Meeting of the Parliament 13 June 2024
On the housing budget specifically, it is not just the capital cut that we are wrestling with; it is the more than 60 per cent cut to financial transactions. I know that Miles Briggs knows that the financial transactions funding is what underpins the affordable housing supply programme. We cannot have a 60 per cent cut in FTs from the UK Government without that impacting the programme that it funds. We need a reversal of the capital cut and the cut to financial transactions, and that is what we will be pressing for.
The Scottish Government has consistently and proudly prioritised investment in public services and we will continue to do so. Despite the challenging financial situation, we are continuing to take bold and ambitious action to protect and improve our public services wherever possible.
We are using all the powers that are available to us under the current devolution settlement in order to maximise our investment in public services to benefit the people of Scotland. For example, we believe that those with the broadest shoulders should be asked to contribute a little more, and our progressive approach to taxation is central to our investment in public services. That approach delivers £1.5 billion in additional funding to protect our services. Given its opposition to progressive taxation, the simple fact is that, were Labour sitting in our seats right now, it would be delivering £1.5 billion of cuts to Scotland’s public services.
I am proud of the Scottish Government’s legacy of investing in and reforming Scotland’s public services over many years. Across the education and skills sector, we are continuing to invest around £1 billion each year in 1,140 hours of high-quality early learning and childcare. Scotland already has the most generous childcare offer for three and four-year-olds in the UK, and we also make those hours available to the two-year-olds who need it most.
In our health and social care sector, we are working to reduce in-patient and day-case waiting lists by an estimated 100,000 patients over the next three years, with planned investment each year to deliver that improvement to such a critical public service. That comes on top of £19.5 billion of investment in health and social care. In our justice sector, we are investing £1.55 billion in policing in 2024-25, which demonstrates our commitment to keeping people and our communities safe.
The Government has spent around £1.2 billion to mitigate the impacts of 14 years of UK Government policies such as the bedroom tax and the benefit cap. That includes almost £134 million this year alone through activities such as our discretionary housing payments and the Scottish welfare fund. That £134 million could have been spent on our public services—as an example, it would pay for more than 2,500 nurses each year if we did not have to mitigate Westminster austerity.
We have also invested £2.9 billion in 2023-24 across a range of programmes that are targeted at low-income households, which all drive forward our mission to eradicate child poverty. That includes awarding almost £430 million to families through our Scottish child payment, with more than 329,000 children benefiting from the payment—worth £26.70 per child per week since the end of March this year—which is literally keeping food on families’ tables.
Again, with Westminster policies, we have had one arm tied behind our back. One of the quickest interventions that the next UK Government could make is to lift the two-child benefit cap. The Child Poverty Action Group estimates that ending the two-child limit
“would lift around 300,000 children out of poverty”
across the UK and 10,000 children in Scotland overnight. Labour is, of course, refusing to do that. The cost to scrap the two-child cap across the UK would be £2.5 billion this year; the cost of keeping Trident is more than £3 billion. That is the choice that Labour is making: it is choosing to prioritise billions in nuclear weapons over eradicating child poverty. That is the simple truth of the matter, which is why I will not be supporting the Conservative or Labour amendments today.
The fact that the Labour amendment would delete a line in our motion that says that we are committed to “high-quality services” and that we welcome
“that public sector pay is higher”
—a line that not even the Conservatives seek to delete—really says it all. I wonder what our trade union colleagues would think about that.
If the proposed Green amendment had been selected, however, I would have supported it, as I believe that reform of the council tax is needed. I am committed to making progress on the matter, on a cross-party basis if we can. The joint working group on council tax will continue to operate, chaired by me, and will next meet later this summer after the pre-election period that has meant that work needed to be paused. At that meeting, it is my intention that the group consider the plans for taking forward the council tax deliberative engagement to conclude before the 2026 Holyrood election. I recognise the issues raised in the proposed Green amendment, which will need to be discussed as part of any reform of the council tax.
As I bring my remarks to a close, it is right that I recognise the invaluable role of Scotland’s public sector workforce, which is the backbone of our society. They do much to deliver public services with kindness, dignity and compassion. I am proud of our approach to public sector pay in recent years. That approach means that, on average, people in key public sector roles in Scotland are now paid 6 per cent more than those in such roles in the rest of the UK. We should remember, however, that the gap in public sector pay between the Scottish Government and the UK Government is a political choice by the outgoing UK Government. What remains to be seen is the political choice that any new incoming Labour Government makes.
For as long as the Scottish Government remains on an effectively fixed budget under the current devolution settlement, there are limits to what we can achieve in investment in public services. However, we will continue to do all that we can to invest in our public services. That is the vision of this Government. It is a shame that other parties do not share that vision and, instead, want to continue the plans that have brought us austerity, Brexit and the cost of living crisis.
I move,
That the Parliament welcomes the Scottish Government’s continued investment in public services and shares its commitment to maintaining high-quality services that people in Scotland need; recognises the key role that the workforce plays in delivering public services and welcomes that public sector pay is higher in Scotland than other parts of the UK; acknowledges the importance of a socially just and progressive approach to public service design and delivery, underpinned by fair work and a progressive tax policy; agrees that the UK Spring Budget fell far short of what Scotland needs to deliver further investment in public services and infrastructure, and will result in a cut in the Scottish core block grant of around £0.4 billion in real terms in 2024-25 compared with 2022-23; is concerned that significant, real-terms spending cuts, assessed by the Institute for Fiscal Studies as being up to £20 billion by 2028 across the UK, will be needed as a result of the economic plans of either a Labour or Conservative UK administration; calls on the incoming UK administration to bring forward an emergency budget to restore the £1.3 billion cut in Scotland's capital budget, and notes that, for as long as the Scottish Government remains on a fixed budget under the current devolution settlement, there are limits to what it can achieve in terms of investment in public services.
15:26