 The next item of business is portfolio questions, and the portfolio today is social justice. I remind members if they wish to request a supplementary, they should press the request to speak button during the relevant question, or enter the letters RTS in the chat function during the relevant question. I call question number one, Colin Smyth. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to recent statistics showing that the number of children in Dumfries and Galloway living in temporary accommodation rose by 67 per cent between 2022 and 2023. The number of households in particular children in temporary accommodation in Scotland is too high. That is unacceptable and we are firmly committed to reducing it. In the response to the temporary accommodation task and financial group recommendations published in July, we have said that we would work with councils to support the development of targeted plans to reduce temporary accommodation pressures. We provide councils with annual allocations of £8 million of rapid rehousing transition plan funding to support people on to settled accommodation and £30.5 million for their work to prevent homelessness, with Dumfries and Galloway receiving over £950,000 in 2023-24. Colin Smyth. We have seen an increase of over 90 per cent in the number of open homelessness cases in Dumfries and Galloway compared to 2019-20. The crisis is so bad that housing officers are replacing people in caravans and 50 bed and breakfasts across the region. Why the number of homes that were given grant funding in the year to the end of June as part of the affordable housing supply programme was down by 22 per cent and the number of affordable homes started in the region is at its lowest level since 2016, when we have this crisis facing the region? Surely that will make it worse. There is a series of measures. I will come back to the task and financial group in the recommendations. One of the recommendations that we responded to was in terms of acquisitions. Again, that is something that we will be working on in Dumfries and Galloway in that regard and also looking at allocation policies. This morning, I had a meeting with a task and financial group on prevention. We are talking about that and coming forward in regards to what we can do in terms of prevention. There are things that we can do in working on Dumfries and Galloway and prevention at the moment. In addition to that, we also offered the £106.148 million that was allocated to Dumfries and Galloway over the five years of our PA. Some of the issues are in about how we can maximise the spend around that. There is flexibility in that programme to look around about temporary accommodation in that regard. I am happy to meet my Mr Smith to discuss that further, if needed. Question 2, Evelyn Tweed. To ask the Scottish Government what impact its programme for government 2023-24 will have on the affordable housing supply programme. The number of affordable homes completed in the last year, the latest year to end, March 2023, is the highest annual figure in more than two decades. The programme for government 2023-24 airfarms our commitment to invest £752 million this year towards affordable housing supply programme. Since 2007, Scotland has seen more than 40 per cent more affordable homes delivered per head of population than in England and more than 70 per cent more than in Wales. We will shortly be publishing a rural and islands house in action plan aimed at helping retain and attack people in rural and island communities. Evelyn Tweed. Thanks to the SNP in government, Scotland builds 13.9 affordable and social homes per 10,000 people. They do that annually compared to 9.7 in England and 8 in Labour-run Wales. As the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has said, affordable housing contributes to Scotland having the lowest poverty rates in Britain. With the Tory cost of living crisis and Brexit pushing up the cost of materials and borrowing, how can the minister ensure that we continue to meet our challenging investment targets? The member is right that it is at an extremely difficult position at the moment. The hard Brexit did not add economic mismanagement with the UK Government. Obviously it has not helped the situation. We have seen construction inflation have around about 15 to 20 per cent. That is obviously including settling constituency. That has caused obviously soaring construction costs. Despite that, the housing sector has done incredible work to deliver the highest annual rate of affordable homes since 2000. We are making £3.5 billion available to this Parliament. Remember that £3.5 billion has been impacted by construction inflation as well. That obviously goes towards delivery of affordable and social homes. We recognise need to keep pace with the demand for social housing and we are making available more than £60 million from this year's £752 million budget to support the acquisition of properties to be brought into the affordable housing sector. I was interested to hear about the minister and the member's spin on that. New statistics on Tuesday have shown that the number of affordable homes that have been approved in the quarter between April and June has reached the lowest level in 10 years. Those are the facts to it. Why have SNP green ministers dropped their target for affordable homes to be built in this Parliament? That has not been dropped. I have been going round to the summer tour, most local authorities, speaking to private builders and RHAs in terms of that. The key thing that is coming through is the two main reasons that are coming through. One is construction inflation. We are looking at inflation rate in the UK, which is obviously an additional borrowing cost that could cause through by the UK Government's mismanagement. Those are the main reasons that are coming through in terms of approvals. We can go and speak to them. They will tell you the exact same construction inflation rates and borrowing costs as to why things are slowing down. Question 3, Monica Lennon. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on progress with its tackling child poverty delivery plan, including in relation to its commitment to pilot universal free school meals in secondary schools. Our annual report on progress towards meeting the child poverty targets is published in June each year and will include updates on actions taken on the delivery of the free school meals project. Through the programme for government, we have recommitted to work with COSLA to prepare schools and infrastructure for the expansion of universal free school meals provision to primary 6 and primary 7 pupils during 2026. That will start with those in receipt of the Scottish child payment, and we will save families an average of £400 per child per year. Monica Lennon. I thank the cabinet secretary. It was back in 2021 that ministers promised to expand universal free school meals support to all primary pupils in the first hundred days of Parliament. It didn't materialise, and this majorly delayed manifesto commitment is going to make hungry children wait now until 2026, if we have to believe the First Minister. I ask the cabinet secretary, in addition to what she said, when will we see detailed implementation plans around the timeline, not just for P6 and 7, but also for that pilot in secondary schools that is also long overdue? We have, during this parliamentary session, already seen expansion in the free school meals provision within primary. As I stated, that will continue through our programme for government commitments. The member's right to point to the Government's commitment also to pilot in secondary schools, and the cabinet secretary for education has been meeting with officials and engaging with COSLA on the issue. Of course, the discussions will conclude and something will be made public in due course. Is the cabinet secretary as frustrated as I am by the audacity of Scottish Labour who criticised the steady roll-out of free school meals in Scotland, when that is precisely one of the UK Labour pledges abandoned over the summer by Keir Starmer? It has been a bit difficult to keep up with the number of commitments that are held. Please resume your seat a second. If a member wishes to raise a point, they know how to do that. Otherwise, the floor is with the person who has the floor, which is the cabinet secretary. It has been rather difficult to keep up with the changes of policy from UK Labour, and that is concerning, because clearly the fear for those of us in the Scottish Parliament is what impact that might have on policies for Scottish Labour as well. This Government has reaffirmed its commitment to helping families to strike the roll-out for free school meals. It is a disappointment that UK Labour leaders Keir Starmer has refused to follow that example. I hope that that is not a strictly slope that Scottish Labour will now be on as well. I was making the point earlier, Deputy Presiding Officer, that that was a question about Labour party policy addressed to cabinet secretaries. I find that not in order, if I may suggest, so that is not what we have these sessions for. Why is the heckling aside from the sedentary position? I have the stats in front of me on school meals take-up. They are down on 2016. Why? Before I call the cabinet secretary, I just say to Mr Keir that if Mr Keir wished to raise a point of order, he should do that. Otherwise, he should just probably ask his question, cabinet secretary. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I will be guided by you by what is in order in this chamber rather than Mr Keir. I am afraid that his crocodile tears and his concern for young people and children really are just that. From a Government and from a member who backs the rate clause, who backs the benefit cap, who backs recent cuts to universal credit and who supports the tax cuts for the richest. I am afraid, Presiding Officer, that I will take no lectures from Mr Keir on how we are trying to provide the support, as we are already doing, to children throughout Scotland. At your invitation, Deputy Presiding Officer, I would like to make the following point of order. Is it in order for members of the Government Party to ask the cabinet secretary questions about Labour Party policy or any other party's policy, other than the answer for the stewardship that lies within the realm of those ministers? Mr Keir, I thank you for your contribution. As far as I recall, the question was related to the social justice portfolio and, indeed, the issues raised in the principal question of Ms Lennon. I am not responsible for the manner in which any particular Government minister seeks to answer a question. That is obviously not a matter for the chair, but I was satisfied that the issue raised fell within the scope of the question on the business bulletin. I now call question number four, Colin Beattie. To ask the Scottish Government what stakeholder input informed its decision to increase investment in social security. We regularly engage with a wide range of stakeholders in 2324. We will invest £5.3 billion in social security benefits, which will reach 1.2 million people, rising to 7.4 billion and 2 million people in 2728. Social security is a fundamental right, which is why we have established a radically different benefit system, built on dignity, fairness and respect. Colin Beattie, I thank the cabinet secretary for her response. I am heartened to see the professional input that underpins the Scottish Government's compassionate and ambitious approach to social security, but I am painfully aware of how efforts to tackle poverty here are undermined by Westminster benefit cuts, cuts that are now backed not just by Tories but by Labour as well. Would the cabinet secretary agree that it is likely that the Scottish welfare model will keep having to mitigate UK Government welfare policies in the years ahead, whether that is under Rishi Sunach's blue Tories or Sir Keir Starmer's red Tories? I would completely agree with the premise of that question, and I can hear by the reaction that Labour and Conservatives are uncomfortable by this line of questioning. I am not surprised. We have spent over £1 billion mitigating the impacts of 13 years of UK Government policies, such as the bedroom tax and the benefit cap, and they do not like to hear about that. Meanwhile, the UK Government is steadily dismantling the welfare system across the UK and enforcing a sanction regime that is punishing the poorest members of our society. That is exactly the opposite of how our dignity, fairness and respect system in Scotland works. I was slightly surprised by the cabinet secretary's answer when she said that Social Security Scotland is radically different from that of DWP. Can she tell me how ADP, how children's benefits and how any benefit that has been so far devolved to Scotland is radically different in regard to the regulations that this Government has brought forward? I do not have time to go through that in detail, but I would love to meet Mr Balfour to give him the full details of that. However, I will say that the client experience that has already been published in our surveys, if Mr Kerr is genuinely interested in that subject, he may wish it to listen. We are radically different in our application process in the way that we work with stakeholders to ensure that people are encouraged to come forward for the benefits, and we are radically different in making sure that we are delivering the right result first time, which is very different to the appeals process that people are made to go through, and indeed the barbaric PIP assessment process that they go through with the DWP. A few examples that I would be keen to elaborate with Mr Balfour in due course should he wish to do so. Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government what analysis is carried out of the barriers to achieving the national house bill programme for Scotland. The Scottish Government has set clear ambitions for the delivery of 110,000 affordable homes by 2032, with 70 per cent for social rent and 10 per cent in rural and island communities. We have well established partnership working with local authorities, registered social landlords in the construction sector to ensure that we deliver the right homes in the right places. Scotland has led, as I mentioned before, the UK in providing affordable homes. Since 2007, Scotland has seen over 40 per cent more affordable homes delivered per head of population than in England, and over 70 per cent more than Labour-controlled Wales. I refer to Shelter Scotland director Alison Watson. I want to quote directly for her talking about the way that we are progressing in Scotland by housing. She says, and I quote, The snail's pace of delivery demonstrates clearly that the Scottish Government has got its priorities badly wrong and is neglecting social housing. No minister can claim ignorance of what that means. It means more children with nowhere to call home. It means more people trapped in miserable temporary accommodation, and it means Scotland's housing emergency continuing to devastate lives. Does the minister not agree that what we need is a national house bill programme that takes into account the land that needs to be made available and gives local authorities the power to be able to get that land? We will now move to the minister for the answer. I have met Alison Watson twice this week, met her on Tuesday and met her on Wednesday and met Alison Watson on a regular basis to discuss that. One of the key things that I have been doing this summer is a programme of visits going round all local authorities. The one key thing that comes through in all those visits is that there are 32 local authorities with 32 different local solutions. I have visited Fife on a number of occasions and I meet Fife on a regular basis to talk about homelessness and the affordable housing supply programme. I invite him to ask what the discussions have been going on around that. We have made £180 million available for Fife. In this parliamentary term, that was an increase of £35 million. Part of the discussions that I have been having about Fife is how do we maximise capacity and how do we maximise the pace of building in Fife? The key thing for me is discussing with local authorities what they need specifically in terms of homelessness and house building. I am happy to discuss that and the discussions that I have been having with Fife on that matter. Over the summer, an announcement of £960,000 to support community housing trusts in rural and island areas was made by the housing minister, which is a welcome example of what is needed to boost progress towards Scotland's ambitious housing goals. Can the minister say what role does empowering local communities have in ensuring that we meet those affordable housing needs? I am getting mentioned about the summer visits. I had the pleasure of visiting Gerlach just in the last month to talk about that and where we launched the funding in terms of that. You see the difference around what community housing could make in there. It was driven by the local community there. Community housing plays an important role in our broad approach to deliver more affordable homes in rural and island areas. Many communities are actively engaged in taking forward projects within their own local areas, often supported by the rural and island housing fund. That fund is playing a critical role in supporting community organisations and others in bringing forward housing projects that would otherwise be unable to access the mainstream affordable housing programme. The main thing about driving this is giving them the capacity to drive forward the project on their own. The recently announced co-funding support will enable the community's housing trust and South of Scotland community housing to provide continued advice and support to communities. To ask the Scottish Government how much it has spent in the last five years within the Aberdeen City Council area to mitigate against any effect of UK Government welfare policy. Over the last five years, including this fiscal year, the Scottish Government has spent more than £733 million to mitigate UK Government welfare policies. Although we are unable to break that down by local authority area, over the last five years, we have invested £17.2 million in Aberdeen City Council through the Scottish welfare fund and discretionary housing payments to mitigate, among other things, the bedroom tax, the benefit cap and local housing allowance. Additional funding has been made available through universal credit Scottish choices and advice services. A £11 million has also been provided through the Scottish child payment. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Would she agree that the £84 million a year spent on the discretionary housing payments could make a huge difference in support and folk through the cost of living crisis if it weren't being spent mitigating some of the UK Government's cruelest policies? It is indeed frustrating that the UK Government plans to spend £100 million on discretionary housing payments for England and Wales in 2324, while Scotland, which has a tenth of the population, will spend over £80 million. If we did not have to spend this money mitigating against the UK Government's cruel policies, it could of course be used further in our national mission to tackle poverty. I would suggest that this shows that the UK welfare system, if indeed not the UK itself, is not fit for purpose. To ask the Scottish Government to provide an update on its progress in removing highly combustible cladding from buildings. Safety of homeowners and residents is our absolute priority. That is why the programme for government sets out proposals for a cladding remediation bill to give ministers new powers to remediate buildings with unsafe cladding and seek the transfer of powers to create a building safety levy. We are in discussions with the UK Government at the moment. We are undertaking a robust programme of single building assessments. Assessments are being completed and remediation is under way on one building. We are committed to undertaking a stock census to help alleviate buildings and explore ways to minimise costs and maximise revenue to ensure that the programme can deliver its objectives in full, efficiently and an reasonable time frame. A loophole means combustible cladding can still be used on schools and hospitals under 11 metres and on all hotels and office buildings. The Government is reviewing safety regulations this year, so will the minister close the loophole? I am happy to discuss that further with Mr Golden. Just a few things I want to add in terms of cladding. There have been consistent meetings with residents groups. We have also been working very closely with developers in that regard. We have obviously gotten to sign up to the developer commitment letter, moving towards long-form contracts. We have regular discussions with developers in that regard. I am happy again to discuss the issue that he has raised. In fact, two members have requested supplementary questions, so I will take both, given that we have time in hand at the moment. Ben Macpherson. My constituency is significantly affected by the issue, and a number of my constituents have contacted me with questions regarding their developments. While I appreciate a different approach and solution that will be applicable for each building, is the Scottish Government able to provide further detail on when home owners can expect to receive communications about the outcome of their single building assessments, including a high-level timescale for any remediation work required, and clarity on where the responsibility for meeting costs will lie. The First Minister is mandating later to the cabinet secretary for social justice. I set out a commitment to focus on supporting residents by ensuring that each of the buildings that are already on the pilot programme is on a single building assessment pathway by summer 2024. It is absolutely correct that the timetable and detail of work to be undertaken will depend on the circumstances of each individual building. I am happy to meet Mr Macpherson and residents, as I mentioned previously, to discuss the specific needs of his constituents. The minister will be aware that I have been working very closely with my constituents in Glasgow-Kelvin on the issue. Residents in a number of those buildings find themselves facing rising factoring fees and other costs as to remedial work is rolled out. Can I ask the minister for an update on recent engagement by the Scottish Government with relevant stakeholders regarding insurance and mortgage issues? As the member knows, we have met in a number of occasions to discuss issues that I met with residents in her constituency. I sympathise with the difficulty that home owners are facing. The regulation of mortgage lending is reserved for the UK Government, and we would expect any changes in lending market in England to be extended to all nations of the UK. However, current arrangements are not applicable in Scotland, given the reference to UK Government funding schemes that only apply in England. We have therefore been exploring what actions would be taken to provide reassurance to homeowners in Scotland, and I can confirm that we are requested to be able to issue letters of comfort to homeowners whose buildings are part of the pilot claring remediation programme. Those letters provide factual information, and while they will not completely resolve the difficulties that homeowners face, they should help. I am happy to discuss the matter further with the member. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide further information regarding the minimum income guarantee expert group. The expert group includes people from academia, trade unions and poverty and equality organisations who bring a wealth of relevant knowledge and experience, membership and terms of reference for the group, together with the minutes of meetings and papers prepared for the group and the group's interim report from March 23 are published and available on the Scottish Government website. I thank the cabinet secretary for that reply. I was very enthusiastic to see the minimum income guarantee mentioned in the First Minister's programme for government the other week. Can she say if we will need input from Westminster to go forward on this and if she has had any discussions with them? The expert group's interim report acknowledges that the full potential of a minimum income guarantee may not be realised without full legislative powers. Although devolution continues to limit what we can do, we are determined to use the powers that we have to the fullest extent. We will continue to utilise those powers to tackle poverty and inequality. The recommendations from the expert group are very welcome. They take that into account, as well as the broader advice about what could be done if we did, in the future, have additional powers. I look forward to receiving their final report in due course. That concludes portfolio questions on social justice. We will now move to the next item of business.