 Rhae, dweud hynny, drws iawn, i ddigwydd, ac i ddigwydd, i ddigwydd, pob gwaith gyda gael, Dweud hynny. A gweithio'r llesbyn ymlaen i ymwyaf i fynd i fynd i'r cyfreidio Angela Constance o gweithio'r credu ffordd gyda y cyfleid yw'r cyfiawn i'r Llywodraeth Cymru. Llywodraeth Cymru yn gwybod at y dyfodol oedd i ddim yn ddegodol i ddim yn ei hunain o'r rei gwelli. Rwy'n cael ymlaen, Angela Constance. Over the course of the last two years, there has been a clear and sustained strengthening in the Scottish economy. In the first quarter of this year, the economy moved back above pre-recession levels. A gynlluniaethau ar gyfer ar gyfer, fel y cyfan yn cael eu momentau. Unigledig yn ddiweddol, ac unigledig yn y cael eu cyflodau oesol. Efallai unigledig yn cael eu cyflodau, ac yn ymgyrch yn y cael eu cyflodau oesol sy'n gyflodau. Felly, mae unigledig yn unigledig yn y cael eu cyflodau oesol sy'n gyflodau oesol sy'n gyfer mai i July 2009. Efallai unigledig yn an copyi a fyt teulu yn glasbyn ei wneud yn esgolol yn ymgyrch, yn eu cyflodau iawn. Ar mulch i ddod, ddim yn neud yn unigledig yn y cyflodau oesol sy'n cyflodau a yw ddweud i elu sy'n cyflodau oesol sy'n glasbynnig yn nos i'ch gael y clywedau yn y y maesiau, ac yn y cyflodau allan i somebodyfiau noeth yn rheolad, ac yn y cyflodau hyn yn y cyflodau a chymraerio. Felly, y bydau i wych yn rhan i fod yn cael eu cyflodau oesol yn cael eu cyflodau oesol o eknwys i'r cyfnodau. Felly mae'r cyfnodau hynny i ddefnyddio'r newid, Scotland a'n amdegwyr i'r gwneud o 13.2 per cent ac paradigmios Ieirdeidwyr o 14.3 per cent. Mae cynhargyn ni'n 5.9 per cent yn yr ysgoleddedd Nedleolans, 7.4 per cent yn Norweil, ac 7.5 per cent yn Ddenmarc. Lydym i ddweud, ond, ond y gwirionedd, yw'r cyfnod, yn arwraith i ddweud y Llywodraeth Cymru yn gyffiniddio i gychwynnymau i ddweud y Swyddig ers 50 o'u niw hwnnw wrth eu cyfnodol, bydd i gyd yn fwy hwnnw i siad bywc gan gwelliwyr, ac ydy nhw'r wych yn ychydig ar wahanol cyddiad ei gaelig i gaelig i ddweud hynny. to realise their potential. We need the type of growth that reduces disparities between different parts of Scotland, and we need the type of growth that is sustainable and resilient and which focuses on maximising returns from work. Through existing devolved powers, the Scottish Government has taken forward a range of ambitious initiatives including opportunities for all, investment in childcare, sustained investment in reform and education, record numbers of modern apprenticeships and programmes such as Community Jobs Scotland and the Youth Employment Scotland Fund to meet the challenges that we face. We will, of course, do more, Presiding Officer. For example, by implementing the recommendations of the Young Workforce Commission, we will deliver world-class vocational education and training to support sustainable employment and to boost productivity. I announced £4.5 million of funding and an early response to the recommendations, and we share the commission's aspirations to reduce youth unemployment by 40 per cent by 2020. Scotland's economy will only achieve its full potential when we maximise the quality as well as the quantity of work, offering equality of opportunity to grow our skills, to apply those skills and to boost business productivity. We need to embed progressive workplace policies. As such, Presiding Officer, I therefore welcome the publication of the report of the Working Together review. I am grateful to all the members, Chris Parr, Mary Grant, Sue Bruce, Mary Alexander, Lillian Macer, Graham Smith, Professor Patricia Finlay and I am particularly grateful to the review group's chair, Jim Mather. They were asked to review progressive workplace policies in the public and private sectors, identify opportunities for innovation which would enhance productivity, highlight good practice and recommend how we build on that to optimise the relationships that link trade unions, employers and government. As expected, their report is substantive. In the recommendations section it says, and I quote directly, Presiding Officer, our report provides a great deal of evidence which confirms that many unions, employers and employees are already reaping the benefits of working together to construct their own business or sector-specific models of modern co-operative industrial relations. We welcome that and recognise that it is one of Scotland's existing economic strengths and we are ambitious to build on that success. Presiding Officer, I fully endorse that statement. The Scottish Government regards trade unions as key social partners playing an important role in sustaining effective democracy in society, particularly at the workplace and sees the existence of good employment practices as a key contributor to economic competitiveness and social justice. While some may not share that view, engaging and empowering employees is widely recognised as a key success factor. The report challenges businesses and employers, trade unions, members and officials and government to learn to adapt and to evolve. It identifies four action priorities, building capacity, on-going dialogue, real partnership opportunities and a willingness to learn from what works. The Scottish Government will of course consider the report and the recommendations fully engaging directly with business and trade unions and prepare a formal response. Today I want to highlight elements of the report that resonate with Scotland's future and the jobs plan for an independent Scotland that was published yesterday. We want Scotland to be an innovative, high-wage and high-productivity economy that competes in international markets and focuses on high-value goods and services. Independence will provide greater opportunities and new economic framework that better utilises our unique strengths and which delivers a more outward-focused and resilient economy. Under independence, the Scottish Government would have greater access to levers to support the labour market. I am pleased that the Working Together review, while adopting a neutral position on the referendum and rightly so, has endorsed a fair employment framework in recommendation 11. I welcome the proposed focus on supporting and encouraging diversity in all its forms in the workplace, particularly for women and young people. I endorse the importance of capturing and applying evidence of what really works and promoting an on-going dialogue at workplace, sectoral and national levels as detailed in recommendations 19 and 20. The independent body proposed by the review to lead joint work by unions, employers and government that boosts productivity and sustainable economic growth adds, in my view, to our plans for a fair work commission and a linked national convention on employment and labour relations. Adopting an inclusive, innovative and holistic approach will promote change for the better and stronger social partnerships will drive that forward. Progressive workplace policies can help to improve firms' productivity and innovation and aid sustainable growth. Well-rewarded and sustained employment is the best route out of poverty and the best way to tackle inequality. That is what I want for Scotland's future. I conclude by reiterating that the Scottish Government is most certainly for trade unions because of all that they have contributed to workplaces, to communities across Scotland, to wider civic society and, indeed, to innovation, productivity and economic growth. The Scottish Government is most certainly for businesses because they deliver jobs and the economic growth that underpins opportunities for all. We are most certainly for fair work and good employment practices and, indeed, Presiding Officer, we are most certainly for independence. The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions and it would be helpful if members who wish to ask a question were to press the request-to-speak buttons now. Question 1 is from Jenny Manor. I would like to thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement. I would also like to thank our colleagues in the trade unions and in industry for their work on this report. The employment figures today are to be welcomed. They show that economic growth is steady as part of the United Kingdom, but we all across the chamber want to do better. I commend the cabinet secretary's ambition to deliver world-class vocational education. As before, I welcomed the £4.5 million funding, but I wonder when the detail of how that money will be spent will be available for us to scrutinise. As Labour said in response to the publication of the Wood commission, it is very difficult for us, Presiding Officer, to square the Government's laudable words on vocational education with their funding priorities to date. Colleges have had a very raw deal from the Scottish Government with 140,000 fewer students going to college since 2007 and 80,000 of them being women. I would like to repeat to the cabinet secretary that a reduction target of youth unemployment of 40 per cent by 2020 is far too modest. Our government should have much higher targets for the scourge of youth unemployment. The 40 per cent target, cabinet secretary, how does the square with John Swinney's announcement this weekend that there will be full employment in an independent Scotland? I am confused as to why she is announcing a target of reducing youth unemployment by 40 per cent in her independent Scotland when John Swinney has found jobs for 100 per cent of our young people in an independent Scotland. On this vital issue, jobs for our young people, what is the Government's real target? I was half expecting a question from Ms Marra on the Government's response to the working together review. I appreciate that the Government has only had the working together review for a few days now, but it is nonetheless a very significant report that has been the result of six months work. It is a 70-page document that has made 30 very far-reaching recommendations. With regard to the £4.5 million that I announced to make early progress with regard to the Young Workforce Commission, of course, details of that were available some time ago, and much of that money was to go in foundation apprenticeships, tackling occupational segregation, supporting education Scotland in their new roles and such like. If, of course, she wishes further detail and she wishes to ask detailed questions, we can indeed supply that information to her. In terms of her swipe against the college system in Scotland, can I just remind her, before answering substantive question about full employment, that we are indeed investing more in further education than any other previous administration, and we now have a funding for it. It is also worth remembering that women are underrepresented in further education and that additional funding was supplied of £6 million for additional part-time places, and we are very much focused on women returners to the labour market. Let me just be clear for the record, what I have campaigned for and what I have believed in in all my life is full employment, and what I want to see in this Parliament is a Parliament with job-creating powers that will see full employment. In terms of the 40 per cent recommendation reduction in youth unemployment by 2020, I always thought that the Labour Party over the past two years has been calling for targets, and, if I can remind her, that target came from the Young Workforce Commission and the target was to get, move us from being in the top 10 economies when it comes to young people to being amongst the top five economies. I hope that we have unanimity in this chamber that we all support full employment, and I would contend that we have far greater prospects of achieving full employment in this country with a Parliament with full job-creating powers. Murdo Fraser. I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement and commend the members of the review group for their work. I think that all of us support the aim of improving industrial relations, although it is fair to say that, with a few high-profile exceptions, we in Scotland generally have a good record in this area in recent years. I do think that it is disappointing that the cabinet secretary chose to use her announcement to seek to further the case for independence, perhaps not surprising at this point, but it would have been better, I think, if she just tried to build some consensus. I have three brief questions by me, Deputy Presiding Officer. Firstly, the review proposes the establishment of a new independent body to lead joint work by unions, employers and governments. Why, while this may have some merit, do we really need another quango to take this forward? Secondly, recommendation 21 of the review group asks the Scottish Government to use procurement rules to promote a living wage. I thought that we would have had that debate during the procurement bill. I thought that the Scottish Government had told us that it would not be legal to do that. I wonder why nobody seems to have told the review group. Thirdly, recommendation 24 asks the Scottish Government to legislate to ensure worker representation on all public sector bodies boards. If the Scottish Government is going to look at that, can I suggest that it will also look at the question of representation on such boards of consumers or service users? Of course, we will come as no surprise to Mr Fraser that I am and that this Government is a proponent of independence. I think that it is nonetheless very interesting that he is trying, he says, or he articulates to seek consensus, because we in this Government very much believe in social partnership. We very much believe and pay tribute and credit to the trade union movement, who have made a massive contribution to the economy in this country, as well as wider civic gains. I think that you can contrast our approach to social partnership and industrial relations very positively to that of the UK Government, where the car report seems to have stumbled and failed, and now will make a much briefer report and will actually make no recommendations. Interestingly enough, because it talks about the very febrile atmosphere in the lead-up to the general election, and it is interesting that, despite us all being engaged in the most historic campaign and election and vote leading up to September 18, that nonetheless this Government and this country have been able to support a body of work that is about finding a consensus and a way forward, and building real, lasting and meaningful social partnership in this country, which has to involve trade unions, but it also has to involve employers. I think that we can stand proud by a record. I am very sympathetic to the creation of a stakeholder body. I do not see it as another clango, I do see it as an essential forum to create a win-win situation both for employers and workers, the length and breadth of this country. If you believe in social justice and sustainable economic growth, you have to see social partnership and the bodies and the dialogue and the on-going dialogue and working together as part of that vision. In terms of procurement, in terms of recommendation 21, I am sure that Mr Fraser is aware that, as a result of the procurement reform bill, we are now in a position where we are consulting on the statutory guidance. I think that the statutory guidance part of the procurement bill is very much indeed welcome and that gives an opportunity that is part of the procurement process that we can consider some wider workforce issues in terms of people's terms and conditions and indeed that they are paid. That is very important in terms of standards of living for people who are struggling with the rising cost of living and it is very important to the benefit of our economy and indeed business. My final comment, Presiding Officer, is that I met many very progressive employers on my travels in this portfolio and previous portfolios and most employers recognise the importance of progressive workplace policies and their importance to their business and the success of their business. Many thanks. Now there are many members seeking to ask questions this afternoon so succinct questions and answers would be welcome. Please, Annabelle Ewing. