Meeting of the Parliament 19 December 2018
I start by paying tribute to my colleague Jackie Baillie for securing the debate and lodging her relevant motion. Jackie has a formidable record as a campaigner and in bringing issues of substance and issues that matter to the Scottish Parliament chamber. Scottish Water’s proposed cut to the discount for single persons is no different from those.
We should look at the extent of the issue. The proposal will affect nearly one million people; the geographic breakdown shows that it will affect 138,000 people in Glasgow and 57,000 people in South Lanarkshire. I have no doubt that many people across Rutherglen, Cambuslang and Blantyre will be concerned about the proposals in the Scottish Government’s consultation document. Age Scotland is right to highlight the impact on pensioners. We know that over the next 25 years, the impact will grow by 50 per cent.
It is relevant that we are having the debate at this time of year, when we are also focusing on fuel poverty. A quarter of people in Scotland suffer from fuel poverty, and half of them are older people. A lot of the issues relating to the single-person discount affect older people.
That being the case, the Scottish Government is pursuing the wrong policy. First, the policy is unfair. If the single occupancy discount was reduced or removed, nearly a million people would be affected, including a lot of pensioners.
Secondly, there seems to be an argument about shifting to the council tax reduction element of the water charge. That has very poor uptake, so it would not have the same impact in terms of helping people. There would be unintended consequences to the policy.
I suspect that the Scottish Government is taking the approach because it continues to pursue fundraising options to fill the black holes in its budget—not just this year, but in future years. Nobody should be surprised by that. From the publication of last week’s draft budget, we know that there will be a decrease of £319 million in real terms for local councils alone. There are clear issues with that.
Jackie Baillie has brought a relevant issue to the chamber. Having looked at the consultation, I say to James Dornan that it lists clearly the various current exemptions and says:
“Ministers ... consider that there is a strong case for reducing or removing these discounts.”
It says not just that there is a case, but that there is “a strong case”. That shows how the Government is thinking. It clearly knows that the issue is controversial, given that it will publish the results of the consultation on Friday, when most people will be heading off for the Christmas break. I agree with Jackie Baillie that the Government should rethink its position, if the direction of travel is to reduce or get rid of the discount.
This debate has been relevant in bringing the issue to the chamber, so I hope that the cabinet secretary’s response to it is constructive. As the change would have a detrimental effect on nearly a million Scots, a lot of whom are pensioners, we need to rethink the way forward.
17:30