Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
13
Parties on record
2,355,091
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,355,091 contributions in session S6, 17 Apr 2026 – 17 May 2026. Latest 30 days: 148. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 14 May 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 23 April 2025

23 Apr 2025 · S6 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
United Kingdom Government Welfare Reforms
Chapman, Maggie Green North East Scotland Watch on SPTV

This afternoon’s debate is a call to conscience. The Scottish Green Party believes in building a society in which everyone can live with dignity; in which compassion, equality and social justice are embedded in every aspect of public policy; and in which we stand up in solidarity with those who are marginalised and minoritised by various intersecting systems of oppression.

The UK Government’s latest welfare reform proposals betray that vision. The reforms are not only technically flawed but morally indefensible. If implemented, they will devastate the lives of millions, particularly those of disabled people, carers and young people who are already teetering on the brink of—if they are not already in—poverty.

Let us be clear about what is on the table. The UK Government’s “Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working Green Paper” outlines sweeping changes to disability benefits that would result in the most brutal package of cuts since George Osborne’s austerity years. According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, the reforms aim to cut nearly £7 billion annually from benefits paid to disabled people and carers?. Savings for the Treasury mean staggering losses for real people.

Nearly half of all recipients of personal independence payment—1.3 million disabled people—stand to lose their daily living component. That is not a minor policy tweak; it is a mass removal of essential support from people who, for example, cannot dress, wash or feed themselves or use the toilet unaided?. Imagine telling someone who needs help to eat or shower that they no longer qualify for support because they did not score four points in a specific bureaucratic box. That is cruelty by spreadsheet.

The devastating consequences ripple further. Under the reforms, only those who qualify for the PIP daily living component will be eligible for the health element of universal credit. In one cruel stroke, more than 1.4 million disabled people will be denied both forms of support?. Those individuals face losing upwards of £8,500 a year. That is not a policy adjustment; it is an engineered descent into poverty.

In Scotland, we talk about leaving no one behind, but the proposals flip that on its head. They punish those who are too unwell to work, often stripping them of the minimal support that allows them to survive. There is no evidence—none at all—that the cuts will achieve the UK Government’s stated goal of getting people into work. Even the Office for Budget Responsibility could not estimate any employment gain from the reforms. In fact, previous benefit cuts of similar scope led to only a 3 per cent rise in employment among disabled people?.

The proposals also disproportionately impact carers, the vast majority of whom are women. Up to 150,000 carers stand to lose carers allowance or the carers element of universal credit?. That is not just bad policy; it is gendered injustice, stripping away the financial independence of those who already shoulder an immense burden of unpaid labour.

Scotland, with its devolved powers, has tried to chart a different course. The Scottish Government has rooted its approach to social security in dignity and respect, and programmes such as the adult disability payment reflect a commitment to compassion. It is not the panacea that we need, but even that progressive framework is under threat.

As Scotland’s funding for ADP is tied to eligibility rates for PIP in England and Wales, any reduction in the number of claimants there will mean massive funding shortfalls here, which are estimated to be more than half a billion pounds. Unless the Scottish Government follows suit with equally harsh eligibility cuts, it might not be allowed to use ADP as a passporting benefit for universal credit. That would leave thousands of disabled Scots unable to access much-needed financial support.

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation estimates that the reforms could push an additional 400,000 people into poverty, including at least 50,000 children?. Let us not forget the wider context: disabled people are already overrepresented among those in poverty, with 63 per cent of people experiencing destitution reporting a disability or long-term health condition?. The reforms will only deepen those disparities.

This is not just about policy. It is about human dignity. It is about the lived reality of people such as the disabled Glasgow Disability Alliance member who said:

“Every day is a battle ... from the moment I wake up I am continuously faced with these awful decisions … I’m hungry but I’ve nothing much there ... Can’t really get out anywhere ... nae money to do anything anyway.?”

When we talk about welfare, we must remember what that word means: the wellbeing of people. It is not fiscal manipulation or political point scoring but real human wellbeing. The UK Government’s reforms offer none of that. It does not see the person behind the form. It sees only numbers to be reduced and lines on a balance sheet to be erased. We see differently. We see people. We see families. We see communities. We see the truth: the cuts will devastate lives. That is why I and the Greens will oppose them with everything that we can.

This debate is not just about benefits; it is about what kind of country we want to be. Will we let the most vulnerable pay the price for political cowardice and economic misdirection, or will we rise in solidarity to say, “Enough”?