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The Cabinet Secretary will be aware that, in the wake of the banking crash, Westminster froze the minimum wage, forcing some of Scotland's hardest-pressed families to bear the burden of Westminster's economic mismanagement. Can the Cabinet Secretary confirm that any future independent Scottish Government of which she is a part will ensure that the minimum wage always keeps pace with inflation? Yes, Presiding Officer. Ensuring that the minimum wage is upgraded by RPI and keeps pace with the cost of living would be a key priority and, indeed, a key plank of the work taken forward by a fair work commission. I think that it is of note that, come this October, there will be 150,000 people in Scotland on the living wage. 100,000 of those are women and if the minimum wage had kept pace with the cost of living, those 100,000 women would certainly be nearly £700 better off. I see fair pay as a mark of a civic society and something that we could build and make a lot of progress on. Thanks. Ian Gray. Minister said in her statement, Scotland's economy will only achieve its full potential when we maximise the quality as well as the quantity of work. I can only agree with those fine words, but Murdo Fraser is right. We could have taken a real step in that direction by guaranteeing, not guiding, but guaranteeing a living wage and banning those lower contracts for all workers on publicly funded contracts. Why on earth would the minister and her colleagues not work together with us and the trade unions to make that happen? I do think that it is unfortunate that Mr Gray seems to have a short memory because my recollection was that Mr Gray and the trade union colleagues to his all worked very closely with the Government and while there was indeed a disagreement as to what was and was not possible under EU legislation, I think that considerable progress was made under the procurement legislation and in the fact that the amendments proposed by the Deputy First Minister included the living wage. We do of course all live with the difficulty of the fact that we have a national minimum wage enforceable in law, which is much lower, to the living wage, which is not impossible by law. I think that there has been very clear guidance from that, from Commissioner Barnier. It is a shame that we cannot recognise where progress has been made. Procurement has to be used as a power of good and to improve the working conditions for people the length and breadth of this country. The debate has moved forward. We will always look to see what more we can do and the consultation on the statutory guidance just now is very important. Many thanks. Christina McKelvie. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. In the report by the Gemma Reed Foundation working together, a vision for industrial democracy in a common wheel economy tells us that the country with the strongest worker participation rate according to the EU participation index is Denmark. The high levels of worker participation in Denmark can be attributed to three factors, the strength of trade unions rights and collective bargaining agreements, employers and employees, and worker participation on management boards. Along with the measures outlined in today's report, can the cabinet secretary reassure me and the workers of an independent Scotland that this common wheel approach will be looked at very closely as a possible model for the highest standards of employee-employer relations? Cabinet Secretary. To stop your patience and brevity, Presiding Officer, can I just concur with the tone and tenor as to Ms McKelvie's question? When people get a chance to read the report in depth, they will see for themselves the evidence, not just internationally, but across Scotland that speaks to the strength of things like collective bargaining and partnership working. Thanks. Drew Smith. Thank you, Presiding Officer. As a former board member of Scottish Union Learning, I'm particularly interested and thankful for the review goods recommendations in relation to workplace learning. Union learning is a great example of how trade unions add value to work and that there are good employers in Scotland and less interested employers. Why does the cabinet secretary believe that business in Scotland will be more likely to support workplace learning after independence? If it isn't automatic, what specific steps would she intend to encourage engagement from business to meet their skills obligations? Cabinet Secretary. Presiding Officer, Mr Smith is right to say that there is nothing inevitable about the relationships and conduct between people and interested parties. However, it is important to recognise the considerable achievements not just of the trade union movement but of employers the length and breadth of Scotland. I believe firmly from consulting with a whole host of stakeholders that there is a real appetite in Scotland for a social partnership framework and to take things forward. I'm very pleased that he's shown an interest in Scottish Union learning. I have a particular portfolio responsibility for that. Scottish Union learning has certainly thrived under this Government and we remain very committed to it. Willie Coffey. I ask the cabinet secretary in an independent Scotland will the Scottish Government give a commitment to ending current UK employment practices which see people, particularly young people exploited due to low wages and poor conditions of service. Can I accept? Presiding Officer, I regret very much that employment law remains reserved to the UK. I know that Willie Coffey has written to me about the experiences of one of his young constituents. It was experienced, certainly very similar to a young constituent of mines where they were very subject to exploitative practices and extremely poor pay. Although employment law is currently not reserved to this place there was certainly action I undertook with Skills Development Scotland to ensure that young people could have access to better employment advice. On that regard, I also have to pay tribute to the STUC Youth Committee and all the work that they have done in this regard. My final point, Presiding Officer, is that I think that fair work for all, irrespective of age will be a key plank of the work taken forward by a fair work commission. Thank you. Recommendation 24 recommends to keep in mind in particular the need to increase the number of women on our public sector boards. I, of course, whole heartedly agree with that. Given that, can the cabinet secretary explain why the nominations to the Scottish Government's fiscal commission do not support the policy that women should make up 40 per cent of the membership of public boards? Well, Mr Sheung, this Government is certainly leading by example and has 40 per cent of cabinet with female representation and I think that it would be fair to say that Cabinet is indeed Scotland's company board and I'm glad to see that the UK Government followed STUC and have followed where we have led and have increased the number of women that are in the UK Government at a very senior level. With regard to recommendation 24 and I have to apologize, I actually didn't answer part of Murdo Fraser's question in relation to recommendation 24 and I'll sweep that up now in my reply to Jim Hewme. The recommendation in 24 is that the Government should legislate to ensure that there is effective worker representation from representative trade unions on the board of every public sector body. We will certainly be taking a close look at that recommendation, taking it seriously and investigating it because it chimes very clearly with our aspirations and plans to increase the representation of women on boards in Scotland and we have laid out our intentions and, if necessary, our ability and desire to legislate should we be required to do so. The UK Government's austerity policies and welfare cuts are hitting women the hardest. Does the cabinet secretary agree that by increasing the participation of women in the workplace and reducing the gender pay gap that exists in some professions Scotland could seek to create economic benefits? I think that the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and indeed this working together review report made a very salient point about inequality. We often, when we're discussing and debating inequality, talk about it in terms of welfare reform or cuts or tax policies rightly so but we mustn't forget to say that well-rewarded high quality work is actually the best route out of poverty. I thank the minister for our statement and for the direction of travel she has indicated in a progressive and sustainable employment. The concept of decent work is one that we can unite around although I would observe it stands in contrast to the Government's support that she gives to union avoiding and tax avoiding companies like Amazon. Can I ask the minister whether she will introduce progressive policies supported by Labour such as wage ratios minimising the salary differentials between the highest and lowest paid? I'll look at the detail of any recommendations that Ken McIntosh wishes to forward me and perhaps on the note of consensus I'll just unite with Mr McIntosh and say that I agree that everybody should pay their tax sometimes tax enforcement is as much of an issue as in terms of disagreements about tax policy. Cabinet Secretary, the public sector workers have been under sustained attack from Westminster Governments over recent years whether it be from their pay to their pensions and I think that can only be halted by independence but can the cabinet secretary agree that by putting public employee representatives on all public sector boards we can give workers a real voice and the public improved services? I think that one of the gains of devolution and indeed the trade union movement in this country is the fact that we have a no compulsory redundancy policy in the public sector and in terms of the directly answering Mrs Watt's question I think that what we have seen in terms of employee representation at director level, non-exec level and NHS boards has proven to be very successful not just in terms of a more collegiate workforce but in terms of managing chains, communicating with the workforce and indeed I believe has delivered benefits to patients. I thank the minister for the statement which recognises the importance of sustaining democracy in the workplace as well as recommendations 17 in the report which seeks to give the new body a role in increasing democracy in the workplace. Is it a policy objective for the Scottish Government to increase workplace democracy and if so how will that be integrated into the range of business support services and grant schemes such as RSA given for example the notorious track record of a company like Amazon? We do have a policy position of supporting a workplace democracy and participation. We of course as a government have to reply to the detail of this very extensive report and can I say that recommendation 17 is very much linked to recommendation 10 in terms of how you get that infrastructure for social partnership. Can I just leave Patrick Harvie with a quote actually from the report on page 12 which I think is hugely significant and it says that a number of recent initiatives undertaken by the Scottish Government and others is that there is a growing appreciation that what happens in the workplace is important in its influence on economic activity, performance, growth and inequality and that it is important as macroeconomic factors and therefore gives us scope greater scope for intervention and workplace practices that is going to make a difference to work in lives. Many thanks cabinet secretary that concludes the statement on working together with the Scottish Workplace Policy in Scotland. I will allow a few seconds for members to change places before the next item of business. The next item of business is a debate on motion number 1077 in the name of Nicola Sturgeon on welfare and I invite all members who wish to participate in this debate to press the request to speak buttons now please and I call on Nicola Sturgeon to speak to and move the motion. Deputy First Minister 13 minutes please. Thank you very much. Debates on welfare always provoked me as I'm sure they do in many others in this chamber conflicting emotions. Firstly, I feel a sense of regret that our welfare state which is so often held up as one of the defining achievements of the union is being systematically dismantled causing real and additional hardship to those in society whom most need our help. There is now very strong evidence that the Tories so-called welfare reforms are failing people right across Scotland and that their cuts are having a devastating impact on some of the most vulnerable individuals, families and communities in our society. Indeed, when the Secretary of State for Scotland says as he did in April that we are part of a fantastic system I think he demonstrated just how out of touch he and indeed the other unionist parties are dealing with vital issues. So regret and a heavy heart are what I inevitably bring to any debate on welfare. But standing as we are just five weeks from the referendum I also feel a real sense of hope. We have before us a precious opportunity to change course and to build not overnight but over time a social security system that meets our needs. We need an economy by equipping people better for the world of work one that supports the needs of individuals by ensuring that those who do work get a decent wage for the job that they do and one that supports the needs of the vulnerable by ensuring the decent safety net that I believe and I know many people agree with is one of the hallmarks of a civilised society. So I think today's debate is an opportunity to crystallise the choice on offer. The choice between on the one hand a vision under the present system and on the other a different, better more progressive and supportive path with independence. As people consider that choice that is before them on 18 September they should of course do so in the knowledge that further Westminster cuts are still to come. Cuts that will impact most on women, on children and on the disabled. As people consider that choice I am confident that the policies we have outlined and the vision we put forward will encourage them to vote to take these powers into our own hands. Perfect illustration of that choice and a topic that we've discussed many times before in this Parliament is the bedroom tax. Yesterday the welfare reform committee considered and I'm glad to say agreed to support the section 63 order to transfer the power over expenditure and discretionary housing payments to Scottish ministers. That's a welcome step. It's a step that means we can now ensure that no person in Scotland need to be adversely affected by the bedroom tax. But it is not a democratic outrage that a tax that had no political or popular support in Scotland was ever introduced here in the first place. Make no mistake all we are able to do with the bedroom tax is mitigate to take money from other parts of the Scottish budget and to mitigate a policy that had this Parliament had a say would never have been introduced at all. Section 63 order will not end the bedroom tax only by this Parliament having the power to decide will we be able to do what the majority in Scotland I believe the vast majority in Scotland want and that is to abolish the bedroom tax completely. And that is I think the nub of the matter the nub of the debate we are having today with the UK parties now battling to outdo each other on how tough they can be on welfare is becoming very clear that if we truly want a system that treats people with dignity and respect then independence is the only option, the only way for us to achieve that. In Scotland's future we set out a vision and a range of measures that will see us start to ensure that we have a welfare system more suited to Scottish needs. If there is a yes vote we have said very clearly that we will halt the roll out of universal credit and personal independence payments we will abolish the bedroom tax and ensure that welfare payments increase in line with inflation to avoid the poorest families those with the least in our society being plunged further and deeper into poverty. We will increase carers allowance to recognise the contribution that carers make and to end the situation and currently get the lowest rate of benefit of everyone claiming benefits and all of these policies will directly and positively impact on people's financial circumstances and on their quality of life. If there is a no vote we will be unable no matter how much we might try and we will to stop the rise in poverty that Westminster policies will cause and there is no doubt that the impact is being felt most by the most