 Ynaf i'n meddyl o barwch ei dweud o môin 5111 i ynw yn ymwneud drwy Jackie Bailley o'n ziwodol fod y ddigwydd o peithio gwahanol ar gyfer o newidol argyllte i cyfrdd. Rydyn ni'n croes i chi i chi'n adleg yw o'r bwysig, nyntai'r cwysig, o bwysig o'i gweithio ar gyfer, o ddod o'i ddweud. Fy overflow yn ei amdanaeth, sambol, o'r eich cwysig – pan ei ddweud ar gyfer o'r cwysig – ar gyfer gweithio lŷnol, mae wedi'n byddio mwy o'r ddweud. amddai'n meddwl i gyrsbyddio i gyd yn gwych yn yr hwnpiwyr, ac rym ni'n i gyd yn de jeden. Mae'n gweld ei fod yn ffordd fel cysylltyn. Rwy'n gweld ei fod yn ffordd ei gyd yn ffordd ei gyd yn gweithio. Fyddwch chi'n rhan o ran i'r cysylltu. Rwy'n gweld ei wneud o'r i'r byw, ac mae ei fod yn ei solydd i gweithio argynnu. Mae'n gyd yn gweithio i'r hirchu gan gwych. Mae'n golygu am Equ inhabitant i Gweithreib Ledger-Walen o hyffordd yr Unigol Cymbr yn olygu. ond there is so much more that they can do. Let me set out one of the things that the Scottish Government can and should do right now. That is to end non-residential social care charges across Scotland. This was a pledge in Labour's manifesto. It was also a pledge in the SNP's manifesto for the Scottish Parliament elections. It was also a recommendation in the Feely report commissioned and supported by the Government. The cost of doing so is estimated by spice to be in the order of £51 million, a relatively small amount of money in the grand scheme of things, which will have a profoundly positive impact on those who require social care. We know that disabled people are twice as likely as others to struggle to heat their homes. Nearly half, 49% of all those living in poverty in the UK are either disabled people or they live in a household containing a disabled person. And then there are those who are elderly and receive home care. I know many older people in my community have community alarms, so should they have a fall, they can summon help quickly. It is a lifeline service that enables older people to remain in their own homes for longer, but as costs rose, so too did the number giving up their alarms because they were unable to afford them on fixed incomes. When I met with unpaid carers recently, one woman described how her gas and electricity bills have gone up to £4,000 a year and that is before the price hike due later in October. She told me that her husband isn't eating due to his illness and she said that she was glad because it means she can save money. What an absolutely terrible position to be in. Many of those in receipt of social care, the elderly, those with learning disabilities, those with physical disabilities will pay charges and they simply cannot afford to do so. Now we all understand that heating can't be switched off during the day for those who are housebound. Many don't even go outside even if they wanted to because of the rising cases of COVID-19 and new variants posing a real threat to their wellbeing. But we can do something about this in this Parliament. Earlier this week Labour-led Western Banshire Council announced a £5 million support package to help residents with the cost of living crisis, putting money into people's pockets and saving them money as well. A central part of their plan was to scrap non-residential social care charges, saving vulnerable people in my area £1.5 million. That is the difference that Labour makes in power. And there is nothing, absolutely nothing, to stop this from happening now in every council in Scotland. I will come on to describing how this can be done. But first I want to deal with the notion that the SNP say that we need to wait for the national care service. Now of course we will examine the detail of the national care service in the weeks and months to come. But there is absolutely nothing standing in the way of the SNP ending charging right now. Doesn't depend on the national care service. Care charging doesn't even get a mention in the bill at all. It depends entirely on political will and resources. So I say to the Minister, no more twiddling your thumbs, no more spin and distraction. Get on with it and do it now because those needing care are desperate. The cost of living crisis demands that you act now. And here is how you can do it. Presiding Officer, it's amazing what you discover when you go looking for it. There are eye-watering sums of money that are currently sitting as reserves in IJB accounts across Scotland. Reserves started to build up in 2021. Much of this was Covid funding and it was difficult to get out the door. And I think we all thought that this would be spent in the following financial year. But rather than the reserves going down in 2021-22, they have increased exponentially. And all of this at a time when services were withdrawn as a result of the pandemic and unpaid carers were left to shoulder the burden happen to do so. Dillion won. It's a ploddable idea, but is Jackie Baillie suggesting that we tell IJBs how to use their reserves? Well, the government wants to, by creating a national care service, you do actually want to tell them all what to do. So I am suggesting to you, you gave them this money, you can tell them what to do with it. You can at least encourage them. But let me tell you why, let me tell you why. Because those reserves have increased exponentially at a time when services were withdrawn. And let me illustrate that for you. South Lanarkshire Council, South Lanarkshire Health and Social Care Partnership, sitting on £30 million in reserves in 2021. That figure for 2021-22 is now £85 million. The cost of scrapping care charges in South Lanarkshire is £2 million. Tiny amount. In Western Barchshire, the reserves are sitting at £32 million. The cost of scrapping care charges is £1.5 million. Equally a tiny amount. The picture is the same across the board in Glasgow, in Edinburgh, in Aberdeen, in every single council has seen those reserves rise substantially. So scrapping non-residential care charges can be done now. The SNP have the power to do it. It doesn't require constitutional change. It simply requires political will. For the people who get social care and need to pay for it, their struggle to make ends meet is becoming increasingly difficult. Older people are cancelling their emergency alarms because they can't afford them anymore. They are risking their health and wellbeing. Don't make them wait any longer. Scrap non-residential care charges. Now, and I move the motion in my name. Thank you, Ms Bailey. I now call on Kevin Stewart to speak to you and move amendment 511.2 minister for up to five minutes. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. And I want to thank Labour for bringing forward a critical issue for debate today and for providing me with a welcome opportunity to set out this Government's key social care support policies. Earlier this week, we set out our legislative proposals for the creation of the national care service. Through this, the Scottish Government has embarked on the most ambitious reform since the creation of the national health service. The introduction of the national care service bill in line with the Bute House agreement starts the process of the creation of this new service which will end the postcode lottery in adult social care support in Scotland. The Government are taking forward these ambitious reforms but we do not want to wait for the national care service to be up and running before we act. The Scottish Government appreciates the costs of care can be high for individuals and we are absolutely committed to the removal of non-residential charges for social care support during this Parliament. That is why it was an SNP manifesto commitment, as has already been mentioned by Ms Bailey, and it is why it was included in the programme for government. And I'll take Ms Bailey. Jackie Baillie. I'm grateful to the Minister. Could he tell us when non-residential care charges will be ended? I'll lay out some of the ways that we're going to do that as we move forward. The Government has an excellent record of improving the lives of those who are the most disadvantaged in our society, as shown by the extension of free personal care to all adults who need it. I acknowledge the intention of Westin Bartonshire