Meeting of the Parliament 16 September 2021 (Hybrid)
A fellow Orcadian knows how this one likes to talk. Thank you, Presiding Officer.
I am pleased to be speaking in favour of the motion today, as it highlights the ambition that the Scottish Government has for the session ahead. I note from the proposed amendments to the motion, particularly the Labour amendment, that there is quite considerable consensus, even if it is tacit, across the chamber on the measures that are being brought forward by the Scottish Government. It was, therefore, perhaps a wee bit contrary for Anas Sarwar and many of his Labour colleagues, since the programme for government was announced, to say that it somehow lacked ambition, when the areas that are mentioned in the motion match or go further than Labour’s manifesto commitments and so little is sought in the amendment.
Indeed, the one area of real deviation—[Interruption.] I will answer that later. The one area of deviation between what is set out in the programme for government and today’s Opposition amendments is on the Scottish child payment.
All parties went into the election promising to double the Scottish Government’s anti-poverty, game-changing Scottish child payment. As someone who is an anti-poverty campaigner and believes that building consensus drives and sustains progress, I found that incredibly heartening. The question mark, of course, is about timing. We all want to see that increase happening as quickly as possible, but it highlights the limitations of a hybrid tax and social security system.
The Scottish child payment is demand led. That means that the budget commitments will change year on year, depending on eligibility, which of course will be higher at times of higher unemployment or poor economic performance that suppresses wages; that is also the time when consequential tax receipts are also lower. When we need to fund more social security, our revenue is reduced and that is why demand-led social security requires borrowing to work. The Scottish Parliament does not have adequate borrowing powers, which means that it takes longer to safely deliver and sustain social security benefits than it would do if they were being delivered with full powers.