vulnerable in particular by those with health conditions or disabilities. Rather than help, support individuals Westminster is ploughing on with flawed systems like the now five times reviewed work capability assessment and I warmly welcome the expert working group on welfare's report which recommended that the current work capability assessment is scrapped and it's something this Government has committed to do when the powers to do so are in our hands. Just this morning we have published a research paper which lays bare the impact of the UK Government's reforms on disabled people. It finds that disabled people in Scotland are likely to experience significant and disproportionate loss of income due to these Westminster cuts. Of the 190,000 existing claimants of disability living allowance who will be reassessed for personal independence payments it's expected that more than 100,000 of them will lose some or all of their disability benefits by 2018 with a loss of at least 1100 pounds a year. People who get enhanced mobility support could lose up to 3,000 pounds a year. Let's remember that for people in those circumstances that's a loss that takes away more than pounds and pens, important though that is that's a loss that could take away their very independence. Making cuts of this magnitude on the backs of disabled and sick people is in my view flatly wrong and I believe it's time we got the powers to do something about that. Independent research has recently concluded that the cumulative impact of welfare reforms on income is particularly severe for households with disabled children and adults at about 1,500 pounds per year on average. That impact is more than double the average reduction faced by non-disabled households and we already know, all of us already know that disabled people are more likely to be in poverty and face higher costs of living than non-disabled people. It beggars belief to me that in modern Scotland we are prepared to stand by and watch this get worse but of course while disabled people are being hit disproportionately they're not alone in bearing the brunt. We also know from children's charities that up to 100,000 more children will be pushed into poverty by 2020 if we stay on this Westminster path. In March we published our child poverty strategy it set out the progress that we're making in childcare, education, youth and unemployment it showed that since devolution under this administration and the previous there was a real improvement in the rates of child poverty in Scotland that is to be welcomed because I believe that while we may disagree on the best way to combat child poverty everyone in this Parliament is united in wanting to see it eradicated within a generation but the latest figures show that the reduction in poverty that we have seen in recent years is now being reversed Westminster cuts like the reduction in in-work tax credits are reducing incomes for some of our poorest households now we will do as we always should everything possible in our power to ensure that no child lives in poverty no child grows up in poverty but the bottom line is this when policies from Westminster are taking us in the wrong direction when they're undermining all of those efforts when they're cancelling out all that this Parliament is able to do then the case to take these decisions ourselves becomes absolutely overwhelming because by doing that we can combine what we're already doing on education and support for young people on employment on welfare and on benefits and with that approach we can begin to make real inroads into not just mitigating poverty but alleviating it for good it will take time, it will take effort it will take determination but we will have the powers and the access to our vast resources we are after all one of the richest countries in the world to make it possible and that has got to be better that has got to be so much better than standing by powerless while Westminster does its damage to the most vulnerable and to the very fabric of our society I want to start to draw my remarks to a close today by posing some questions specifically to my colleagues on the Labour benches because Labour's Tory and Lib Dem partners in the no campaign support the welfare policies of the Westminster Government I disagree with them I disagree with them profoundly but at least I know where they stand Labour will claim today I'm pretty sure that they don't support the policies of the current Westminster Government they will say and I suspect they're saying it more in hope than any serious expectation that the answer to this is not independence on the Scottish Parliament and a Labour Government at Westminster so taking that taking that at face value I want to give Labour the opportunity today to answer a couple of very straight questions and the questions I have for Jackie Baillie to answer are these firstly what new powers is this Parliament guaranteed to get short of a yes vote on the incomes of the disabled of women and of children and secondly even if there is a Labour Government at Westminster and Jackie Baillie cannot guarantee that but even if there is what is it that that Labour Government will do differently on welfare apart from abolishing the bedroom tax what precisely is Ed Miliband going to do that is different to what David Cameron is already doing will Labour halt the roll-out of personal independence payments will Labour protect the disabled from the cuts that I have outlined today that they stand to face if personal independence payments go ahead or is the reality that the disabled will face exactly the same cuts under Labour as they do under the Tories these are important questions if we are to crystallise that choice that faces people on the 18th of September if Jackie Baillie is about to get up and oppose these cuts like I do but then argue that getting our own hands on the decision making powers is not the best way to address them then I would put it to everyone in this chamber that she needs to be specific very specific about what Labour at Westminster will do instead and then she needs to tell us what will happen if we end up with another Tory Government after all I suspect although I hope that I'm wrong that at the end of our speech we'll still be waiting for those answers which will prove the point that whether it's Labour or Tory if we won't know the outlook for the most vulnerable in our society will be exactly the same Presiding Officer it's clear that the UK Government under successive administrations has failed to deliver the changes needed to ensure a fair welfare system fit for all not only that but the proposed so-called reforms that are currently underway are likely to make the situation worse it is only with independence that we can create here in Scotland a social security system that is fair and one that treats people with dignity and respect it's only this Government and this Parliament that can stand in the way of Westminster implementing further measures that will cause poverty, particularly child poverty to increase and the only way we can guarantee the powers we need to stop that happening is to take the power to decide these things into our own hands so that the future of our welfare system is not decided by Tory Governments at Westminster but here in this Parliament so that we can build a better, fairer more equal society I move the motion in my name I should point out to the chamber that we are tight for time this afternoon I call into acubalia to speak to you and move amendment 10777.4 nine minutes please Ms Bailey thank you very much I find it astonishing that from a party that can't even tell us which currency benefits will be paid in I will take I will absolutely take no lessons from Nicola Sturgeon who's boss at the last general election encouraged people to vote liberal and look where that got a sit down Presiding Officer I welcome the opportunity to debate welfare because it was Labour in the post-war austerity years that was bold in its thinking creating the welfare state and creating the NHS and I am very clear in Nicola Sturgeon's right we are witnessing the destruction by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Government of that welfare state there is no doubt in my mind that the consequences of the so-called Tory reform of the welfare system is that it is not being treated inhumanely whether it is sanctions driving people to food banks or people waiting months and months for their personal independence payments the distress is self-evident and it is not just those who are unemployed that need help there are increasing numbers of people at food banks who are employed but in low paid jobs we are facing a cost of living crisis the likes of which has not been seen wages are flatlining or declining the price of everyday items is going up a staggering 25% in the last five years alone so just getting by is increasingly difficult I believe that there is a shared analysis about the extent of the misery caused by the Conservative policies for those who are disabled, those who are unemployed or in low paid jobs and that for the majority in this chamber a rejection of what can only be described as an ideologically driven attack on some of the poorest in our society but the real question here is what we do about it for the SNP the answer is independence their answer to every question no matter what that question is when Labour was building the welfare state the answer was independence when we were creating the NHS the answer was independence and now as families face a cost of living crisis the answer again is simply independence the truth is that people in Scotland are caught between two Governments with the wrong priorities obsession with the constitution blinds the Scottish Government from taking action now we can provide people with much needed help now we have the power to do so it is frankly criminal not to use it no we can of course vote the Tories out return a Labour Government in 2015 which is the quickest route to making a difference to people's lives no I think you should sit and listen can I welcome the efforts of the expert group on welfare to be frank I expected more detail and a better understanding of costings from the SNP Government for many many years now they have argued for the transfer no for the transfer of power over welfare yet the bulk of the recommendations will not be considered until after the referendum again as with much else proposals for independence there is a lack of clarity a lack of certainty and there is considerable risk people in Scotland deserve better than across your fingers and hope for the best approach to welfare and the future of the country in a recent you gov poll in a recent you gov poll 79% of Scots said they wanted their pensions to be the same across the UK as did 75% of people for welfare they agreed that pooling and sharing our resources across 63 million people rather than 5 million people make sense like us they believe in something bigger than independence they believe in social solidarity across the UK they want the pensioner in Liverpool to be paid as the pensioner same as the pensioner in Linlesco the disabled person in Dundee to get the same support as the disabled person in Doncaster and they want a child who is poor in Gateshead to be cared about just as much as the child who is poor in Glasgow I'll take an intervention from Nicola Sturgeon if she can tell me why 79% of Scots are wrong Deputy First Minister Jackie Baillie is setting out there is why people all over the UK should lose the same amount in benefit under the Tories but I've got a very we set out today 100,000 disabled people more than a thousand pounds a year will Labour halt the roll-out of personal independence payments yes or no Jackie Baillie clearly was a speech rather than a question she has set herself the cabinet secretary has set herself has set herself against the 79% of Scots who believe in something bigger than independence let me deal with their announcements on carers allowance because it is right that we recognise the contribution of carers to our society and provide them with support I know the cabinet secretary acknowledges that increasing carers allowance alone is no substitute for the range of other services that carers need like respite however it is disappointing that the Scottish Government chose to spin the announcement saying that 102,000 carers would be better off costing almost £60 million when she knows that this is just not true what the Scottish Government failed to explain is that any carer who is in receipt of benefit would have carers allowance offset against that in other words they would not receive that extra money the true figure supplied by the office of national statistics is 57,000 it is often said that the SNP overclaim and under deliver and here is an unfortunate example of them doing just that let me turn to costs there is very little in the paper that has been costed and I look forward to the cabinet secretary telling me the costings because without a price tag this is nothing more than a wish list firstly there are the set up cost for our IT system estimated to be 300 to 400 million pounds yesterday the cabinet secretary tried to suggest that we could just use the UK system just like Northern Ireland forgetting of course that they're going to remain in the United Kingdom whilst we would be a foreign country and we might not even have the same currency but you know also using the UK system means that she can't make the changes she says she wants to make secondly experts suggest look she's like Jackie Baillie can I stop you a moment please if members are not taking interventions then other members who are trying should resume their seats please immediately Jackie Baillie secondly experts suggest that the cost of proposals for carers allowance, the bedroom tax the stopping the roll out of pips would cost at least £350 million that's £350 million extra on the social security bill each year there's no detail of how we would pay for that instead what we see is tax cuts for big businesses the cost of which will be borne by the poorest in our society other proposals like universal credit costed, operating benefits to meet the cost of moving admirable but uncosted replacing DLA and PIP uncosted and the very real prospect the very real prospect of reassessing disabled people as they transition from one benefit to another causing even more distress something the cabinet secretary did not deny when questioned yesterday no costs, no detail just vague promises about how it will all be better but you know it doesn't take constitutional change it takes political well no even where the SNP has control of welfare they've not delivered the Scottish welfare fund underspent at a time when the need is clear one year to drag them kicking and screaming into this chamber to mitigate the bedroom tax and I am pleased that yesterday yesterday the cabinet secretary said there is nothing to stop local authorities from back dating to help those in arrears of bedroom tax from last year that is a very welcome U-turn on their previous position but you know when it comes to tackling poverty they have a record they stripped £1 billion from programmes to tackle poverty they underspent their budget on fuel poverty when the number of households in fuel poverty is at 900,000 and all time high and they refused to take action on the living wage to the procurement when they had the chance to do so their actions speak louder than their words and Presiding Officer experts say that the first Scottish Parliament post independence will face a £6 billion deficit £6 billion cut from public spending like schools like hospitals like welfare Labour has an ambitious programme we will increase the minimum wage we will introduce workplace contracts to guarantee the living wage we will tax bankers bonuses to fund a job guarantee scheme for those out of work we will scrape the hated bedroom tax we will transform work capability assessment we will tackle the huge backlog of PIP claims and we will devolve housing benefit and the work programme to Scotland what Labour promise, Labour will deliver what we have been promised by the SNP is vague, is uncosted is likely to amount to hundreds of millions of pounds more than we currently spend and they have no idea how it's going to be paid for Ms Bailey I have given you some extra time for all of the interruptions but you really must come to us My final sentence Presiding Officer it relies more on across your fingers and hope for the best