Council to remove non-residential social care support charges. However, to do this in a uniform, fair and consistent way across Scotland, that requires legislation and it is the Government's intention to do this within the next year. And I find it a little bit bizarre that yesterday, Ms Baillie was talking about a power grab and centralized control in terms of the national care service. But today, she wants us to compel IJB's health and social care partnerships and councils to do this now. You cannot have it always, Ms Baillie. Your position on Tuesday is somewhat different from your position today. On actions that we have taken, let me set out our track record, Presiding Officer. Through the budget for 2223, the Government has allocated almost £3 billion to a range of supports that will contribute to mitigating the impact of the increased cost of living on households. That includes work to tackle child poverty, reducing the qualities and support financial wellbeing, alongside social security payments that are not available anywhere else in the UK. This Government has already committed itself to increase spend on social care by 25 per cent by the end of this Parliament. And funding of £846.6 million will be transferred from the health portfolio this year to local authorities for a range of investments in health and social care and mental health services. And from April this year, we provided funding of £200 million to local Government to support investment in health and social care, embed improved pay and conditions and deliver £8.50 minimum wage for all adult social care staff in commission services from 1 April this year. That represents an increase of 12.9 per cent over the course of the year. Excuse me, Presiding Officer. We are working with a fair work in social care group who have developed a set of recommendations for minimum standards of terms and conditions reflecting fair work principles. And we have improved support for Scotland's unpaid carers as a priority with our social security powers. Our carers allowance supplement was the first payment made by Social Security Scotland and increases carers allowance by over 13 per cent with eligible unpaid carers receiving a payment every six months. Since the launch of the supplement in 2018, around £659,000 totaling £188 million have been made. An unpaid carers continuously in receipt will have received over £2,270 more than their equivalent unpaid carers in the rest of the UK. Very briefly from Ms Duncan Glancy. Pam Duncan Glancy. I thank the minister for taking that intervention. Can he set out what financial support he'll give to the £1 million carers who are not accessing carers allowance and therefore the carers allowance supplement in Scotland? We would encourage everyone who is eligible to apply for the allowance and we will continue to review our policies on unpaid carers and we will announce more on that in the very near future in terms of our strategy. We announced an additional £4 million in January to help organisations working with unpaid carers to put expanded services in place during winter and we have invested an additional £20.4 million for local carers support in 2022-23 bringing total investment in the carers act to £88.4 million per year. Presiding Officer, we recognise that the cost of living crisis has an impact on everyone in Scotland and that includes those in need of social care support. The workforce and unpaid carers and I would call on the UK Government to play its part and we have had very little information on how they intend to address the pressures not only in the social care sector but for communities right across Scotland. Presiding Officer, I've set out the ways the Scottish Government is leading the way in the UK and improving the lives of those who are most disadvantaged in our society as well as those who care and support them and we will continue as a Government to support. Thank you. You need to move the amendment. Minister, could you move the amendment? I move the amendment in my name, Presiding Officer. Much obliged. I now call on Sanders Grolhany to speak to you and move amendment 5111.1. Dr Grolhany, up to five minutes. Well, Presiding Officer, it's nice to hear some details of the national care service from the SNP but it's after the photo op an announcement to the press. Perhaps a ministerial statement would have been more reasonable for such a big announcement. Not opposition business but this isn't the first time, is it? 76 days ago Scottish Labour published its local election manifesto and it seems the SNP would like to have further conversation but I think you've had your time to talk and you did it in the press. 76 days ago Scottish Labour published its local election manifesto and the motion debated today appears consistent with most of Labour's desired aims. I say most but not all and we will come back to that. While we are sympathetic with the principle of ending non-residential social care charges let's consider the financial facts. The SNP have cut local government funding by 20% in real terms since 2013. Local government is facing another real terms cut of £800 million by 2027. Getting the financials right is vital for sustainability. Also important is a commitment to focus on driving up standards of care. In a recent debate Labour front bench spokesman underscored the importance of creating a national care service to deliver change. Now we're detecting some inconsistencies with Labour's position. Yesterday after the Cabinet Secretary unveiled to the press his master plan for a new service Labour seemed to wake up and reject what would amount to the biggest power grab in Hollywood's history since the COVID recovery bill. We're pleased to see Jackie Baillie roll back on this. I would, yes. Jackie Baillie. If you bothered to actually consider what Labour... Through the chair please, Ms Baillie. If the member had bothered to consider what Labour have in the manifesto and have believed in for 10 years is about local accountability and local control. Something completely missing from the Cabinet Secretary's plans. Doctor Gohani. Well, as I said, Jackie Baillie rolled back on what was said earlier by from bench spokesman and Presiding Officer, on social care provision in Scotland we are in crisis. But the last thing we need right now is a major bureaucratic overhaul of the current system. I know the SNP Green government have been on the end of some uncomfortable truths but here's another. Audit Scotland says reform of social care cannot wait for the government to set up its national care service. Frontline improvements to essential care services are well overdue. Some things must be done now and some things financially are just way off the scale. The SNP Green government's national care service will cost around £1.3 billion to set up which includes almost half a billion pounds to establish a new centralised body. That is if this government can actually deliver a budget and that's debatable. For context, half a billion pounds would cover the salaries of 14,000 qualified nurses. Instead, the national care service is expected to hire up to 700 new staff, mainly managers and administrators. It will be mainly staffed by civil servants, not social care professionals. We simply can't afford to see money of this magnitude diverted from Frontline local services. This will be compounded by a loss of local decision making and accountability, financial instability and the risk that upheaval will negatively impact the most vulnerable in our society. And who will sit at the bureaucratic pinnacle of this new huge government entity? Well, that's not entirely clear but we can only assume it's the same Cabinet Secretary who presides over the worst A&E waiting times, cancer services in crisis, dentistry on a cliff edge, failed workforce planning. Surely even fans of centralisation should be worried. Presiding Officer, the government's own policy document accepts that there is a risk that the proposed national care service could lead to more bureaucracy, less input for people accessing care and a poorer service for rural and remote areas. And concerns exist regarding staffing retention and morale and this all seems all too familiar when it comes