Meeting of the Parliament 10 December 2025
I want a caring system that respects people when they are in need. That is why the Liberal Democrats supported the Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018, and why we believe in the fairness, dignity and respect approach. We believed that, when we were creating a new welfare state, we needed to come together to create those new central powers for it.
One of my constituents told me that, unlike under the previous Department for Work and Pensions system, she was believed—and her face showed the relief of being believed. She was right to think that she deserved that respect, and that is why I was pleased that that approach had filtered through into the Scottish system. It is also why I am pleased that the two-child limit has gone, because, in effect, it was punishing the children rather than the adults. That is not an appropriate way to manage a welfare system.
However, we can agree that the current system is unsustainable and that, when we reach it, the forecasted £2 billion gap will test us quite considerably. It is also true that the levels of economic inactivity—said to be one in four or one in five; the figures fluctuate—are too high. That means not only that there is a significant burden on the social security system but that we are losing valuable taxpayers to our economy.
On both fronts, the system is not sustainable. I think that we can all accept that we face an enormous challenge, but I am more concerned about the impact on individuals, because the level of economic inactivity in Scotland is far too high.
Unlike in the 1980s and 1990s, when those who were economically inactive were primarily men who had worked in industrial complexes and whose bodies were battered and bruised, we are now talking about younger people who are neurodivergent or who have mental health issues. We cannot afford for them to be economically inactive for the rest of their lives.
In the 1980s and 1990s, those men lost perhaps about 20 years’ worth of economic activity. If we do not support into work the people who I have just mentioned, they will be lost to work for the rest of their lives, which will be bad for them and for our economy. We need to deal with that.
The most depressing thing about the debate is the silo mentality that surrounds it. We must have rounded services that help those people. I have an example of a young person in my constituency in his 20s. When he was at school, he received support for his attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. When he left school, he went off the rails. He has been lost to the economy for four years now, because there is no adult neurodivergent service in Fife. That situation is replicated across the country.
What is the national health service doing? Does it not understand that it is important that it orientates its services to help the economy? If we do not get those people back to work, we will not be able to raise the taxes to pay for the vital NHS services that we rely on. We must have a rounded system.