approach it is inherently dishonest and the people of Scotland deserve much better than that Thank you Good afternoon ahead in this debate Can I remind members that if members are not taking interventions then they must be respectful and resume their seats Can I also remind members that comments from sedentary positions are not acceptable Thank you I now call on Alex Johnston to speak to and move amendment 10777.2 Mr Johnston six minutes Thank you very much Deputy Presiding Officer it comes as no surprise that the timing of this debate has coincided with the publication of a report which allows the Scottish Government to make further claims about its position on welfare However, the problem that drives us today is the one that this Government does not realise the role that welfare plays in achieving our economic recovery The Westminster Government have made it quite clear that welfare does have a role in economic recovery There is no coincidence that we in this country in the UK as a whole have the proportion of work-less households as the lowest ever recorded The number and proportion of children in these households is at a record low The number of children in households where no one has ever worked is at its lowest level for some 15 years The inactivity rate at 21.7% has never been lower reflecting in falling numbers claiming inactive benefits Employment is up in every UK region since the election three quarters of the rise in employment are people working full time and particularly in the 16 to 24 age group the number of those not in employment or education or training is at the lowest level for over 8 years When we talk about these numbers the Government in Scotland often like to claim a responsibility for that but they cannot claim that responsibility if they pursue a negative policy in relation to our welfare reforms and the key welfare reform which has been raised by the the press release which came out this morning is the change in disability benefits and looking at the press release that was published this morning the government make it clear there are 100,000 Scots are expected to lose some or all of their UK disability benefits by 2018 with individuals set to lose at least 1,120 per year now these figures are figures that we have to look slightly more closely at first of all of the 190,000 Scots who are in receipt of disability benefit if 100,000 are likely to lose out then it's reasonable to expect that the bringing in of personal independence payments would actually benefit some 90,000 Scots the 90,000 Scots who are most severely disabled and that is the key change that moving from DLA to PIP is designed to satisfy it is a desire to ensure that those who are in greatest need benefit from the resource that is available of course that figure of 100,000 that will see their support reduced includes a significant proportion who as a part of this change will move from disability payments on to universal credit of course that reduction in the total budget is not accounted for by the Scottish Government and consequently skews the figures but the impression is also being given that the amount of money being paid in disability benefits is somehow reducing yet the figures that are available through the DWP and I'm sure that someone will be willing to dispute them appear to tell a very different story the real terms budget for the current financial year is a record high the money that is being paid in DLA will begin to tail off as we reach the end of this decade and PIP begins to kick in in fact it is not until the later years of this decade that the amount of money being paid will allowances and benefits will begin to fall below the record high which we will see in the current year however at the same time the take up of universal credit will stop that gap plug that gap and ensure that nobody loses out the key issue here is that we must ensure that as we move forward into economic recovery we provide opportunities for those many people who would wish to work but have not had the opportunity to get back into the workforce unless we can deliver a viable healthy workforce in this country we will not benefit from the recovery that is currently on going now I'd like to turn finally to the discussion which took place yesterday at the welfare reform committee and it's already been mentioned by Jackie Baillie because it was during that discussion that Jackie Baillie, Michael McMahon and myself raised the issue of funding and how the Scottish Government intend to fund the promises they have made well under questioning it became relatively clear that the promises that are being made are by and large empty and unfunded it would appear that the £6 billion that the cabinet secretary likes to talk about as the money that's being removed from the overall budget is not to be misinterpreted as a promise to reinstate that money there appears to be no financial commitment in the first years of an independent Scotland to returning any of that resource to the people whom the cabinet secretary claims it has been taken off from I will finish with the taking the opportunity to ask a question of the cabinet secretary and she can then answer that question sometime later in the debate if the opportunity arises and that is will she be honest with the people of Scotland will she tell us prior to the 18th of September what it is she intends to spend additionally within the budget for welfare in an independent Scotland will she tell us what it will be spent what will be spent or will she come clean and tell us that she intends to spend not a penny more thank you we now turn to the open debate if we do have to pause for disruptions this afternoon then obviously the time will come out of members' speeches I call Kevin Stewart to be followed by Ken Macintosh, maximum six minutes please thank you Presiding Officer we've already heard this afternoon on the secretary of state for Scotland Alistair Carmichael thinks that we have a fantastic welfare system I would like to see Mr Carmichael say that to some of my many constituents who are suffering because of these horrendous welfare reforms that we are seeing from the Tory Liberal Government in London, backed by the Labour Party to the hilt at the end of the day Jackie Baillie said earlier on that our answer to everything was independence, which it's not but her answer to everything seems to be stick with the Tories that is the Labour answer stick with the Tories that's certainly not what I want to see for Scotland and let's look at some of the impacts of these welfare reforms since 2009 there has been a staggering increase in jobseekers allowance sanctions and a written answer to myself it shows that there has been a 65% increase in the number of disabled people who have been sanctioned in that time a 76% increase in the amount of women being sanctioned and a staggering 63% increase in the amount of lone parents who have been sanctioned over that period of time it is absolutely clear that the current UK sanctions regime is neither ethical nor proportionate and that is the potential to leave already vulnerable people at risk of poverty and we see that poverty that increase in poverty by the rise in the usage of food banks in Scotland a 400% rise in the usage of food banks in the last year an 1103% rise according to the Trussell Trust in the usage of food banks by children I believe that that is completely and utterly unacceptable and that is not the kind of society that I want to live in however it seems that members of the Better Together campaign feel that food bank usage is absolutely fine and in a post on Facebook Better Together Aberdeenshire's Facebook page reported in the Press and Journal today they claim that the rise in food bank demand was Scotland becoming a normal European country Scotland becoming a normal European country I don't know who wrote that but quite frankly they're off their head I have to say that I want to live in a normal country a normal independent country where we don't have to rely on food banks where families and children including families and work have to queue to get food parcels that is not the kind of country it may be one that Better Together activists want to live in no I won't because your side will not give way let me turn to some of the other remarks that have been made by other groups about these welfare reforms the welfare reform in Scotland the impact on people living with HIV and viral hepatitis report by HIV Scotland hepatitis Scotland says the reforms are causing significant uncertainty and anxiety worsening the mental and physical health of people in great need what we have seen or what I have seen as I have gone round various groups in recent times is not just uncertainty and anxiety but fear absolute fear being to happen to folks the MS Society in Aberdein recently held an open day where MSPs were invited to discuss with sufferers their fears about the reforms that are about to hit us they have a great worry about Pip Ms Bailey has confirmed today that Labour will keep Pip in her speech today a great fear that these folks will lose their independence or that their carers will be forced to leave work in order to care for them I have to say that the vast bulk of the folks who I have spoken to wants to remain in work for as long as they possibly can and often their DLA parents are the way for them to be able to stay in work those DLA parents provide additional care so that their loved ones can continue to go and work so this great welfare reform policy which was supposed to be to ensure that folk who can work will get work is blown completely out of the water because of these scenarios that are going to inevitably happen this fear this fear is immense and what I want to see and what I want to live in is a country where we can replace hope with fear and create a system that works for all thank you, Presiding Officer thank you, I call Ken Macintosh to be followed by John Mason thank you, Presiding Officer too much of my case work in the last couple of years has been about welfare and in particular about the impact of the welfare reforms we're all aware that times have been tough and just when families and individuals have needed to fall back on our welfare safety net they find that safety net withdrawn people with disabilities have been filled with anxiety even at the prospect of being reassessed families whether because of sanctions or for a combination of reasons have found themselves with no cash or no fuel even beyond the immediate benefit system we have the most vulnerable affected by decisions taken at all levels of government but directly affecting their welfare students with additional needs find their college courses withdrawn people the length and breadth of our country suffering from a lack of affordable housing and so much as I am pleased to be discussing welfare yet again in Parliament today this afternoon's motion also sums up much of my frustration with the independence debate that the Scottish Government over the last three years Labour and the SNP should be united on welfare working together to oppose a Tory agenda we both resist standing up for the vulnerable trying to lift people out of poverty rather than blaming them for their misfortune defending or even rebuilding a system based on the words of the expert group on dignity and respect rather than punishment and shame Dave Thompson he mentioned there that Labour and the SNP should be united in relation to these welfare issues against the Tories does he not accept that the majority in this Parliament which would also be the case in an independent Scotland would indeed be united against these welfare cuts and all these other things that are coming from the Tories and between us and the SNP and Labour we would be creating a far better fairer welfare system in independent Scotland I recognise that the argument that Mr Thompson uses but I believe that the answer is twofold one is that we should unite in this Parliament to use the powers of this Parliament to make a difference and to protect the people of Scotland but it's also fundamentally an argument for getting rid of the Tory Government at Westminster not for breaking up the whole of the country I will I really appreciate the tone that Ken Macintosh has strike and I think it's very positive I'm just not clear what it is that the Labour Party is saying they will do differently on universal credit, on personal independence payments and some of the other changes that are causing so much hardship to what the Tories are doing Ken Macintosh Well interestingly to that my response is that the SNP have actually modelled most of their policies on Labour tried to copy Labour's policies there's not that much difference between what the SNP are trying to present as an independent Scotland and what we would be doing in the UK it's simply whether you want to do it in an independent Scotland or in the UK and I genuinely don't think there's much difference and the difficulty to me seems to be that although we do share a broadly similar approach it's independence that gets in the way for the Scottish Government and its supporters independence is portrayed as the answer to welfare just as Jackie Baillie said earlier it's the answer to nuclear disarmament it's the answer to unemployment the rest of us see it as a simplistic and misleading distraction now on the positive side we only have to endure this for another five weeks and I'm optimistic I'm optimistic that Scotland will emerge from a resounding no vote and can unite around a shared vision for a progressive future because that's the language that has dominated the referendum debate and it's one of the few positives that I think we can salvage from this national discussion so why is independence not the answer I'll just take a few examples and food banks to begin with the First Minister faces a parliamentary question from her colleague Jackie Baillie tomorrow and she'll ask whether there will be food banks in independent Scotland and I'll be intrigued to hear his response because the evidence presented to the welfare reform committee was clear about the various reasons behind the growth and demand for such a basic as food the rise in food, energy and housing costs being part of the story but the introduction of various welfare reforms including specifically the increased use of sanctions being another Labour and SNP members on the committee are united in our frustration that UK ministers seem to be in deliberate denial about this link but it's difficult to see how the SNP offer on welfare in an independent Scotland differs from Labour according to the evidence we heard yesterday from the Deputy First Minister herself the SNP for example want to end sanctions but maintain conditionality and I thought there was an interesting contrast in fact between the Deputy First Minister's evidence a relatively sober contribution to the welfare reform committee yesterday and the entirely un-costed but stridently assertive motion in her name today yesterday the Deputy First Minister painted a picture of a reformed welfare system but one which she said would not involve any net increased costs but today we're back with the language and we'll stop the cuts but with no detail of how that will be paid for and I thought it was actually just amusing if not certainly ironic if not amusing that she asked for answers to questions that she won't even answer herself welfare is inherently complex just to expand on why independence is not the answer it's also worth reminding ourselves for example that although much of our discussion is focused around out of work benefits most welfare spending goes on older people including disability and housing support a single cost being the state pension and in his infamous leaked cabinet paper John Swinney himself noted the worries that exist over the affordability of pensions in an independent Scotland we know that the institute for I will do the institute for fiscal studies noted that the average age of the Scottish population will increase more rapidly than for the UK and the Office for National Statistics said that Scotland is projected to have a higher and increasing dependency ratio amongst those of pension age Presiding Officer most Scots recognise that we are better off working together with the rest of the UK pooling and sharing our resources but also using the powers of this Parliament to make a difference rather than simply using welfare to nurse grievance with Westminster I'm sorry to advise Parliament that I don't have time to