to the GP contract. And before charging ahead with the national care service isn't it more astute to learn lessons from the conclusions of the Scottish Covid inquiry? We need to see the SNP Green Government abandon the national care service plan which would scrap local accountability and impose total ministerial control and as a direct attack on localism. The Scottish Conservatives would fully support a local care service that would ensure support is delivered as close as possible to those who need it. The SNP Green Government should be putting every penny into local care services as well as supporting councils with proper funding so they have more freedom when it comes to non-residential social care charges. This, we believe, is real devolution. I move the amendment in my name and I refer members to my register of interest as a practicing NHS GP. Thank you, Dr Bill Honey. I now call on Alice Cole-Hamilton for up to four minutes. Minister, go Hamilton. Thank you very much indeed, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm grateful to rise for the Liberal Democrats in today's debate. I'm grateful to my friend Jackie Baillie for bringing it to the Chamber. I'd also like to thank her and Scottish Labour for confirming yesterday that the Labour Party will join the Scottish Liberal Democrats in our opposition to the national care service. Deputy Presiding Officer, to say a lot to the Scottish Government the Labour Party who have long campaign for a national care service do not recognise the vision that they campaigned for so long in the ill-thought-out plans that this Government have. In 2019, I must make progress. I will draw you in shortly. In 2019, during her keynote speech at the SNP conference, Nicola Sturgeon said that the principle of free personal care is the same as healthcare. If you need it, you should get it. However, despite that principle, many people of all ages still have to pay for non-residential case for care services. I'll give way to Gillian Martin. Gillian Martin. Very grateful. Just to ask if Mr Cole-Hamilton agreed with the findings of the Fili report. Let's go, Hamilton. I agree with much of the findings of the Fili report, but I don't think you'll find the solution to that found in the creation of the Government's ill-thought-out measure of a national care service. I will come on to that in my remarks if I'm allowed to make progress. First Minister explained and she went on and I quote that charges can be a barrier to people accessing the support they need. If they can't get that support in their homes, they are more likely to end up in hospital. Presiding Officer, I agree with her. She went on to pledge that if we elected the SNP we would scrap these charges for everyone. And this wasn't just a one-time promise from the First Minister said it repeatedly in last year's election campaign. But as we speak, thousands of people across Scotland are being forced to pay for care. Deputy Presiding Officer, we're talking about care that is essential to people's wellbeing on a day-to-day basis. Non-residential care includes personal care like help with personal hygiene, help getting dressed, preparing food and eating. It also means help with housework, community alarms. Currently councils have the power to charge for many of these services and every year they bring in over £40 million by so doing. To give one example in Glasgow, some people are forced to pay £17 an hour for home care services. This financial barrier can sometimes lead to people going without the care they need or even for going other basic necessities to be able to afford the cost. Presiding Officer, amidst the cost of living crisis, that is sadly not surprising and it serves to underline the need for these charges to be scrapped without any further delay. Many people would have been relieved to hear the First Minister promise to do something about this and yet despite being re-elected last year there are no signs of action on what was one of the SNP's key election promises. People are forking out sometimes hundreds of pounds a month for care. They must be wondering what this government is waiting for and Presiding Officer, you couldn't blame them for questioning how this government has found the time to satisfy a succession for a second independence referendum but not to help people with their most basic needs without suffering financially. This government has a habit of kicking the can down the road when it comes to reforming social care. The pot of gold at the end of the rainbow seems to be for this government the national care service but people just can't wait for that. In fact it's the wrong thing that they should be waiting for and as I've said before and I say this to Gillian Martin as well that the national care service is dressed up in the clothes of our most treasured national possession in the ANHS. An institution forged in the rubble and the poverty of the Second World War that is free at the point of delivery but it is part of this government's mission to centralise things and it will not be free at the point of delivery. There is no comparison to the NHS. Government needs to get on with taking the obvious action that would benefit our constituents today. Not an indeterminate number of years is part of a reorganisation that shackles services to government ministers who have already proven their incompetence in this area. Presiding Officer, thousands of our constituents receive non-residential care. For their sake, we must not wait a moment longer to end the financial burden that they have been lumped with for far too long. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr Cole-Hamilton, we move to the open debate and I call firstly Carol Mocken to be followed by Gillian Martin for up to four minutes, Ms Mocken. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. This is an important and timely debate with an immediate purpose. It's the kind of debate we should be having more of in this Parliament but sadly, that is really the case. This Government do not often want to debate issues such as this. Issues that they have made commitments on but are not prioritising and issues that they could easily achieve. Everyone in Scotland knows that social care is really being held together by the hard work of overworked and underpaired carers across the sector and they hold it together every day with little support from central government. And if you talk to workers on the front line they feel that there is very limited support from this Government. On top of this, those who require care are often some of the worst hit by inflation and a general increase in the cost of living. And unfortunately for them and so many others, we are now well into the depths of the cost of living crisis that is already biting hard for families all across the country and those same people are asking for help. This Government's record on supporting local government is very poor and I think we should have some honest debate and discussion around this. This Government have presided over the slashing of care packages, the withdrawal of respite care and they have failed to immediately implement a number of the key fairly review recommendations including that of universal non-residential care. All of these would have made such a crisis much more bearable for those with care needs and their families. Let's not forget that it was this Government that set up the fairly review. So why are we still awaiting its implementation? Far too long has passed. Yes? The reason why we are waiting implementation is because we consulted on the recommendations of fairly. 