Now is the time to choose justice. With countless lives hanging in the balance, now is the time to fight for dignity and to stand with disabled people and carers. We cannot let them fall.

15:29  

In the same item of business

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Liam McArthur) LD
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-17242, in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville, on the UK Government welfare reforms. I invite members who...
The Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice (Shirley-Anne Somerville) SNP
I open this important debate with a message of solidarity: I want all disabled people to know that this Government stands with you in opposing the planned UK...
Michael Marra (North East Scotland) (Lab) Lab
He apologised!
Shirley-Anne Somerville SNP
Oh, he apologised, I hear Mr Marra saying from a sedentary position. Well, that makes it fine, does it not? That makes it absolutely fine to say things like ...
Craig Hoy (South Scotland) (Con) Con
Will the cabinet secretary give way?
Shirley-Anne Somerville SNP
I will if I can get some time back. Can I, Presiding Officer?
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
Yes.
Craig Hoy Con
I accept the cabinet secretary’s point in respect of the UK Government, but has the Scottish National Party Government not made the same mistake at various p...
Shirley-Anne Somerville SNP
Our benefits bill is not related to whether people are in or out of work—with the greatest respect to Mr Hoy, I think that he is conflating different issues....
Liz Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Con
I will put party politics aside for a minute, Presiding Officer. The recent debates about Labour’s welfare changes, highly charged as they have been—and I am...
Shirley-Anne Somerville SNP
Will the member take an intervention on that point?
Liz Smith Con
I will, but I think that I am nearly out of time.
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
Very briefly, cabinet secretary.
Shirley-Anne Somerville SNP
I thank Liz Smith for her contribution so far, much of which I agree with. However, the comparison that she has just made is unfair, because the 2.2 per cent...
Liz Smith Con
We do need to be careful, because the point has been raised by the Scottish Fiscal Commission. I am very aware of the saying that all political careers end...
Paul O’Kane (West Scotland) (Lab) Lab
During the debate, we have already acknowledged the complexity of social security and the complexities of having a devolved system and a reserved system that...
Liz Smith Con
I entirely agree with that point, but how does that sit with the UK Labour Government’s intention to put more and more costs on to employers, who are the ver...
Paul O’Kane Lab
Liz Smith and I have debated the national insurance increase before, as she has with Mr Marra and other members in the chamber. That choice was made so as no...
Shirley-Anne Somerville SNP
The day before the proposals were unveiled, Mr O’Kane and I were on a panel together, and he did not want to speculate. We do not have to speculate any more—...
Paul O’Kane Lab
The point that I was about to make is that the green paper contains a range of proposals. The cabinet secretary now wants to pick and choose and debate indiv...
Jeremy Balfour (Lothian) (Con) Con
We all want more people to be in employment, particularly those with a disability. However, does Paul O’Kane recognise that getting more people into employme...
Paul O’Kane Lab
I was just coming on to talk about ADP and PIP and trying to understand our devolved context in relation to ADP. The reforms to PIP are at UK level; we have ...
Maggie Chapman (North East Scotland) (Green) Green
This afternoon’s debate is a call to conscience. The Scottish Green Party believes in building a society in which everyone can live with dignity; in which co...
Willie Rennie (North East Fife) (LD) LD
The debate is about a number of competing challenges. It is about dignity for disabled people—particularly those in poverty. It is about balancing the books ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Annabelle Ewing) SNP
We move to the open debate. Back benchers will have speeches of up to six minutes. 15:36
Collette Stevenson (East Kilbride) (SNP) SNP
Since the election last year, the Labour UK Government has failed to compensate the WASPI women—women against state pension inequality—and has scrapped winte...
Jeremy Balfour Con
I agree with the cabinet secretary that social security is a social investment, but a social investment has to be paid for. We have a £1 billion deficit comi...
Collette Stevenson SNP
The heart of the issue is about political choices, with social security being a human right. I will touch on that later. The DWP’s analysis has shown that i...
Roz McCall (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Con
I am pleased to speak in the debate, and I will direct my remarks to the Scottish Conservative amendment, in the name of Liz Smith. The amendment correctly ...
Shirley-Anne Somerville SNP
Does the member agree with her colleague Jeremy Balfour, who pointed out earlier in the debate that the ADP is not linked to employment, and nor should it be...