give back for interventions interventions must be contained in speeches John Mason to be followed by Liam McArthur Thank you If there was one more area I would like to see come to this Parliament and we have responsibility for it would certainly be welfare for two main reasons one because it makes absolute sense we are responsible for education preparing young people and others for the workplace we're responsible for health when people can't afford work we're responsible for getting more and better housing we're responsible for trying to create more and better jobs so the clear missing ingredient in that whole package is welfare and benefits and we should be looking to decide on them we need a system which both helps and encourages folk into work if they are able to do so but we see so many faults with the present system and we've been hearing a lot this afternoon I'm sure we're going to hear more but particularly that people are not financially better off if they get into work people are working but they still need to get benefits to manage to live on on top of that and currently the changes or cuts are especially hitting women disabled folk and younger people and my second main reason would be because this Parliament across the parties, particularly between Labour and the SNP, has shown an appetite for it for dealing with welfare reform or welfare we have set up a welfare reform committee which we have not done for many other reserved matters and when Labour asked for measures to deal with the bedroom tax they were clearly pushing at an open door as many of us including John Swinney the cabinet secretary detested the bedroom tax and the main challenge was how to tackle it within the rules now if I could just look at some specific issues and firstly sanctions we had a number of briefings today one being from the child poverty action group and they list four effects impacts on children of the recent reforms real term cuts secondly reducing entitlement to tax credits thirdly reducing value of child benefit and fourthly sanctions and benefit delays but the first three of these are talking about erosion and reduction and these kind of words the fourth one, sanctions is talking about people being left with absolute late no income at all and that is what I find so awful about sanctions and for that matter benefit delays where all income can be stopped often for the slightest of reasons and how is anyone meant to cope with that now on this point I realise we are not voting on Alison Johnson's amendment with its reference to citizens income and I realise that that is not without its challenges but surely we could at least agree that that is a direction that we would all like to move in and whatever the situation everyone would be entitled to a roof over their head food and heat another point I would like to make is on food banks absolutely yes Ken Macintosh it was just a question I put to the Deputy First Minister yesterday that the SNP's expert group on welfare has said that we should end sanctions but it says that we will have conditionality which the Deputy First Minister recognised are sanctions by another name does the member recognise that same description? John Mason I think that one of the key things the Deputy First Minister said was about we cannot change the system overnight but it is the direction we are going on and that is what I want to stress in my argument today that I think Labour and ourselves and that the example has been the bedroom tax want to move in the same direction to have a good strong welfare system and part of that I think I would like to move to is the suggestion of just made that there should be a certain level of unconditionality that people are entitled to a certain income no matter what because that's what we give to prisoners and presumably that's what everybody should be entitled to and I'm going to run out of time here but just to mention food banks I was meeting one day one of the local co-ordinators for the north and east of Glasgow and she and I are both convinced that more people are needing to use food banks than are actually accessing them at the moment. A lot of people are reluctant to even go into a food bank and ask about it then they find out they've got to get a voucher. The DWP does not give out vouchers the Citizens Advice Bureau do not give out vouchers many GPs do not give out vouchers so it is not altogether easy to get food from a food bank and the Trussell Trust is quite a strict system as to how often people can access food parcels frankly that is not often enough if somebody has been sanctioned for 13 weeks so the idea that food bank use somehow greater than the actual need strikes me is totally unbelievable at least in my area I'm totally convinced that the need is greater than the current level of usage. Now in the Equal Opportunities Committee we've been particularly looking at a range of issues but we've got good briefings today which I'm not going to be able to go into but just to mention them in passing gender in gender has got a good briefing about how women are being affected so much more than men with the present cuts 5.8 billion of the changes are hitting women whereas equivalent figure for men is only 2.2 billion disability inclusion Scotland have briefed us that the current programme of welfare reform is having a devastating and disproportionate impact on disabled people in Scotland and young homeless people were getting evidence tomorrow at the committee from Action for Children saying that some young people also face sanctions on their housing benefit when they access certain training courses so I guess my question for the anti-independence parties and especially for Labour would be will you not support welfare coming to Hollywood whatever the vote in September and if not why not the sad fact is that a no vote is very unlikely to give more devolution I guess that's why I find so disappointing about Labour's position in this chamber although clearly Labour members outside like Bob Holman in East End of Glasgow are strongly supporting independence why are Labour here putting the constitution ahead of the real needs of their constituents why are they so focused on the constitution and refusing change will they not just choose what is best for real needy people surely they would accept that Labour and the SNP here at Hollywood are going to produce together better welfare solutions than Labour and the Conservatives at Westminster even if we give the Labour amendment the benefit of the doubt and assume they win the 2015 UK election the Tories are likely to be back in 2020 and they will undo anything positive that has been done so Labour have the choice do they want Labour and the SNP working together to do welfare or do they want to alternate with the Tories at Westminster thank you very much I'm afraid I now have to keep people strictly members strictly to six minutes Liam McArthur to be followed by Annabelle Ewing thank you everybody I welcome this latest debate on welfare an issue clearly of fundamental importance to people right across the country indeed I declare a personal interest but it has been a long-term recipient of DLA so let me assure the chamber at the outset that I need no persuading about the anxieties felt by those directly affected by these changes and indeed the associated uncertainty and it's partly for this reason I believe we must be absolutely clear about what we're proposing to do and equally importantly why it is also why we need to continue to listen carefully and be prepared to argue for change where evidence shows that things are not working and I do not doubt that the process of welfare reform has been difficult and unsettling but I do think that the UK Government can legitimately claim to being clear about the objectives reform but also showing a willingness to listen and adapt where necessary including in relation to the needs of cancer sufferers those living in residential care and of course the way in which the spare room levy is applied this will need to continue but it does not seek to shy away from the need for reform something accepted by most independent experts and all political parties including it would seem the SNP and little wonder the reality is the current system too often provides the wrong incentives for too many people that acts as a real obstacle to work over the period when our economy experienced almost uninterrupted growth the welfare budget increased in real terms by around 40 per cent and that makes no sense nor is it sustainable but this debate of course is not really about welfare as ever, as the cabinet secretary herself admitted it's all about the referendum and the belief that all would miraculously be better with independence for the reasons I set out at the start and the interests of those who are worried and may be tempted to take the SNP's promises at face value those assertions need to be rigorously tested as Jackie Baillie, Alex Johnson and Ken Macintosh did so let us start with the case for reform while the cabinet secretary denounces everyone else for supporting reform it is an agenda that she and her colleagues appear to accept why else set up the expert working group however the challenge facing this group was not insignificant members were presumably tasked with coming forward with proposals that would honour Ms Sturgeon's commitment to a welfare system that was quote fairer and simpler would make work pay that was quote innovative and included appropriate targeting that didn't involve cuts but which would not have the £2.5 billion needed to honour the promises made by SNP ministers in opposing almost every change put forward by the UK Government so how did they do in truth as well as could be expected but after months of listening to SNP ministers and backbenchers rail against the work programme against sanctions, against universal credit even we now find that their own experts are recommending to the surprise of no one a work programme, sanctions and the principle of universal credit simply changing the name of these to pretend that somehow what you are proposing is radically different is disingenuous and will leave many people across Scotland wondering what is the point of independence as for the criticism of welfare caps and the threat to more cuts to come the SNP's case is little more convincing the First Minister himself has said and I quote the right cap deployed in the right way is a reasonable thing to have so as far as Mr Salmond's concern the cap appears to fit meanwhile the SNP's own fiscal commission has said that the Scottish Government will have to match the trajectory of debt reduction and Mr Swinney agrees little wonder then that the white paper makes no mention of any commitment to increase spending by the 2.5 billion needed to make good on the promises regularly made by the SNP to reverse the cuts cuts let's be clear that are represented in Scotland by a welfare budget that is for the time being going up and the Cabinet Secretary by all accounts was not able to shed any more light on that at the welfare committee yesterday there doesn't even seem to be space in the white paper to explain how the SNP would pay for another of their top priorities backed by a motion of this Parliament to increase child benefit for those earning over 60,000 a year so the SNP's claims on welfare don't stack up meanwhile we now have the ridiculous claims that only a yes vote next month will save the NHS what aren't nonsense since 2010 NHS funding in England is up 12.7 billion pounds the cash equivalent for Scotland is protected and could be spent by the Scottish Government in any way it sees fit and the founding principles of being free at the point of delivery based on clinical need are unique and enduring by contrast as the IFS and ICAS have both pointed out the cost of independence would lead to tax hikes and or spending cuts which would inevitably affect the NHS in Scotland a point agreed to by John Swinney in his infamous briefing for Cabinet no wonder a BMGA poll out today suggests 60 per cent of doctors believe we have the best of both worlds as part of the UK on welfare after three years of debates and much sound and fury we know what the SNP don't like but as Ken Macintosh rightly observed what is not clear is how any of this would change in the event of Scotland leaving the UK and how any changes would be paid for or indeed in what currency and in key elements of what has been introduced by the UK Government while promising to reverse other changes but failing to say how much this would cost or how it would be paid for won't wash Deputy Presiding Officer we need to create a welfare system that is simple to understand lifts people out of poverty and makes work pay while at the same time providing an effective safety net for those who need it but as I've said before claiming to be in favour of reform but holding the view that any cuts to any benefits or any tightening based on recipients is automatically unfair just is not credible no one in this chamber including the SNP has a monopoly on caring but the SNP is scaremongering about the NHS or further welfare cuts while making promises they know they can't keep is not a more secure future for the people who need the support Thanks very much No-call and unable hearing to be followed by Alex Rowley up to six minutes please Thank you Presiding Officer and as a member of this Parliament's welfare reform committee I'm pleased to have been called to a important and revealing debate on welfare this afternoon for it affords me the opportunity to ensure that no one is in any doubt as to what the impact is of the current Westminster Government's current welfare cuts those coming down the line and irrespective of whether it's Tory, Labour, Labour or Tory that is the position since the silence of the Labour Party today speaks volumes there's nothing they're going to do differently from the Tories except the bedroom tax while shame on them what we are seeing before our very eyes is the dismantling of the welfare system and the removal of the safety net that should be embodied within it and what kind of rotten, miserable society is being created by this Westminster system that harasses recently bereaved widdles to leave their home of many decades or pay a tax simply because there's a spare room or a system that says to those with MND that to avoid the bedroom tax in a lodger a system that encourages the description of those with long-term conditions who are unable to work as a system that forces decent hardworking civil servants to make judges of Solomon about their fellow citizens in accordance with Kafkaesque criteria designed to lock their fellow citizens out of the little help that they are entitled to as this motion states the damaging and destructive impact on welfare policies is being felt across communities the length and breadth of Scotland and is being experienced by families the length and breadth of Scotland and in the time that I have available today I would wish to focus in particular on the impact on the disabled and on children, two of the most vulnerable groups in our society and as we have heard the Scottish Government published comprehensive report on the financial impacts of welfare reform on disabled people in Scotland and what is clear from this report is that we will see more than 100,000 people in Scotland losing disability benefits and that will be not just a loss of financial support as the Deputy First Minister rightly pointed out but also will have a devastating impact on the quality of life of disabled people and of their families and indeed as inclusion Scotland has said in their helpful briefing for today's debate at paragraph 2.1 it is clear that the prime motivation behind the replacement of disability living allowance by the personal independence payment has not been empowering disabled people to the same freedom, choice, dignity and control as other citizens to participate in society and live an ordinary life rather it has been about cutting the welfare budget and there we have it in a nutshell the treatment by Westminster of disabled people in 21st century Scotland to be determined solely by the treasury being kinders indeed the Tories are so interested in the possible ramifications for disabled people that having a little chat and telling some jokes it seems amongst themselves this is an important debate and I'm sure that people across Scotland will have noted the lack of interest of the Tories in the interests of disabled people it should be of course recalled