78 per cent of the folk who responded to that consultation back the Government in terms of our aims. They back the Government implementing what is in the fairly report and so we must move for people to make sure that these things are implemented at pace. It is a question that I ask in this chamber almost weekly when will this Government implement the commitments that it has made? That is why Scottish Labour is calling for the end of all non-residential social care charities across the current financial year and we are calling for it right now. We simply cannot expect people to bear the brunt of the Scottish Government's constant hand wringing for much longer. We are in the midst of the worst cost of living crisis in living memory. People need support from this Government now. It is not too much to ask. It was after all the SNP in the SNP's manifesto last year and I remember the days when breaking a manifesto promise was considered to be unacceptable both from the opposition benches and from the back benches. As my colleagues have already mentioned this is not simply a request from Scottish Labour that we are not willing to do ourselves. Only this week Scottish Labour run Weston Berkshire Council as we have heard, unveiled an ambitious cost of living plan which includes ending non-residential social care charges. Imagine if that was replicated on a national scale. Here we see forward thinking work going on at a local level and yet the SNP proposed vision for national care service wants to strip councils of most of the powers before long under this Government. I have heard it said that we will see local government hard leaving able to cut ribbons, never mind anything else. It is a disgrace the commitment this Government give to local government but it is clear we should be doing more and we should be backing Labour's motion today to end non-residential care charges. Thank you Deputy Presiding Officer. Thank you Ms Morgan. I now call Gillian Martin to be followed by Katie Clark again up to four minutes. Thank you Presiding Officer. I note that Weston Berkshire Labour run council has said that they are going to do what the Labour motion proposes. I do not know whether that is using the reserves or whether that is just in their budget but obviously I would be interested in Aberdeenshire Integrated Joint Board looking to any reserves that they have to ease a number of burdens on my most vulnerable constituents and topping up the assistance of the Scottish Government has already given to ease the cost of living burden that has been outlined in the previous debate. So I did a bit of digging. The Integrated Joint Board on Aberdeenshire have got 49 million in reserve and I asked myself what is that money, a contingency for? I've got that here. There's a number of things, staff wellbeing, alcohol and drug service work has been earmarked, money in the reserves, some mental health programmes, primary care improvement fund and the largest sum of 25 million for ongoing Covid response contingencies. Right, I don't know the detail on that and I might not agree with all the budget decisions that have been made once I do look at the detail but it's my SNP council group that has those disagreements with the Tory Liberal Democrat Administration in their own setting because that is local democracy. And in the SNP administration certainly will have done things differently than our Tory counterparts and indeed I see an SNP run per share they immediately put a £700,000 package in place to ease the cost of living strains that vulnerable people there. And in the previous debate where McGuire pointed to North Ayrshire council who are doing something to ease child poverty but Aberdeen's IJB reserves are something I will bear in mind for conversations that I'm having with them in the coming weeks about things that I think that they should be doing. But, Presiding Officer, here's what really bothers me about the Labour motion. It's not about what they want to do in terms of helping people. It's laudable. I said that to Jackie Baillie but it proposes that we should be telling IJBs around the country what they should spend their budget on after their budgets have been set. And say we did. What happens next year? Do the charges come back in? Are we deciding that for them too? Presiding Officer, with IJBs that are managing their own services within their budgets are Labour saying that we should say that the Scottish Government and Parliament should interfere in what IJBs do with their budget, what they should do with their reserves? I'll take us. Oh, yeah. Thank you. I'm grateful to the member. The Scottish Government are already the final arbiter of decisions made by IJBs. They go to the Minister. You already direct how they spend money by ring fencing. Ultimately, you are in control. Gillian Martin. We've never told them how to use their reserves. We never told them how to use their reserves. And just yesterday I read that newspaper quote on the proposals for our national care service. A national care service recommended by the Feeley review a national care service that Jackie Baillie tweeted last year about Labour's idea. And here it is. What this represents is nothing less than the biggest power grab in the history of Holyrood. One that threatens the very existence of local government. Well, who said that? Jackie Baillie again. Presiding Officer, is this motion the sound of a power grab being advocated by Labour? And although I have sympathy for IJBs taking decisions to remove care charges and I commend those who might choose to prioritise that, that's their decision. It's not our decision. Of course, what's this really about? We're very used to Labour asking the Scottish Government to spend money without giving detail on where it should come from. I've got a list here. Free residential care for over 65s. 412 million. Expanding eligibility criteria. 436 million. Non-residential charging. 51 million. 15 pounds an hour for all social care workers. 1.75 billion. Increasing respite support. Uncosted. Reopening ILF. 32 million. A total of 2.68 billion. Never with any idea about where this should come from. And that's one thing. It's one thing to do that. But that's the shugley peg that they put their duffle coat on every time they have a debate. But telling local authorities how to spend their budget well that's even the shugler in my mind. Presiding Officer. Thank you, Ms Martin. I would encourage the front benches not to engage in heckling during member speeches. I call Katie Clark to be followed by Tess White for up to four minutes, Ms Clark. Thank you Presiding Officer. And this debate of course is about what we can do now given the challenge that we face to support some of the most vulnerable in society and with the level of reserves that sits with health and social care partnerships. There seems to be a consensus across the chamber that there should be a removal of non-residential social care charges which have sometimes in the past been called a care tax. But the debate seems to be when that should happen. We of course need an extensive debate about the Scottish Government's proposals for a national care service which of course I would remind Gillian Martin and others in the chamber will be as proposed a centralised service. I've campaigned for a national care service but the national care service that I campaigned for would be a not-for-profit care service which respected the role of local government. But that is not primarily what this debate is about today. We know that there has been a slashing of care practices and care charges and there's been a withdrawal of respite care. And what this motion proposes is an end for all non-residential social care charges in the current financial year. So it's not about the future configuration of care in Scotland but it is about priorities and about what we think this Parliament should be prioritising. And the Scottish Labour Party I don't really have time for an intervention and I'm happy to take interventions but I don't think there's time. What Scottish Labour is prioritising today and saying to the Parliament we should prioritise is this particular action given that we do see it as one of the priorities that we should be setting. We know already that there are many good examples of councils that are taking steps to try and address this issue. For example, as has already been mentioned North Ayrsa Council indeed whilst it was under a Labour administration brought forward flat rate charges regardless of income to include meals at homes and telecare. As has been said earlier this week West Bartsonshire Council unveiled an ambitious cost of living plan which includes ending non-residential social care charges which would put more than a million pounds back into the pockets of some of the most vulnerable people. We know from