Chamber and committees

The convener said that we have a fixed budget, which is true to some extent, but we also have tax-raising powers and we can raise tax by 3 per cent.

The Deputy First Minister is due to give a statement before the October recess on his response to the budget that will be announced at Westminster tomorrow. I am interested to know whether the three organisations before us would like John Swinney to announce a tax increase. That could not come into effect until next year, but if that were his direction of travel would each organisation want that to happen to mitigate some of the issues that have been raised?

That leads me nicely to my next question. First, somebody could listen to today’s evidence and think, “That’s all very well, but impact assessment is a paper exercise and what difference does it make to a disabled person in Inverness or to somebody from an ethnic minority in Dumfries?”. Will you give me a bit more on how it makes a difference to the average person?

Secondly—this is asking you to speculate—if, as the Scottish Government intends, we incorporate human rights treaties into Scots law, would that mean that individuals could challenge the budget in court if their equality characteristics have not been properly defined? Do you envisage it ending up with legal cases against the Scottish budget?

My second question is on an issue that came as a bit of a surprise to me when we heard evidence. At the moment, a lot of the debt that people are dealing with is council debt—it is council tax debt and rent arrears. This is a genuine question and I ask it out of ignorance. Is there a legal duty on councils to pursue that debt? Do they have to pursue it vigorously? If not, have you had any discussions with COSLA with regard to at least mitigating the pursuit of that in the short term? Clearly, things may change in the months ahead, but we have received evidence that, at the moment, most of people’s debt is not private debt but is owed to local authorities. From a purely legal perspective, do they have to pursue that? What discussions, if any, have you had with COSLA on that?

We had a long discussion with a number of groups about the issue of bankruptcy and how it works, and I have a couple of questions on that issue. On the fees for applying for bankruptcy, what consideration has the Scottish Government given to removing the restriction that someone can go through a minimal asset bankruptcy only once every 10 years? Could that length of time be reduced? If it was, would that require primary legislation, or could it be done by secondary legislation?

Good morning, and thank you for coming along.

First, I would like to follow up that issue with the finance secretary. Post-Covid, people with disability are struggling to get into employment more than they were before Covid. The figures show that the problem has grown. Many people with disability are also in poverty. Are there specific measures that you intend to take over the next few years to tackle the issue of people with disability who are looking to get into employment?

I am grateful for that answer, although it would be good to hear a bit more on the policy side.

I genuinely do not mean this in a “Look at that!” sort of way, but the figure seems to be going in the opposite direction in England. I have asked lots of people why that is the case and no one seems to have an answer. I wonder what is going on. Is that to do with population or age? I genuinely do not know the answer, but it would useful to know whether the Scottish Government has done any work—we might need to ask the UK Government about this, too—on why the figures are different for the situations on either side of the border, given that the employment laws are similar.

My main question—to get the convener back on board—is about the independent review of adult disability payment that you will be aware is under way. The mobility issue is being dealt with first and there will be a full review of the whole benefit next year. I think that the expectation in the disability community is that there will be a divergence between what is happening in England and what is happening under the new ADP. Is there a realistic prospect of making disability benefits more generous if the review considers that to be appropriate? If it does, how would that be financed?

Time will tell.

Good morning, minister, and good morning again, cabinet secretary. It feels like the good old days when we all used to be on the committee together. It is nice to see you here.

It is clear that the digital path to applying for benefits is the way forward and that it saves many people a lot of time. However, there are people with disability issues and older people who find filling out forms online really hard or who are digitally excluded. How do we strike a balance so that we do not exclude people from applying for benefits because they cannot use the online system? Will the Government make a commitment that people will still be able to use the telephone or a paper form, if that is appropriate?

Thank you both.

I will just ask that one first.