that when the welfare reform act was going through the legislative process oh he's gone too Liberal Democrat government made it very clear made it very clear made it no, I'm sorry Miss Bailey set the tone for taking interventions in this debate the Tory Liberal government made it very clear that what they were seeking to achieve was a 20 per cent cut across the board but there is another way Presiding Officer and there is another future possible for our disabled citizens a decent dignified future for a yes vote on 18th September will enable Scotland to halt a new welfare system a welfare system for Scotland that is fit for purpose and is progressive a system that provides a safety net through which individuals cannot fall a system that will not see more than 100,000 children pushed into poverty by 2020 and a system that will not see a somehow acceptable that in the past year alone 22,387 children had to resist 87 children had to rely on food banks in order to be able to eat and I mentioned here again as my colleague Kevin Stewart did the very curious statement from the official Better Together outfit up in Aberdeenshire who seemed to think that somehow not only is such recourse increased recourse to food banks acceptable in 21st century Scotland but that somehow it is also laudable how can they steep so low and what a miserable what a miserable lot they are do they have no respect for basic human dignity Scotland is a wealthy country wealthier per head than France Japan and indeed the UK as a whole as the independent chair of the expert working group on welfare and constitutional reform Martin Evans said at her evidence session of the committee on 24 June 2014 the evidence was quite wide ranging our expenditure and social protection overall as a percentage of gross domestic product is lower than the level of expenditure in the UK and lower than that in a significant number of other OECD countries the taxes that are raised in Scotland pay for our system already well there we have it we have heard in conclusion proof today that as far as Westminster is concerned Labour Tory Tory Labour it will make no difference for the most vulnerable members of our society for Labour have made it quite clear by their silence and they're sitting smirking away they've made it quite clear by their silence that they have no intention of doing anything very much different from the Tories it's time to take welfare decisions into our own hands to control our own resources it's time to take this one opportunity to use our vast resources to build a favourite country it is time to vote yes thank you by Jamie Hepburn thank you when I came into the chamber today I had read the briefs and I then got a hold of the sheet and read this motion and I have to say that the motion isn't about trying to build some kind of unity in terms of a way forward in terms of welfare in Scotland this motion put forward by Nicola Sturgeon is simply an attempt to try and win some yes votes in terms of the referendum and I see that Nicola Sturgeon has rejoined us but I would have to say that our policy seems to be where there is harmony then we will create discord we will create division and we will try and win votes from that as we move forward when I think of the welfare state I tend to think of average too many private conversations can you have Mr Rowley and his attempt or the paper that he brought forward at that time to tackle want, idleness ignorance, disease and squalor the five great evils as he called them at that time and I'm sure I would say to Liam McArthur that I'm sure that today William Beverage would turn on his grave if he sees what these reforms are actually doing in terms of the way that they're impacting on people not just in Scotland but across across the UK I recently visited the Bernarte food bank which is part of the Dunfemmelin food bank and I noted there that out of the 2003 373 vouchers that had been issued since April 2010 to July 2014 the largest amount of them 613 benefit changes 710 benefit delays the Trussell Trust does not account sanctions as such and then you go down and there's refusal of crisis loans so these are major factors in driving people into absolute poverty where the very basic right and need that everyone has in this country to be able to feed themselves and eat is being denied to the Tories and the Liberals is that you need to come out of denial we have these food banks we have major problems in our communities and we need to examine why that is stop being in denial that the problem exists and start to look at how we can mitigate these issues that are there so that something that's unacceptable for the whole of Scotland or the whole of the UK indeed is that people are having to rely on charity to feed themselves when I also think about the welfare state I think about Clement Artley and the Artley government A45 that brought about the creation of the welfare state and I think that that great Welshman and political hero Nae Bevan who brought about the creation of the National Health Service the National Health Service and one of the greatest social creations of that century and indeed into this century and they recognised that by pooling and sharing the resources of the odd million people across the United Kingdom we could build a welfare state we could build a health service that would be the envy of the world and that's why the answer to the current issues that we have is not narrow nationalism that wants to create this harmony and put people against each other it is about continuing to work to share the resources across the United Kingdom so that people in any part will work together when people are in difficulties in any part of the United Kingdom my view would be very much that we have to be tough on poverty and tough on the causes of poverty if we look at being tough on poverty itself and I think the Oxfam briefing that was sent out earlier highlights Clydebank independent resource centre where they supported clients to claim over £3.5 million in 2013-14 in moneys that was not being claimed and my criticism in a sense one of the areas of the Scottish Government is that they are not working with local authorities working with organisations across Scotland so that we can be tough on poverty I saw Nicola Sturgeon on the television the other night and I thought she was announcing a new half million pounds for food banks I discovered the following day that it was the same half million that had been announced previously I was just saying how the money was to be spent and I know that I think £10,000 of that money was coming to five but we need to work with the local authorities and work at the local level to ensure that we are maximising how we actually are tough on poverty in terms of some of the policies and I would have to say again the SNP Government have a terrible record over the last seven years in terms of trying to tackle inequality I will pitch the Labour Government record either in the UK or in Scotland against that record any time in any place in Scotland 200,000 children lifted out of poverty half a pension of poverty these are all achievements under a Labour Government if we look at the SNP record tackling equality they should indeed certainly have nothing to be proud of in terms of being tough on the causes of poverty they have even less to be proud of if we look at the cuts in colleges we need to look at full employment I have said time and time again that throughout the history of the Labour movement the Jarl marchers the UC work in the upper side Clyde shit workers none of these people marched for benefits they marched for jobs and our objective should be full employment opportunities being more ambitious for young people in their life on benefits getting them the training, the skills and the jobs so that they can have a prosperous future again the SNP has failed drastically okay now calling Jamie Hepburn to be followed by Alison Johnstone thank you very much I am very proud of the Scottish Government's efforts to tackle and mitigate the effects I am very proud of the Scottish Government's efforts to make up the shortfall that was handed down by the UK Government in terms of council tax benefit and I am very proud of the additional money that was funneled into the Scottish welfare fund these are things that are happening here and now that we can be proud of can I thank the Scottish Government for bringing forward today's debate I think it's important to go back to first principles inherent within the Labour amendment today and Jackie Baillie's contribution is the idea that Scotland is somehow a basket case and can't afford to provide for a decent and fair social security system her contribution today was matched by her line of questioning yesterday's welfare reform committee, no welcome for the Scottish Government's commitment to abolish the bedroom tax no welcome for the Scottish Government commitment to provide carers allowance at the same level as job seekers allowance and the Deputy First Minister's commitment on that commitment no welcome to replace the work capability assessment with a fairer system the affordability of our social security system is undeniably important but so is ambition so is vision so is a determination to do better and I didn't get that sense of drive from Ms Baillie's contribution today and we know that in 2012-13 42.3 per cent of Scottish tax revenues were spent on welfare and pensions social protection compared with 43 per cent for the UK as a whole and we know that spending on social protection as a share of GDP has been lower in Scotland and the UK in each of the past five years so we know that Scotland can afford a better system a point made by the independent expert group on welfare can I turn to the report that the Scottish Government published today on the impact of welfare reform on disabled people on the report Tali Larsie with the report that Sheffield Hallam University prepared for the welfare reform committee and of the Scottish Government reports today of the 190,000 existing DLA claimants in Scotland who we reassess for PIP is expected that around 105,000 working-age disabled people will lose some or all of their disability benefits by 2018 with a loss of at least 1120 pounds per year an absolute disgrace in 21st century Scotland. The person on GMS this morning regarding disability benefits he said the headline budget for this will increase it won't reduce and he said this is not about reducing budgets he needs to tell the Treasury and the Treasury's 2013 budget document estimates reduced spend due to disability living allowance reform of nearly 3 billion pounds a year by 2017-18 Scottish disabled people are expected to shoulder around 310 million pounds of that by 2017-18 To the point that Annabelle Ewing made Inclusion Scotland said that motivation behind the replacement of DLA with PIP has been about cutting the welfare budget that's what people are saying Mr Johnson I think you need to take that on board Can I turn to the issue of food banks that has been mentioned in the debate Presiding Officer Citizens Advice Scotland tells between January and March 2014 Citizens Advice Bureau in Scotland recorded 1,311 new food parcel issues equating to one food parcel issue for every 50 clients who received advice Oxfam, who Alec Rowley mentioned reminds that in Scotland the Trusill Trust distributed 640,000 meals last year a five-fold increase on the previous year large risers are also reported by other providers and they go on to say that the evidence clearly shows that changes to the welfare system of rising food bank use so it was said not without some sense of incredulity that I read the comments of better together Aberdeenshire that Kevin Stewart and Annabelle Ewing mentioned I want to read out what they say far from being a sign of failure food banks are an enriching example of human compassion, faith and social cohesion well undoubtedly they are a sign of human compassion the compassion of those who give up so much of their time at others and for many of them a sign of their faith as well but the idea that it is a sign of social cohesion that the idea that they are not a sign of failure is something that I think no one with their heads screwed on frankly could recognise in the case and they better together Aberdeenshire group go on they say that to raise this issue insults the thousands of people who contribute who run and use food banks well let's hear what those who run food banks say the welfare reform committee was told by Joe Roberts of Community Food Murray that her organisation were having to provide more cold food pass because we're seeing more people for whom food is a priority and electricity and heating are not in Dennis Curran of those and fishes and very compelling evidence to us a present officer who told us that people are getting penalised for being poor for not having the ability to do for not having a job and for going to the food bank so I do not understand how better together Aberdeenshire can take the position to do Can I conclude briefly present officer referring to the Labour amendment today which concludes the best way of helping people out of poverty is the return of a Labour Government in 2015 we've heard that today but that of course is not in our hands here in Scotland, Scotland has voted Labour at UK general elections for the entirety of my life and for many years before but the Tories have formed the Government of Scotland for two thirds of that period if this is Labour's prescription for social security system for tackling poverty what happens if the Tories win next year or it's the point made by my colleague John Mason at some point subsequent in the future that's why although Jackie Weill is right it does take political will to make decisions that's why the constitution is important in this case because this Government has the political will but it doesn't have the means to exercise that will that's why we need a yes vote on the 18th of September now Colin Alston Johnston to be followed by Siobhan McMahon we're tight for time up to six minutes less would be more thank you this is one of the most important debates we can have in the lead up to the referendum the creation of the post-war welfare state was a great progressive leap forward for society we should be rightly proud of the struggle for a system which aims to ensure that nobody is left in poverty or destitution instead we have seen the UK Government seek to stoke division between people David Cameron's use of the words and shirker to describe people receiving support is divisive and an attempt to legitimise his government's reforms which have not focused on the welfare and mental health of people most in need or the urgent need to address inequality in our society all MSPs have received a welcome flood of briefings for today's debate one from engender stuck out their headline, shocking figure is that since 2010 74 per cent of cuts tax credits, pay and pensions have been taken from women they point out that this rises to 81 per cent of the savings realised by the treasury in 2014-15 it's clear that women are being hit by a gender dysterity and gender point out that UK welfare reform has just exacerbated a gender inequality already pervasive in society and the faucet society has identified three main ways in which women are being chiefly hit by the cuts through the loss of benefits and services through the loss of public sector jobs and as state services are withdrawn women will have to fill in the gap and take up further care and community responsibilities it's hard to believe that the gender pay gap in Scotland is 13 per cent for full time work and 34 per cent for part time women who predominantly still manage caring duties probably can't find enough hours in the week or extra hours from their employer wages into line with their male counterparts employment law is still reserved to Westminster why has such little progress been made on average women do four hours and 15 minutes of unpaid work a day compared to men's two hours and 18 minutes some 40 per cent of women employment rely on relatives for childcare a majority of them are female and one in four women in their 50s is caring for a disabled or frail elderly relative the UK Government is keen to see the pension age lifted rapidly and if women who do not choose to are required to continue working who is going to take on these caring roles Presiding Officer the green amendment for today it wasn't selected but it refers to the Scottish Government's expert group on