 The next item of business is an urgent question called Michelle Ballantyne. To ask the Scottish Government for what reason it did not inform the Parliament in last week's statement that severe disabling allowance will remain reserved and administered by the DWP. Shirley-Anne Somerville I thank Ms Ballantyne for her question and it might help if I start by clearing up a misunderstanding in her question. Let me be clear that none of the 11 benefits included in the Scotland Act will remain reserved to the DWP. Last Thursday, I informed Parliament that all six Scottish Government will take responsibility for all 11 of all benefits from the first of April 2020. That remains the case and it includes severe disabling allowance. That means all funding decisions, delivery decisions and policy decisions are taken by the Scottish Government. Arrangements for the delivery of the severe disabling allowance were set out in documents published on Thursday and referred to in my statement. A letter to the Social Security Committee of this Parliament was also sent on Thursday and published in a public Q&A also on Thursday. Michelle Ballantyne I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, but the reality is that there was no mention of severe disabling allowance in the actual statement that was given on Thursday. Let's face it, the reality here is that this is another devolved power that you are asking the DWP to administrate. You knew the circumstances of this benefit two years ago in 2016, so it has taken two years for you to decide that you don't actually want to do the administration of it. Let me ask you a straightforward question. You say that you can devolve and create a whole new state in 18 months, but it has taken you two years to make this decision. So let me ask you when did you make the decision? Did you already know when you made your statement last week? When exactly was it made and when did you tell everybody? I think that that was a few questions, Shirley-Anne Somerville. As I laid out in my original answer, I told the Parliament last week in my statement in the 11 policy position papers that were published alongside it, and in a letter to the Social Security Committee of which Michelle Ballantyne is, of course, a member. As we move through the process of devolving benefits to Scotland, we take our decisions based on consultation with people with lived experience. The consultation that we did with those with lived experience was to ensure the safe and secure transition of all the living benefits, but also the transformation of the benefits that are causing most anxiety and stress to those in the current system, such as disability assistance, which has an application process that is viewed by those who are going through it, designed to catch people out, and an inhumane system of assessments. That will be our next priority in the devolution of benefits. As I said, in multiple channels last week, we chose to deliver SDA through an agency agreement with the DWP. It is a benefit that has approximately 2,000 claimants. It has been closed since 2001, and in the consultation that we do before we make decisions on how we will deliver benefits, no-one suggested any changes and no-one suggested any particular issues that we needed to address. That is why the priority will go to disability assessments, where the maximum damage is being done by the DWP. The particular challenge with SDA is that it is also closely linked to the pension system, which remains reserved to Westminster. Establishing a separate payment system would put claimants at risk. It is a prime example of why it would be easier to have full responsibility of social security, rather than having to work with the complex and outdated DWP systems. Michelle Ballantyne, I remind you to speak through the chair. I do not know whether I am thanking the cabinet secretary for that answer, but the reality is that it is like smoke and mirrors. You are saying that you want everything devolved, but you are increasingly pushing things back to be administered under agreement by the DWP. Two years to consult on a benefit that is closed and has 2,000 claimants. How much money has been spent preparing for the devolution of SDA so far? How much will it cost for the DWP to continue to administer it because it is yet another devolved benefit that it is asking the DWP to do? We will ensure that all the agagency agreements that are agreed between the DWP and the Scottish Government are done to ensure the best value for the Scottish taxpayer. I gently say to Michelle Ballantyne that I made that offer to her directly last week. I appreciate that we will have disagreements about how social security will be devolved to Scotland and the policy decisions that we will make, but I think that we have a shared responsibility within this chamber to look very seriously at what we can do and what we should do differently. I direct her not to my words but to a blog that was written by Chris Cregan from the Scottish Commission for Learning Disability after he watched the statement to Parliament last week. He said that disagreement is as much part of the game of politics as consensus, but so is striking the right tone and so is understanding the complexity behind the sloganising that grabs the headlines. I gently say, once again to Michelle Ballantyne, if she has a realistic alternative to a different way that we want to do SDA in Scotland, I am more than happy to hear it. Please let's get away from the headline grabbing and the sloganising and putting fear into the 2,000 people who rely on the benefits through SDA and get on with delivering a credible social security to Scotland that ensures a secure and safe transmission and also a transformation of the benefits under the DWP that are harming people so much just now. With hardly any time left, I'll take many feet. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can I ask how much is the Cabinet Secretary going to have to pay the DWP to deliver those benefits instead of spending that money to support severely disabled people? More broadly, what are the estimated costs of the agency arrangements with the DWP that will be in place until all devolved benefits fully transition to Social Security Scotland? That information was not included in Thursday's statement. Shirley-Anne Somerville was not included in the statement because we are consulting on our priorities as we go ahead, but, as I have said around agency agreements in the past, it is absolutely imperative that we deliver those to ensure that we have good administration of those in Scotland and that we work with the DWP on what is a joint policy. Mary Fee talks about how much changes would be made to SDA— Excuse me, Cabinet Secretary. Mr Tomkins, please do not sit at the back and shout over to the benches when you have not actually been taking part in this question time already. There have been no policy changes suggested as part of the consultation process. It was very important that we listened to those with the lived experience to determine what was the best way forward for SDA. We will take forward the agency agreements with the DWP to ensure that we pay for the administering of those benefits, but the safe and secure transition of SDA is absolutely imperative. We will do that with full consultation with those with lived experience of this benefit and of all others. Bob Dorriff. I can confirm myself and fellow committee members, including Michelle Ballantyne, who was informed in 28 February on severe disability allowance. Does the cabinet secretary agree that the non-revelation regarding severe disability allowance by Michelle Ballantyne might have more to do with the Tory diversionary tactics, given that our social security committee will take evidence tomorrow and morning on the scandal of the UK Government's pension credit cuts, which will cost up to £7,000 a year for up to 10 per cent of pension credit claimants' diversionary tactics? Shirley-Anne Somerville. I thank the convener of the committee for once again establishing that that letter was sent last week. It is very, very important that I do listen to genuine suggestions around social security from all parts of the chamber. This is an area of the subject that I would like to seek maximum consensus on, but I think that Mr Dorriff is quite right to point out that it is very difficult to take lessons from a Conservative party that administers the DWP and the inhumane PIP system particularly to take any lessons on how I should treat those with a disability and our carers within our country. We have seen an absolutely startling lack of an ability for the DWP to look after and support those people, and that is exactly what we are determined to do within social security in Scotland. I conclude the urgent question. To the chamber, we do not often have urgent questions, but the key thing here is question. This is not an opportunity for people to stand up and have a 10-minute debate. It is about asking questions and getting answers. There were many people who wanted to come into that urgent question, who were not able to, because of the length of time, initial questions and, indeed, answers to something to bear in mind for the future. We will move on to the next item of business.