Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Social Justice and Social Security Committee 09 May 2024

09 May 2024 · S6 · Social Justice and Social Security Committee

Item of business

Pension Age Disability Payment

Adam Stachura (Age Scotland) Watch on SPTV

With regard to your first question around the justification for not including the mobility component, that has been a long-running conversation for organisations that work with people who require—or should need—social security support. Marilyn Howard was right in saying that attendance allowance was brought in in 1970. That was the same year in which The Beatles disbanded and Apollo 13 was launched. It is a long time ago—we are looking at 54 years since the payment started. Just now, while we are trying to have a safe and secure transition, the Government has said that a mobility component is not something to look at for “the foreseeable future”, which is disappointing. Although I am not saying that it is insignificant, the only justification is on cost grounds. At the end of last year, we met the relevant Scottish Government officials, who, quite frankly, were open and understood the rationale of saying that the decision is, in essence, ageist. You have picked a date on which somebody will receive extra support and one on which they will not, and that line is the state pension age. We met the cabinet secretary at the end of March and had a similar conversation. We looked at some of the proposals that we put forward, which are in your papers. There was certainly an acceptance that something more could be done. However, the point is that the justification is solely on cost grounds and, in answer to your second question, Mr Mason, about where we would cut, it is really difficult to say. In different inquiries that the Parliament has done as part of its scrutiny—particularly pre-budget scrutiny of Scottish Government budgets—it has been hard to go into the granular detail of what is being spent where. I am not suggesting that it would be easy to find half a billion pounds, if that is the figure, but I suspect that there are also tiers of spend. Maybe a mobility component would not mirror exactly what someone would currently get under, for example, personal independence payment, which would come with them once they were over the state pension age. Part of the challenge is that, if someone has applied at a certain point for that kind of social security or disability benefit and they receive a mobility component at 65, they will not get it at 67. There is not much change in their life in those two years. That is maybe the extreme end of the argument, but it is a close line, which has been decided by Government. The person’s need for mobility, independence and participation, which is about their self-worth and ability to prevent further health challenges and conditions, is something that added mobility can certainly help with. Lack of mobility adds to levels of loneliness and isolation, which is an incredible cost to our health service as well.

Search Hansard contributions

Social Justice and Social Security Committee 09 May 2024

In the same item of business