welfare and they identified two long term but divergent visions for the future of social security one vision was a contributions based scheme described by the expert group as a highly individual approach tying benefits to personal contributions and savings this approach requires the complexity of means testing and constant assessment to ensure that nobody gets more than they need the other vision was a universal one which abandons means testing and complexity and provides a citizens basic income to everyone Professor Ilsa Mackay was a member of the expert group a feminist economist and a life long advocate of this universal approach she sadly passed away before the publication of the report and is greatly missed by her family and friends but I have no doubt at all that her contribution to this welfare debate will continue Glasgow University are advertising to fill the newly created Ilsa Mackay postdoctoral research fellowship in economics to further research the relationship between a citizens income and gender equality a citizens income as at the foundation of the green vision for social security and this week the green yes campaign has published a new paper demonstrating how a citizens income could work and be paid for in Scotland and I thank John Mason for his open-minded comments regarding a citizens income and a certain level of unconditionality now it's not a perfect proposal but it's designed to demonstrate how Scotland can begin on its journey towards rebuilding a fair welfare system with universality at its core and the modelling we've done with David Cumberford from Stirling University demonstrates how Scotland could join the ranks of the most equal countries in the world under the citizens income proposal 70 per cent of the lowest earning households would be better off with the highest earning households losing only 11 per cent of their income citizens income is a simple idea that could reduce inequality promote solidarity and allow each of us to make our own decisions about working caring learning and creating without ending up on the bread line but while we consider a citizens income we can currently crack down on corporate and rich individual tax dodging we can call for an end to the inhumane sanctions regime that has led to hundreds of thousands of people relying on food banks or applying in desperation for a hardship or crisis loan food banks must not become the norm people should have the dignity of buying their food and I agree with Oxfam when they say that the huge rise of food banks suggests that the principle of the social safety net is under threat and we must do all that we can to protect it in closing Presiding Officer I would ask Alex Johnston you state in your motion that the UK Government seeks to make work pay well if work pays why are there now as the Oxfam briefing points out more than in and out of work households and Jackie Baillie I agree that eradicating poverty requires political will however the current constitutional arrangement means that policies increasing poverty in Scotland can be forced upon us by those whose politics aren't focused on the eradication of poverty and those who we didn't vote in to government in Scotland thank you so much well Colin Siobhan McMahon up to six minutes please Presiding Officer I spoke nearly all the welfare debates that this Parliament has held since my election in 2011 it's a subject that is very close to my heart and one that I'm extremely passionate about it's also a subject that is far from easy we all have a different idea of what the welfare state's purpose should be that will be born out of political ideology in many cases but also shaped by your own experiences of the system did it work when we needed it too or did it fail us in our time of need for too many people across the UK today the answer will be that the system has failed them for too many people the answer will be that it added to the burden they were already experiencing and has done very little to alleviate the financial strain they now find themselves trying to deal with day in and day out as the schools across Scotland start back this week there will be many parents thankful and relieved that they don't have to find the money to send their children to the cinema or swimming or to local funfair to be just like their friends and have a good time during their summer holidays but there will be other parents who are still worrying about how they are going to pay back the debt they are now in as a result of paying for their children's school uniform the new school shoes, the school bag pencil case and everything needed to go into the pencil case and everything else in between however that example is something that we in this parliament should be doing something about not in other parliaments we could and should be taking the opportunity to talk about the things that we have the power of control over and how we can change people's lives we could be talking about the one and eight people who are carers across Scotland and need our help now we could be talking about the problems many of our disabled constituents have with transition services or we could be talking about the lack of employment opportunities especially for females and young people instead we are debating what an independent Scotland's welfare system might look like that in itself would be okay if the Scottish Government actually had a vision of the welfare state they would wish to see but as we know we get a list of things presented to us that they don't like about the current welfare state in so-called reforms and things that they wouldn't do like the work capability assessments or sanctions we would get little or no information as to what would replace such things in our briefings for today's debate the start figure of 60,000 people in Scotland being sanctioned between October 2012 and December 2013 stands out as a horrific number and not something that can be easily explained away that is 60,000 individuals but also their families and dependents that is an atrocious figure and a figure that the UK Government should be ashamed of as I have previously stated I understand that the Scottish Government would not impose sanctions on disabled people who have been found fit for work I welcome this however I am unclear as to what would take its place in their own words the Scottish Government stated that sanctions would be replaced with a system that is more proportionate personal and positive that is as clear as mud the Scottish Government have also said they will abolish work capability assessments again we don't know what would take their place the Scottish Government's own expert group has made clear that assessment for incapacity benefits is necessary but the SNP will not formulate any alternative to work capability assessment before the referendum in contrast the Labour Party asked a group of people for ideas on how to make things easier for people with disabilities as a result of this tax force 28 recommendations were made including recommendations about the work capability assessment Labour has said that we will transform the work capability assessment to make it more effective at helping disabled people into employment the assessment that is carried out presently does not take into consideration the disabled person's ability to work therefore we have pledged to end the tick in a box assessment and replace it with one that would include a detailed analysis of the jobs that each individual person could carry out and have a successful career in further to this we would ensure that the person undergoing the assessment would receive a copy of the assessor's report and how their disability or health condition may affect their ability to work and what support is available to them in order that they can work within their local area perhaps most importantly Labour have committed to making sure that disabled people are giving the central role in how the tests are conducted they will also be asked for suggestions on how the assessment can be improved as our Shadow Minister for disabled people Kate Green MP has said we want the assessment to be part of the process of ensuring disabled people who can work get the support they need to do so not to threaten or punish them the test should be a gateway to identify and assembling that support we also recognise that not everyone can work and we are committed to ensuring that supports are in place for those who can't the opposition benches may not agree with the vision that we, the Labour Party have put forward but one thing is clear we have a vision and not one that we will openly talk about of course the hardship that many people are experiencing at the moment is not simply down to the work capability assessments whilst it is true that disabled people are nine times more likely to be affected by the austerity agenda they are not alone as Oxfam Scotland said in a briefing for today's debate the evidence clearly shows the changes to the welfare system are a significant driver of rising food bank use research published in June shows that over 20 million meals were distributed by UK food banks in the last year an increase of 54% on the previous year those statistics are stomach turning but what the people who are using these services like they need is a solution to their problems problems that have been inflicted on them they need that now not in five weeks or five months but now this Parliament is letting every single person who has used a food bank down by simply talking about the problem and using it as a football for a debate on the constitution that's something I won't be part of finally, Presiding Officer the general election next year will mark 70 years since Clement Attlee the founder of the welfare state became Prime Minister I want to tend with a poem Attlee wrote that struck a chord with me when thinking about today's debate I'm afraid you're out of time so for another day perhaps no I'm sorry I hear the feat of children who go to work or play of children born of sorrow the workers of tomorrow how shall they work tomorrow who get no bread today thanks very much now call I move to closing speeches murder phrases six minutes please thank you Presiding Officer this has been a time to rather bad tempered debate I hope I can bring some calm and sense to the close Presiding Officer this is a good day to be discussing welfare reform this morning the latest unemployment the workforce figures were produced unemployment is down again in Scotland across the UK to a total of 6.4% the employment rate in Scotland has reached a record new high since the UK coalition Government came to power some 1.8 million new jobs have been created three quarters of which are in full-time positions why is this important because probably a rare point of agreement in this debate I would have with Alec Rowley but like him I believe that creating jobs for people is the best way to improve their living standards and reduce their dependence on welfare and welfare reform is working as Alex Johnson reminded us today the proportion of work-less households is the lowest ever recorded the number and proportion of children in those households is at a record low the number of children in the households where no one has ever worked is at its lowest level for 15 years the inactivity rate has never been lower reflected in following numbers claiming inactive benefits the welfare system the current coalition Government inherited was broken it had too many disincentives for people to work and try and better their situation and the current UK Government's approach to try and reverse this is clearly having an impact and welfare reform is popular according to a nip sales moary poll carried out last year 50% of people in Scotland believed that the welfare system was too generous against just 25% who thought it was not generous enough and a similar poll showed that 73% of people in Scotland supported a general benefit cap as against just 12% opposed actually more support in Scotland for a benefit cap than across the UK as a whole Liam McArthur reminded us that everyone agrees with welfare reform or so they say everyone agrees that the previous system simply didn't help people when they needed help and that it was seeing costs rise too quickly but whilst those in other parties claimed to support welfare reform in practice they opposed every single measure brought forward by the UK Government to try and deal with it if they did believe in welfare reform then they need to tell us precisely what measures they would implement to reduce the growth in the welfare budget I will turn to some of the points raised in the debate Alex Johnson reminded us that we regularly hear from the SNP that welfare reform is taking £6 billion out of the economy that claim would have some credibility if the SNP were proposing on independence to reverse those so-called cuts so let's look precisely at what the SNP are proposing in their white paper why the two biggest components in the £6 billion are firstly changing the up-rating of benefits inflation linking from RPI to CPI and secondly the removal of child benefit from higher earners between them these two changes make up the vast bulk of the savings and what is in the white paper about reversing these changes nothing I could see the white paper does say benefits will rise with inflation is the CPI no doubt I'll stand corrected in the minister's window the only detailed proposals in the white paper on welfare are to remove the spare room subsidy which we know has already been mitigated by the actions of this devolved Parliament and to stop the roll-out of universal credit and personal independence payments the best that can be said about these changes is that the costs of these are marginal in the context of the total savings from welfare reform so the whole proposition being put forward in this debate by the SNP the voting independence will make a huge difference when it comes to welfare and in the words of the Government motion and I quote only with the full powers of independence can the UK Government welfare cuts be halted is shown to be utterly worthless because the bulk of those reductions are not being reversed under the proposals from the SNP and what would the welfare system under independent Scotland be we don't know how much would it cost to pay for higher benefits we don't know and as Jackie Baill reminded us we don't even know which currency those benefits would be paid in the SNP are using welfare policy to try and argue the case for independence but without any detail on their alternatives the claims they are making are simply dishonest yesterday at the welfare reform committee Nicola Sturgeon I understand said that she foresaw no net increase in welfare costs in independent Scotland beyond the proposals already announced today from a sedentary position the cabinet secretary has corrected me that's what the welfare review group recommended well be interested to know what the SNP are recommending because we've heard nothing in this debate about their proposals she comes to this chamber this afternoon and seems to suggest otherwise all the rhetoric is about reversing all the cuts from Westminster yesterday and that's not what our review group had to say Members in his last minute I'm sorry I'd have been happy to give way but perhaps in the wind up your colleague can address these very points we know from the work done by the institute for fiscal studies that independent Scotland would face greater fiscal challenges than if we stayed in the UK there is no magic money tree there will not be more money to spend on benefits if we become independent in fact there will be less is quite cynically playing on the fears of those in poverty or the disabled by promising that independence will mean they have more money and greater security and yet they cannot produce any concrete policies to back up these proposals it is a deeply cynical and disgraceful tactic of which SNP members should be ashamed thank you very much and now Colin Michael McMahon up to seven minutes please thank you deputy I welcome the prospect of this afternoon's debate on welfare when I learned that it had been scheduled because it's absolutely right that the people of Scotland should hear from the Scottish Government how it plans to introduce its robust effective reliable and affordable welfare system in an independent Scotland what a pity then that for far too much of the time this afternoon all we've heard is that the SNP don't like Westminster they don't like the current system