spice that the cost of removing charges would be in the region of £51 million and we know already that charges for services that are not considered free personal care vary tremendously across Scotland with different councils having very different charging policies. Clearly the national care service will address many of these issues but as we also all know it will be a number of years before any national care service is in place. This debate is about what we can do today in this financial year within the budgets that exist that will help people who are in real need and support some of the most vulnerable against a backdrop of a massive cost of living crisis. I would ask colleagues to support the motion today. Thank you Ms Clark. I now call Tess White who will be followed by Emma Roddick for up to four minutes Ms White. Deputy Presiding Officer the reality is that many of us will have care needs at some point in our lifetimes. At other points we may need to deliver care to a loved one but it's clear the status quo on social care cannot continue. We've seen several initiatives from this SNP government to address the worsening situation but social care has suffered from an implementation gap between what was promised and what was delivered. Just this week a GP from Lawrence Kirk Healthcare Centre in my region reported that social care shortages mean that things are becoming potentially unsafe. A general manager from NHS Grampian added that the biggest challenge we have is access to care packages. That gap of unavailability of care packages for these patients slows down the whole of the system. Figures show that in Aberdeen City 38% of care services are reporting vacancies. In Aberdeenshire it's 34%. In Dundee the number is 37% and in Angus it's 21%. The main reason why services find vacancies hard to fill too few applicants with experience. Yes, the social care system is under immense strain from the pandemic. However, and as the freely review emphasised the vast majority of the challenges we are addressing predated Covid-19 and will outlive the pandemic. That's not just under the SNP's stewardship but under Scottish Labour as well. Presiding Officer both Scottish Labour's proposals and the SNP Green Government's National Care Service Bill failed to measure up to the significant social care challenges that face us from an ageing population putting more pressure on supply to poor workforce planning. The income from non-residential social care charges is used to invest in high-quality social care services. In its guidance COSLA cautions that eliminating charges will restrict the quality of support to the general population who rely on these services. Simply put, Labour's plan risks taking money away from the front line. Meanwhile, the SNP Green Government's National Care Service Bill will pave the way for a centralising bloated bureaucracy that will be established by the end of this Parliament years from now. At an estimated cost of £1.3 billion it will divert precious resources away from the front line, employing hundreds of back-office staff to oversee a top-down system that scraps local accountability. The Minister might not be interested in what I've got to say, Presiding Officer, but it is respectful to at least listen to contributions. Why should care in Aberdeenshire, Angus, Aberdeen and Dundee be dictated from St Andrew's House in Edinburgh? Presiding Officer, earlier this year Audit Scotland stated firmly and unequivocally that a clear plan is needed now to address the significant challenges facing social care in Scotland based on what can be taken forward without legislation. The Scottish Conservatives have published a common sense policy recommendation for how care can be improved now without top-down reform including a social care guarantee to make sure that no individual has to access care miles away from their community. It is important that an individual does have access to care and it is not miles away from their community, family and support network. At the very least, I hope there is consensus in the chamber on that point this afternoon. Thank you. Thank you, Ms White. I now call Emma Roddick to be followed by Gillian Mackay for up to four minutes, Ms Roddick. Thank you Presiding Officer. We are here today debating a Scottish Labour motion that completely fails to recognise the fact that the Scottish Government does not have fiscal autonomy. Ending all non-residential social care charges in this current Parliament will be a huge achievement and it is a bold ambition. I can't respect Labour saying we like what you're doing but do it faster. It is a healthy pressure for an opposition party to put on government and I think we all want to get support out as quickly as possible to people who need it here and now. It's just a shame that they will not lend support to the SNP's calls for further fiscal powers to be devolved to allow borrowing and other decisions that would make more money available for public spending or otherwise to say what spending in other areas they think should be cut. That is what makes Labour's demands unrealistic and I'll take an intervention. I'm disappointed that the member didn't listen to my earlier words. We did set out exactly where you could get the money. We did explain that the Scottish Government has all the powers it needs to do this and do it now and it doesn't require any further constitutional change. Emma Rowley I will move on later in my speech to the issue of taking money away from IJBs to pay for this. Labour's motion also completely fails to recognise that the money we're able to spend in Scotland is tied to public spending in the rest of the UK, public spending which is overseen by a right-wing Tory Government. Over 770 million is being spent this year alone by the Scottish Government simply on mitigating harmful Tory welfare decisions from down south which is 770 million we could have spent on other things. I'll take an intervention. Cri Coy Does Emma Rowley welcome the Chancellor's intervention to support Scots through the cost of living crisis? When Kate Forbes asked for £1,000 for the most vulnerable households in Scotland, the Chancellor brought forward £1,650 for the most vulnerable households in Scotland. Will she join me in thanking the Chancellor and the UK for the full support for Scotland for the cost of living crisis? Emma Rowley I welcome any measures brought forward to help people with the cost of living crisis but I do take issue with the way that this has been done. I take issue with the fact that we can never rely on how much money we're going to be getting from down south and therefore have to change our budget based on that. Now the Tories have complained about independence referendum and money being spent on that. Well 20 million is the estimate spend for a referendum next year. 20 million that means that we could hold 38 referendums for the cost of mitigating one year of harmful Tory welfare cuts like the bedroom tax and still have change left over for a Scottish Tory leadership election. So I suggest that they have a look at their own priorities. I think I'm done with intervention sorry. The Feely report presented some huge challenges and the Scottish Government is rising to them. Free personal and nursing care payments have been increased above inflation for the last two years that's an 18.3% increase since April 2020. That is not the action of a government which does not recognise the cost of living crisis and that the cost of care is increasing. Nor is the introduction doubling and then increasing again of a Scottish child payment the raising of benefit rates are the genuine request for further powers over our own finances over energy policy over employment so that the SNP Government can do even more to help those who need it most. The national care service is the most ambitious reform public services since the NHS was introduced. I know representing the Highlands and Islands that there are concerns still to be addressed and views yet to be heard and explored around how it will work. There's work to be done on considering the needs of remote and rural areas and how we can protect high quality provision which is built on local knowledge where it exists and reassure people who currently feel that they receive care that they are happy with that the policy is a good thing for them too. That's an important aspect of Labour's motion today for me is the word immediate. I don't think it is appropriate to rush this through without proper consideration. That would put the people that I represent at risk of receiving care that is not at the same standard as elsewhere the sort of postcode lottery that the national care service is being brought in to get rid of. