receive the scan in those years in advance of being able to deliver the payment. I am not saying that the DWP would do that, but we would have to agree that with it collegiately. As I have said, the flexibility has been built in.

I appreciate the points that have been made on cold weather payments with regard to the approximately 1,000 people served by the Braemar weather station. However, we have made a policy decision here to expand the number of people who will receive support, in a reliable way, to approximately 400,000 people. That means that a significantly higher number of people will receive support. Those people experience cold weather, too—perhaps not to the same extreme, but they still need additional support for heating costs. That is the policy decision that we have made, and we are asking the committee to approve it today.

I do not see how that is the case.

On the basis of the past 10 years, the evidence shows that a winter heating payment will provide, on average, more assistance than cold weather payments have, and would have, had they continued. Does Pam Duncan-Glancy welcome that, by creating the new benefit, should the Scottish Government be able to finance a higher payment in a future financial year, the mechanism will be in place to provide more support to her constituents in Glasgow than would have been the case under the cold weather payment system?

The Scottish Government regularly liaises with local authorities on these matters. We are, of course, keen to support local authorities and local members in raising awareness of what support is available. I appreciate the context of Mr Briggs’s constructive suggestion, and I thank him for it.

That is a good question, Mr Balfour. We certainly requested the data from the DWP from early January to give us more time and ensure that we could deliver the benefit as quickly as possible. However, the DWP has relayed to my officials that, because of other demands on it as a result of the cost of living payments, it was able only to guarantee getting the scan to us by the end of January. We are grateful that it has given us a guarantee and that it has committed to giving us a scan by the end of January. We had wished for it to be earlier, but we appreciate the demands on the DWP.

As Angela Keane has articulated, once we have the data scan, the agency will work as hard and as proactively as it can to get payments out to people as quickly as possible and in a safe and a secure way. I have said that I cannot guarantee that everyone will get their payment in February, but I can guarantee that we will seek to get payments to people as quickly as possible and to as many people as possible in February.

Yes. There have, of course, been ministerial changes at the UK level. As far as I can recall, the winter heating payment was an issue that I discussed at points in bilateral meetings with Ms Smith. I did not discuss the data issue with her, because the concerns about not getting the data until late January had not emerged at that point. However, I had a helpful bilateral this week with the new minister, Mr Pursglove, and I am grateful to him and his officials for their confirmation, during that meeting, that we will receive the data scan on 31 January as agreed.

Will the member take an intervention?