Seòmar agus comataidhean

Charlene, would you like to comment on that? That is my final question, convener.

Thank you for that. I visited a citizens advice bureau in Cambuslang, where the staff were rushed off their feet—I could not believe the amount of work that they were having to do. I put on record my thanks to the bureaux there for the work that they have done, and to those across the country.

Will you say a bit more about the impact of the fact that you are having to deal with so much demand? I was really struck by the fact that—I think it was Jim McPake who said this—the issue that you are working on now is not credit, but whether people can pay their bills or rent and the other stuff that they have to pay. Could you give us an understanding of the impact that that is having on the advisers?

The SCVO leads on the connecting Scotland project. What demand have you had for that service and what might the impact be of an online or phone-based money advice service across Scotland? Can you also tell us how many devices you have been able to give out and whether there is unmet need in that regard?

I thank the witnesses for their answers so far. I would like to put on record my thanks to Glasgow Disability Alliance, which I know has done a power of work, in particular through the connecting Scotland support fund, in the way that Susie Fitton has outlined.

I want to move on to talk about the impact that debt is having on groups of people such as low-income families. My first question, which is for Conor Forbes and Lawrie Morgan-Klein, is about public sector debt collecting. We have heard, and have seen in the evidence that has been submitted to us, that public sector debt collection seems to be faster and harsher than private sector debt collection. Although no debt collection should be quick or harsh, one would expect it to be the other way round. Why do you think that is? What solution could the committee seek to pursue?

I do, thank you. I share Lawrie Morgan-Klein’s view that the committee should consider speaking to creditors and, for the record, I think that it would also be worth speaking to energy companies.

My final area of questioning is for Susie Fitton. Hi, Susie; it is nice to see you again. My question is about disabled people and their experience of low income right now, as we are in the middle of a cost of living crisis, and their experience of debt.

What types of debts are disabled people getting into? Is there something that is specifically disability related? If there is, what can we do to address that?

I also have a slightly broader question on fuel costs for disabled people. We know that it costs disabled people more in fuel, for lots of reasons. Can more be done on that? Has the support that the UK Government and the Scottish Government have provided by deducting money off council tax bills specifically helped disabled people? What more could we be doing here in Scotland?

Thanks for those answers. I will move on to the next theme. Some of the submissions say that, even if we reach the targets, we will only just reach the relative poverty target and we will miss—obviously—the absolute poverty target. There are concerns about standards of living and the targets on destitution.

For many people, it does not feel that we are in an optimistic situation with regard to the economy or the cost of living, so does the modelling still hold? In a year’s time, will we still be saying that we will meet the targets? Is there anything that we need to do now to guarantee that we will get there, given that the modelling suggests that we will only just make it?

As has been touched on already, the reductions in poverty do not reflect living standards, so it would be good to hear a little more about what that means for families. In the interests of time, I ask Peter Kelly and Bill Scott to answer those questions. I know that everyone could say something on the issue.

Thank you for that really comprehensive and helpful answer. How much does the effect of income distribution on poverty rates explain some of the projections in the modelling?

I also have another question, which is for Peter Kelly. The Poverty Alliance noted that social security is not yet adequate—members and others will know that I share its impatience for action on that, in particular on the adult disability payment and carers allowance—so could you talk about how we can start to address that and what we need to do now?

My first question was a short supplementary for Bill Scott, and the second one was for Peter Kelly.

Yes, please. That was all really helpful. I think that there is a real challenge for us in how we gather information and intelligence then use them to react quickly in times of crisis. As you said, we absolutely need to do that.

I have a question for Jack Evans on the actions that are in the plan. How much action does it contain to address poverty in the priority groups?

That is really helpful. As ever, people will be unsurprised to hear that I hope that the pace will be quick and that the actions will follow to meet the ideas in the plan.

On the point about addressing the poverty of the priority groups, I note that Close the Gap published a blog post this week in which it says that the plan represents a regression in relation to gendered analysis and women’s poverty. Do the witnesses share that view?

Good morning. Thank you for all the evidence that you submitted in advance of the meeting and for all the work that you have done this year and, indeed, in previous years. It has been—and still is—a really tough time for a lot of the people whom you represent.

I want to start with a question for Bill Scott. In its submission, the Poverty and Inequality Commission says that it is looking for “greater pace and scale” and increased investment. How does the delivery plan compare with those expectations? