Hansard

Employment is fundamentally about empowerment and about people having the right opportunities to fulfil their ambitions, make a decent income and contribute to overall prosperity throughout their lives. Securing someone’s life’s ambition is not really about getting the maximum number of people into any available work as quickly as possible. It is time to think differently when we debate the employability landscape in Scotland.

We need to pull back from the immediate situation and take a long, hard look at what the Government can do, what civil society can contribute and how we can best develop the relationships between employers and employability. We are recognising that, and the Scottish Government has made significant changes that are having a positive impact on those seeking entry into the workplace. That involves people learning and developing new skills, and continuing in and returning to education, plus the provision of apprenticeships and close attention to the equality agenda in terms of sex equality and equality for disadvantaged people and those with disabilities.

I am proud to have been one of the first members of the Scottish Parliament to be an accredited living wage employer. It was not that difficult—I already paid my staff the living wage, so it was quite easy to live up to that standard. I have spent a long time in my constituency, through many forums, encouraging businesses and organisations to do exactly the same. A living wage is not only good for the recipients; it is good for employers, too. Evidence shows that sick leave is reduced, profits are enhanced and staff take pride in their work when they feel that they are being paid properly.

Employment levels are better than they have ever been in Scotland and they are now running above those in the rest of the UK. The number of young people who are not in employment or education is at its lowest level since 2004 and the Scottish Government has committed £28.6 million between 2012 and 2016 to drive action on targets.

On that point, we have completely shifted the narrative and the culture of doing down all those young people. We do not use some of the very negative terms that we used to use; we have a much more positive way of describing our young people, talking them up, giving them opportunities and telling them that they can achieve. That is the type of thing that we should be proud of. We have created modern apprenticeships across the piece, dealing with some of the gender issues and with the underrepresentation of people from minority ethnic communities and improving the positive destinations for looked-after children.

However—I agree with Jackie Baillie on this, which does not happen often—that is where we can do more. We need more powers in this place over employment to make the changes that people in Scotland need. A pick ’n’ mix devolution disnae work. Although the Government will have some powers—for example, over the work programme—we need a more complete portfolio to be able to act effectively.

Although the work programme and work choice will be devolved, the access to work scheme will not be devolved. Many people need that extra one-to-one support or an extra piece of equipment to make their workplace viable for them, so not devolving that scheme seems stupid. It seems ludicrous that that level of support is not being devolved along with the work programme and work choice.

We do not want to simply replicate all the problems and barriers of existing models. It will be possible for Scotland to meet the needs of its workforce only if we have the complete package of powers, so I ask the Labour Party—in the spirit of kind, straight-talking politics—to support the full devolution of employment laws and powers. In addition, let us work together to completely and utterly reject the Trade Union Bill in all its forms.

Over the past few weeks, the Welfare Reform Committee has heard from many organisations about issues with the work programme. As Lynn Williams put it in her briefing to us all today:

“The failure of the current approach, our changing demographic patterns and our politically advantageous times mean we need to be bold. At the heart of this must be a re-framing that focuses our attention on people’s contribution to society rather than solely the ultimate goal of employment. We must also recognise that an individual’s form of contribution, or employability needs, may change over time.”

We define work rigidly. Is a mother who is at home with two small children working? Is someone who is looking after an elderly relative with dementia working? Is a volunteer in a charity shop working, or a retired person who does some gardening for their neighbours? All those people are working and contributing, yet we want to push everyone into the short-term goal of getting into work in the conventional way, as defined by the UK Government.

The mood has become intolerant. Society seems unwilling to accept that some people are not in a position to work in the ordinary sense, although they are contributing in definable, cost-effective ways. Is it not about time that we recognised that? Is it not about time that we stopped calling people benefit scroungers? Is it not about time that we had a social security and work programme system in Scotland that actually supports people?

We all know that financial resources are limited and we have no idea what George Osborne has coming down the line for us. We need to grow from a single view of employment and start drawing in different kinds of work, different circumstances and different situations, so that we build a more all-embracing economy as a result.

Just plugging people into jobs does not achieve that. Square pegs do not fit in round holes. Barnardo’s Scotland points that out clearly when it says:

“Back to work programmes are failing to meet the needs of disadvantaged young people who are furthest from the labour market. 68% of young people return to Jobcentre Plus after two years on the Work Programme having not found sustained work for 6 months.”

The work-first approach does not offer those young people the support that they need. We should provide that support with tailored services rather than simply relying on generic programmes. In my constituency, I have seen the hugely positive impact of bespoke services that are provided by many organisations, including Rathbone Training and South Lanarkshire Council. People’s lives have been transformed. We need a more structured service.

The SNP has always argued that higher education should be about the ability to learn and not the ability to pay. Let us now apply the same criteria to our employment resources, which should be based on capability and not always on the pre-structured format of one size fits all, because one size does not fit all. If we work together to give the Scottish Parliament the power to make the difference, we might be able to encourage possible future Labour Governments to follow our plans.