of welfare in the UK but we've heard virtually nothing about what change there would be which yes on September the 18th I'd like to make some progress we don't mind first that when we should have had real answers over how our welfare system would continue if we separated what we've got is an aspirational wish list of vague promises of a fairer system with no price tag attached now there is nothing wrong with being aspirational for your country and its people we all are but it's all very well criticising the current welfare system in the detail of what they would seek to replace it with we've been repeatedly promised such information but it's never materialised and unless the minister reveals the SNP's blueprint to us in our closing speech the SNP looks as though it's going to continue to ask the people of Scotland to vote in the referendum on a prospectus that sees a welfare shaped black hole at its core what I'm saying now I've said it before and I'll say it again is that we're saying that if we get the powers we will not proceed with a £300 million cut in support for disabled people can Michael McMahon answer me the question will a Labour Government at Westminster proceed with those cuts or not it's a simple question can we have a straight answer I'm quite sure that the cabinet secretary would like to boil everything down to a straight yes or no answer but the fact of the matter is you are premising all your questions you are premising all your questions on a vote five weeks from now the Labour Party is looking at promoting the welfare system at the general election in 2015 and we will get we will get the answers at that time when we have won when we have won this referendum you'll get more answers than we'll get from you and that's a fact so I welcome the report of the expert working group but that body was never going to produce the detail answers we need because it was never having the remap from the Scottish Government to do so the expert group identified that there are difficulties in designing entirely new schemes and that the timescales involved in ensuring that they operate effectively will mean that any changes are unlikely to be in place by 2016 indeed the expert group's first report suggested that Scotland should share its system with the UK for a transitional period which would last for at least five years and that was before we got the complication of not knowing what the currency would be that we would use while we shared that system so that the Scottish Government subsequently announced that it wished to make priority changes to social security immediately following separation but it's not yet set out how it would be able to consult legislate and then design and build and test a new system within 18 months so what we have is a recommendation for a national convention on welfare to be formed in 2015 to discuss the details or benefits proposals which they say we have to vote on in five weeks time so that means that the detail will not be known until after the referendum so over half of Scots receive social security payments in some form but the SNP will not tell us how much it will cost to set up a new welfare system when independent forecasters like the IFS are showing that we are projected to have a worse fiscal position than the UK as a whole in the years ahead so rather than this afternoon's debate clarifying for the Scottish people what they can expect from the welfare system in Antibend Scotland the only welfare guarantee we have from the SNP is uncertainty and as the debate wore on it appeared as Jamie Hepburn and others referred to this better together Aberdeen Facebook now a pale deference to my colleague Lewis McDonnell but the people of Aberdeen are very often beyond my comprehension but I do not understand why the SNP members repeatedly went on about this Facebook it looks as though it might well be the new issue rather than panned as aliens on what side of the road we are going to drive on when it comes to the next television debate so certainly not going to give way to you after your disgraceful contribution but we did see some agreement in this afternoon's debate on the sanctions on the bedroom tax on food banks Kevin Stewart, John Mason, Ken Macintosh others what we found common cause the Cabinet Secretary and Siobhan McMahon clearly passionately believe in issues around disability and that's quite right because when inclusion Scotland make absolutely clear that the current programme of welfare reform is having a devastating and disproportionate impact on disabled people in Scotland but John Mason asked and I think this was very important he said he made very reasonable request that we should work together and he asked why when we had such agreement that we could not work with him Mr Sturgeon on the other hand claimed that Labour didn't care about Scotland's poor but that was the difference we focus more on need and not nationality and that's what divides us and what you cannot understand about this debate so the SNP's plans for post independence welfare are papered in and even their own expert group on welfare has said that there would be a serious risk of disruption to benefit payments if we were to leave the UK benefits system and again they made that report before we had the issue of the currency union and its inability to operate so where the SNP has made pledges they have not brought forward proposals for what the system would be changed to so we have come along this afternoon to look for answers on what we would be voting on in September but we are left with no conclusion other than that the only safe choice on welfare is a vote to remain part of the British welfare state that I am proud to say Labour created and that we will always be the best to defend Thanks so much and we now call on the minister Margaret Burr just to wind up the debate you have until 5 o'clock please Okay thank you and like others I don't think this has been the best debate in terms of temperament that we have heard through but there is something that was just said there at the end of the debate that I absolutely agree with and that is that we are absolutely miles apart from the Labour Party and they are better together pals of how we can address the issue of social security in particular in an independent Scotland and the first thing I would want to say at the very start of this debate the deputy First Minister asked two questions to Jackie Baillie about Labour's position she asked what new powers is this Parliament guaranteed if we short of a yes vote and that would allow us to assault the incomes of disabled women and children she was also asked would the Labour Party help the roll-out of personal independence payment and we didn't get an answer to that there is no answer and nobody in the Labour Benchans answered that question and the reason why is because the answer is no they don't know and they are not they are tied to the same system the Westminster system with their pals in the Tory party and that is very clear in this debate they have huffed in hod and tried to get around it there is a history of the Labour Party poems, whatever else but the reality is they support the Tory welfare system and that was just confirmed by Malcolm MacMahon they support welfare being held within the UK yes absolutely because you would rather you would rather have the Tories dismantling the system than have a system here in Scotland supported by meeting the needs of the people of Scotland speaker after speaker has talked this afternoon about the failed welfare state which is clearly no longer meeting the needs of our most vulnerable citizens and we all see examples of that every day and I see a UK Government bringing measures that have little or no support in Scotland and which as Alison Johnstone described we are powerless to stop in this Scottish Government we don't have the power this Scottish Government of course will always do what we can to mitigate most of these reforms and Jamie Hepburn outlined a number of the issues we have taken we have got a strong record in taking action and have backed us up with as much funding as we can muster from the constraints of the devol grant but mitigation is simply softening the blows of Westminster well that's not enough for me and our people deserve more than that this Government the Scottish Government's ambition for Scotland is much much higher Presiding Officer this Government has set out a clear vision of welfare in an independent Scotland will halt the roll out of the discredited universal credit will replace personal independence payments with a benefit that ensures that people with a disability are treated with dignity and respect will abolish the bedroom tax will increase carers allowance and will increase benefits and minimum wage in line with inflation because as the Deputy First Minister said in her opening remarks Scotland is a wealthy country currently social protection expenditure as a percentage of GDP is lower in Scotland than the rest of the UK and it's still low compared to the EU so we can afford to do things differently the Scottish Government's vision of social security in an independent Scotland is one where we all contribute just as we all receive help and support throughout our lives but we also recognise we have a role in supporting and sustaining that system for future generations and through devolution it was mentioned by again Jamie Hepburn and John Mason Scotland's responsibility for education and skills but not for employment tax or welfare policies and the majority of the people of Scotland want the Scottish Parliament to have control of welfare and all of these are crucial to supporting people to sustain employment and I think we all agree in that that sustained employment is the root out of poverty and we make clear in Scotland's future that where people can work they should work and in any case we believe that the vast majority of people want to work and the expert working group came to the same conclusions because it's important for people's wellbeing just as much as it's important for their prosperity we also heard today about the increase of in-work poverty that the equation of work is a root out of poverty is not always true and that's why we support measures like the Scottish Government's social wage and the living wage which will make a real difference to the people of Scotland it's why we're leading by example in ensuring that all the staff covered by the public sector pay policy are paid the Scottish living wage and for those for whatever reason who can't work their dignity and respect must be maintained is in direct contrast to the UK Government and now clearly to the Labour Party their approach shown through measures such as the current sanctions policy does little for people's self-respect and self-esteem and these policies do little to provide people with the support they need and Scottish Government research has shown that the most disadvantaged are particularly vulnerable to being sanctioned I'll take an intervention to recognise that the research conducted on behalf of the welfare reform committee showed that the same problems existed right across England, Wales and Northern Ireland why do you want to abandon them to that fate in order to just pursue your own issues in Scotland Minister this is a ridiculous argument we recognise that the policies are not helping people across the UK but we want to do something about it here in Scotland and we have an opportunity to do that on the 18th of September and we are going to raise your standards raise your ambition but I'll go down together no let us lead by example and help the rest of the UK at the same time let's lead by example I have no idea where the Labour Party are coming from just now and I think it is really where they're going I think as the Deputy First Minister has just said I think it's an absolute nonsense argument going forward just now and you know the most worrying thing about this is that these cuts are still coming there's more cuts still to come we've heard today about 100,000 disabled people could lose up between 1,000 pounds and 3,000 pounds of a year due to the change from DLA to PIP again no response from the Labour Party in that they're simply tied into the Tory with the Tory allies in this one Jackie Baillie has been asked in several occasions will the Labour Party reverse the PIP changes and we have had no answer and that's because the answer is no but we have to remember something that Labour has actually signed up with our Tory Liberal pals to this they have signed up to continued austerity they have signed up to continuous austerity they have signed up to universal credit they've signed up to the UK welfare reforms that will put 100,000 more children into poverty and 100,000 more disabled people into poverty Jackie Baillie is not at shaking her head and saying this is nonsense you've had the opportunity today to tell the people of Scotland what Labour are going to do about this and you have not told us the issues around benefits and welfare reform for me crystallise the clear choice we have to make in September and this is the choice between a future where some of the most important decisions about our country are made in Westminster by Governments whether it be Tory or Labour Governments that more often in Tory case are not elected in Scotland or a future where the people of Scotland have the power to determine our own course and the responsibility for making the most of our extraordinary potential and that is what independence is about it's about making that choice for the benefit of the people of Scotland it's about grasping that when we have an opportunity to make things better we're all agreed it's not working the welfare system we're putting forward proposals to make it better a real change for the people of Scotland and Labour can't accept that they'd rather stick with our Tory alliance you need to wind up minister I want to wind up so we're looking the only way to get a welfare social security system that's fair treats people with dignity and respect and meets the needs of the people of Scotland is to vote yes on 18 September that concludes the debate on welfare we now move to next item of business which is consideration of business motion 10779 in the name of Delford's Patrick on behalf of Parliamentary Bureau setting out a business programme any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press the request to speak but now and I call on Delford's Patrick to move motion number 10779 moved no members ask to speak against the motion therefore I now put the question to the chamber the question is the motion number 10779 in the name of Delford's Patrick we agreed to are we all agreed the motion is there for agreed to the next item of business is consideration of a Parliamentary Bureau motion I would ask Delford's Patrick to move motion number 10780 on approval of an SSI moved question this most we have put a decision time to which we now come there are four questions to be put as a result of today's business the first question is amendment number 10777.4 in the name of Jackie Baillie which seeks to amend motion number 10777 in the name of Nicola Sturgeon on welfare be agreed to are we all agreed if everyone is not agreed we move to vote members should cancel votes now amendment number 10777.4 in the name of Jackie Baillie is as follows yes 27 no 82 there were no abstentions the amendment is therefore not agreed to the next question is amendment number 10777.2 in the name of Alex Shonson which seeks to amend motion number 10777 in the name of Nicola Sturgeon on welfare be agreed to are we all agreed the Parliament is not agreed we move to vote members should cancel votes now the result of the vote on amendment number 10777.2 in the name of Alex Shonson is as follows yes 17 no 92 there were no abstentions the amendment is therefore not agreed to the next question is at motion number 10777 in the name of Nicola Sturgeon on welfare be agreed to are we all agreed the Parliament is not agreed therefore we move to vote members should cancel votes now the result of the vote on motion number 10777 in the name of Nicola Sturgeon is as follows yes 65 no 44 there were no abstentions the motion is therefore agreed to the next question is at motion number 10780 in the name of Joe Fitzpatrick on approval of an SSI be agreed to are we all agreed the motion is therefore agreed to that concludes decision time we now move to members business members should leave the chamber should do so quickly and quietly