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms Roddick. I now call Dilyne Mackay to be followed by Stuart McMillan for again up to four minutes. Ms Mackay. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The cost of living crisis is indeed placing incredible pressure on people across Scotland with inflation hitting 9.1% today. People are being plunged into poverty by the cuts to universal credit and the benefit cap. They are facing rising energy bills because of the Tory's failure to implement price controls or to transition away from unsustainable fossil fuels such as gas as well as rising food prices due to Brexit. Just today, a study published by the Resolution Foundation revealed that Brexit is making the cost of living crisis worse with the average work in Britain on course to suffer at more than £470 in lost pay each year by 2030 after rising living costs are taken into account. I have spoken in this chamber previously about the impact of the cost of living on unpaid carers. As the co-convener of the CPG on carers, I have heard from carers themselves about the effect on them and those they care for. Carers have been faced with rising living costs but many do not have the option to take on more work to meet these due to their caring responsibilities. This has been exacerbated by the fact that early on the pandemic many people's care packages were reduced or stopped and carers took on more as a result. They may face additional costs related to care such as home adaptions, PPE or other equipment, transport or cleaning supplies the cost of which is also rising. Those who develop care needs perhaps as a result of a new diagnosis will also experience the double pressure of having to reduce working hours or leave their employment alongside new care related costs. Research conducted by Mari Curie has found that being terminally ill and reaching the end of life can substantially increase the risk of poverty not just to the person who is terminally ill but also for carers and family to look after them. Current social care charging arrangements can also be difficult to navigate. Rules around free personal care can cause confusion particularly those related to eligibility criteria and what qualifies as free personal care and that often varies across the country. For example, personal care can cover personal hygiene but not laundry. It's not just the charges themselves that create issues for people but the systems behind them which is why we need the large scale reform the national care service will deliver. The independent review of adult social care found that charging for services and supports that had been assessed as needed also presented major issues for many people as this reduced their income and had a real impact on their choices limiting their options and control about what they wanted to do with support in place. This is why the Greens and the Scottish Government have committed to the abolition of non-residential social care charges as part of a national care service built on human rights and lived experience. We're working towards this as a priority and it will be implemented during this parliamentary session and I'm confident that if this can be done more quickly that it will be. I welcome the commitment by Westin Bartonshire council. Often in this chamber, Presiding Officer, we talk about sharing best practice. We've heard some of the things other councils have been doing this afternoon to help with the cost of living crisis, including from Gillian Martin and earlier from Ruth Maguire. I hope that all of those measures, including those from Westin Bartonshire council, are being shared via COSLA to ensure that councils are sharing best practice and ideas that will benefit their constituents. To conclude, Presiding Officer, the Scottish Greens remain committed to the ending of non-residential social care charges and we will work with the Scottish Government to bring this forward as soon as possible. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Can we now move to the final speaker in the open debate, Stuart McMillan again, up to four minutes, Mr McMillan. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. First of all, I want to just get a highlight. I'm going to take this debate. I'm going to speak about a different perspective in the issue that we face. Firstly, I do think it's important to acknowledge that improving health and social care outcomes for patients relies upon two things. First of all, ensuring that those who require these services can access them regardless of income and location and also ensuring that the workforce are supported to carry out their jobs. The Scottish Government has already expanded free personal nursing care to everyone who is assessed as needing it and the national care service will go even further. The publication this week of the National Care Service Bill will see a national wage for carers to ensure the value of the wages of a social care workforce better reflects the work that they do. However, we need to consider how the continued impact of the pandemic and how the cost of living crisis as has been indicated in the Labour motion in front of us is actually impacting health and social care staff. As fuel pump prices soar, people who rely upon their own transport for work like carers and home care staff are having to absorb the additional cost of fueling up. That's why I have written to the Chancellor of Exchequer asking for the mileage rate to be upgraded for health and social care workers until such times as that fuel price actually does reduce. The 45p rate is set at UK level and if the Chancellor were to provide a limited focused measure to increase the 45p mileage rate it will have a positive impact upon my constituents, those constituents of every single MSP in this chamber and also across these islands. Now Willie Rennie and Alex Rowley spoke in the early debate about targeted measures. Now what I'm proposing is exactly that. Needn't be a constitutional matter. The idea came about at one of my regular surgeries when Francis Poole came to raise a range of issues with me. Francis is a home care worker and receives the 45p a mile which has said that this was covering less and less of the fuel that she needs to visit patients and their homes never mind the wear and tear of the vehicles of home care workers. We all know that staff recruitment and retention is an issue in the social care sector at present largely due to Covid-19 and also in some areas Brexit. Without an increase in the standard mileage rate I do fear that some social care staff may actually have no option but to look for employment elsewhere if they cannot afford to get to work due to the fuel costs. It also makes it harder to recruit more staff. Presiding Officer, my Greenock and Inverclyde constituency will be one of the hardest hit constituencies affected by home care challenges. Inverclyde has an older population and has a growing older population and this is forecasted to continue for up to the next two decades. Improving the working conditions of non-residential home care workers is absolutely vital. Christine Grahame was correct when she spoke in earlier debate about decreasing the VAT rate saying that that was a sticking plaster. I accept, I agree with her and I accept that the mileage rate proposal that I am putting forward is also a sticking plaster approach. However, the home care workers cannot wait until Westminster fundamentally changes its funding approach. Presiding Officer, the SNP Government has taken a number of important steps to actually improve social care through the introduction of the Health and Social Care Integration, self-taught support and the CARERS Act. In addition, on 1 April 2019, free personal and nursing care was expanded to everyone under 65 who was assessed as requiring you. Many measures have been undertaken, but clearly there is still much more to do if we do genuinely value our home care workers. I generally believe across the chamber we all will, but the Chancellor has got an excellent opportunity to actually make a change, a fundamental change, that can help home care workers across these islands now. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr McMillan. We now move to the wind-up speeches and I call Craig Hoy for up to five minutes, Mr Hoy. Thank you, Presiding Officer. This has been a full debate and I thank our colleagues for their contributions. Can I start by focusing on Labour's call for the removal of non-residential care charges? Given the savage SNP cuts to front-line budgets, it is questionable and I heard what Jackie Baillie said about reserves, but it is questionable as to whether or not this is achievable even in the cost of living crisis. We know that front-line services are suffering as a result of SNP mismanagement, but rather than raiding the reserves of cash-strapped IJBs, wouldn't it be better simply for the SNP Government to fund Scotland's councils fairly? In a spirit of localism, I say this to Labour, should it be the role of this Parliament or should it be the role of democratically-elected councils to make the final call on charges? That's just a thought. As our motion makes clear, we believe that councils should be given the financial headroom to fully fund services and only by doing so can we then ensure that they have the funding to remove non-residential care charges. Mr Hoy, can we stop with the running commentary on the front benches, please? Mr Hoy. Presiding Officer, in addition to the issue of non-residential care charges, this debate has focused on wider and very important issues. The SNP has spent years hollowing out Scotland's councils, budgets cut by 20 per cent in real terms since 2013, and with their plans for a national care service, they are mounting a full frontal assault on council powers. As COSLA has said, this legislation removes local democratic accountability and passes ministers complete control, control over social care, control over children's services, over social work and drug and alcohol services. The SNP are punch drunk on centralising power, but as Sandesh Gulhane and Tess White made clear, we want to see a policy based on local care provision with a local care guarantee at its heart, and only through localism can we meet future care needs, including the issue of non-residential care charging. Deputy Presiding Officer, social care in Scotland is in crisis, and so too is our NHS, and many of the problems that we see in our NHS stem from SNP problems in social care. Record levels of delayed discharge are impacting patient flow, and the real risk now is that we waste the next four years diverting precious resources away from the front line. The SNP is a past master at misplaced priorities, but even for this Government, the plan for a national care service is simply staggering. Ministers propose to spend up to £1.3 billion setting up a national care service. You could have come to Parliament yesterday and made your statement, and you chose not to, so I just asked you to take a seat. Through the care, please, Mr Hoy. Sorry, Deputy Presiding Officer, I invite the minister to take his seat. Ministers propose to spend up to £1.3 billion setting up a national care service, and it was there in the accompanying notes of the bill yesterday. That's 700 new civil servants and hundreds of managers at a time when the front line is in crisis, when hard-working care staff are burnt out, when carers are burnt out, and I pay tribute to their heroic efforts today. This legislation is a power grab, but it also goes beyond control to the issue of competence. The competence of this Government, the competence of this Cabinet Secretary, how can someone who has failed our national health service so badly say a national care service would be safe in his hands? Make no mistake, this is Police Scotland Mark 2 and Whomza Yousaf is at the wheel. But Deputy Presiding Officer, in the last 24 hours, the Government has also revealed its contempt for this Parliament. Given the scale and scope of this legislation, we might have expected a statement in Parliament yesterday. But as always, the SNP are running scared of scrutiny, announcing plans to the press corps rather than to this chamber. Deputy Presiding Officer, the national care service is simply the wrong plan at the wrong time, and that's why the SNP must ditch this proposal and put every single penny into front line social care. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you, Mr Hoy. I now call on the Cabinet Secretary to wind up for the Government up to four minutes, Mr Yousaf. I thank Jackie Baillie for bringing this debate to the chamber. It has been helpful to air some very important issues, and let me reiterate what my colleague Kevin Stewart reiterated at his opening contribution, that, of course, we do want to scrap and want to end non-residential care charges. We intend to do that in this parliamentary term, and he outlined, of course, that we'll bring legislation next year to that effect. What we won't do, though, is to raid every single IGB's reserves. Some IGBs, in fact, actually don't have reserves, but we won't raid those IGBs that do have reserves of the funds, a one-off funding source for what would be a recurring spending issue. More importantly, it's probably quite vital to put some of the facts on the table. The latest set of accounts that have been published for 31 March 2021 show that total integrated joint boards reserved for £558 million. Jackie Baillie is right. That sounds like, certainly, on the face of it, a staggering sum. Of course, dig into that, and £464 million is already earmarked for specific purposes, in particular the on-going response to Covid. What I would say to Jackie Baillie is that we are having this debate in a week where cases of Covid are rising, infection levels rising, transmission levels rising, and to then raid the budgets of IGBs when they are facing challenges in relation to Covid infection would be foolish, and I suspect that Jackie Baillie, if I did that and left IGBs with no money to deal with Covid, would be the first one dragging me over the hot coals if that was what this Government had done. I give way to Jackie Baillie. Indeed, the cabinet secretary knows me well. I would indeed do that, but what he is misrepresenting is that there are sufficient unearmarked reserves, not for Covid, but for other things, that would cover the £51 million required to end non-residential care charges. If the Government are to be believed and I believe them, they intend to do that. We are suggesting that they do it now. There is the ability to do it now, and if he is as good as his word, he is intending to do it at some point later. You can start now. The money is there. Cabinet Secretary, I can give you the time back. I wish that Jackie Baillie had listened to what I said. Five IGBs have no reserve funds whatsoever. Twenty-three of those IGBs in their general reserves have less than 2% of their available funding. Jackie Baillie, as Scottish Labour has misrepresented the position in relation to IGB reserves. As Kevin Stewart said, I fact almost every single member that has spoken other than her Labour backbench colleagues have all mentioned the contradiction at the heart of Scottish Labour's position. Twenty-four hours ago, she was demanding that the Scottish Government doesn't interfere in local spending and local decision making. Twenty-four hours later, Jackie Baillie is demanding that the Government interferes and intervenes in local decision making. That is a contradiction and a hypocrisy. I am afraid that we are only too used to with Scottish Labour. When it comes to, of course, the national care service and there will be a debate, there will of course be a parliamentary process that we go through, as we do with any other bill, as we would suspect that the committee, of course, that Sanders Gohani and other members sit on. It doesn't surprise me that Sanders Gohani and the Tories don't want a national care service. That is because at the heart of the bill that we published yesterday, a national care service has, at the heart of it, collective bargaining. It has at the heart of it ethical commissioning. It has at the heart of it fair work for social care workers. It has at the heart of it human rights of care home relatives. So the NCS, the national care service, stands up and embeds everything that the Tories oppose. I'll take no lectures, none whatsoever, from the Tories about social care. That is the party. They are the party that drags Scotland out of the EU against its will, causing untold damage to social care up and down this country. To conclude, Presiding Officer, we are not waiting for the NCS to make changes. We have recruited over 1,000 healthcare support workers, many of them based in community, many of them helping and assisting with social care. In my time as health secretary, we have introduced two pay rises for adult social care workers in the last year. So we will not wait for the national care service to make improvements to our social care system, but we will do that in a way that is thought out, that is based on the facts, the evidence and the figures and will continue to invest in social care and of course the people who provide that care are so vital to social care right across the country. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I have called on Paul O'Kane to wind up the debate for around five minutes, Mr O'Kane. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. In closing this debate for Scottish Labour, I reflect that we have again used Labour time to debate the ending of all non-residential care services in Scotland. I think that we have heard from colleagues across the chamber today about what that would mean for so many who rely on support, but also for the unpaid carers who are at breaking point both in terms of their physical and mental health, but also financially. So it is disappointing for the Government not to give clarity on timescales or meaningful plans in terms of how they will remove non-residential care charges. The Government can do this now. The minister says that it will take legislation. I would challenge that. But will he give a cast-iron guarantee that non-residential care charges will be ended before the national care service bill has its final reading in this chamber? I am happy to give way to either Minister or the cabinet secretary if they can confirm what will come first, because those in receipt of adult social care cannot, nor should they have to wait for the Government to get its act together. We are in the midst of the worst cost-of-living crisis in living memory, and many households are already panicking about the living winter. We need to act now. Carers have told me about the impact of the cost-of-living crisis already being felt, for example, through energy bills for vital equipment skyrocketing. 4,000 pounds in one instance, as Jackie Baillie mentioned. We must act with haste to make life a bit easier for those carers. Of course, each time we call on the Government to deliver on their own pledge there are excuses if someone else's fault is outlined in their amendment today. On the last time the minister and I had an exchange and a debate on social care, it was COSLA and IJBs who were the issue. My colleagues in these benches have set out time and again, certainly. Jackie Dunbar. Thank you, and I thank the member for taking the intervention. I would just like to ask does he agree with Jackie Baillie that the minister should just tell the IJBs how to spend their budgets and their reserves? Paul O'Kane. I am coming on to that point, but the point was made by my colleague Jackie Baillie that there is already ministerial direction in terms of spending, in terms of ring-fen spending, but also in terms of the final arbiter of decisions that are made by IJBs. I think IJBs aren't just councils. There are also health boards with health board membership as well. Colleagues in these benches have set out time and again how charges could be ended immediately. Indeed, we provided a costed budget in December, which allowed us to implement the failure recommendations using consequentials. Today, because of an action of ministers on their unwillingness to use consequentials, we have set out how this can be done with the vast level of reserves that sit in health and social care partnerships. For people who pay these care charges, this policy will be transformative, as it lifts a heavy burden from their shoulders. However, it seems that the SNP and the Scottish Greens aren't willing to support such a measure, which would make such a real intangible difference to the lives of so many. It is a case of once again sticking their head in the sand despite the promises in the SNP council manifesto last year that they would end these non-residential care costs. Even before that, the previous Cabinet Secretary for Health promised at the start of 2021 to work as quickly as practical to end all charges. Indeed, the First Minister, he accuses the Government of sticking their head in the sand. Can he tell us why a number of Labour administrations are not doing what Western Barton is doing? Are they also sticking their head in the sand? Paul O'Kane? I mean, I think that that is. The Government has the money. It needs the political will and the bravery. It needs the bravery and the will to do this. I think that the Cabinet Secretary will see Labour councils making the real difference on the grounds in terms of cost of living and in terms of non-residential care charges. We will take any lectures from a cabinet secretary who is unwilling to act. I know that the minister has brought up the national care service in his contribution today, another opportunity to kick things into the long grass. What I would say to members who have made the point about Scottish Labour's position on the national care service, we have been very clear, consistently, about what our own tests are for a national care service. There are serious concerns now that the bill has been published not only from Scottish Labour but from trade unions and councils. Indeed, Cair Greenaway of the GMB said that there is much detail in terms of executive boards and bureaucrats, but no mention of how care workers can improve their pay. It is unclear how, if at all care staff will benefit from the Thag packet plan. That is a view of the trade unions. Thag packet plans is how they described the bill. It is not just the SNP and the Greens who are lighting down Scots with their amendment. Conservative members across the chamber have failed to respond and mentioned today in their amendments the cost of living crisis that has been caused in part by their UK Government, a party who is totally failing the economy and failing to tackle inflation spurring on this crisis. It comes as no surprise to see the Scottish Conservatives pivot away from the real matter in hand which is taking action straight away to end all non-residential social care charges. Instead, the amendment does nothing to address the pressures facing those in receipt of social care now. Scottish Labour are putting in place ideas that will benefit people across Scotland. We are putting them into practice and we have heard that in the examples that were related from West Dunbartonshire. Tackling the cost of living crisis head on with a £5 million package making a real difference, particularly on non-residential care charges. I have yet to see the same ambition from the Benches opposite to tackle this cost of living crisis. The Scottish Government's own report on adult social care lets remind ourselves. I recommend the ending of all non-residential social care charges. When the First Minister announced the review, she said and I quote that it is time to be bold. I say to this Government what you have before you today from Scottish Labour is bold and we will continue to be bold until this timid Government does the right thing. Thank you. Thank you Mr O'Kane. That concludes the debate on delivering the immediate removal of non-residential social care charges. There will be a brief pause before we move on to the next item of business.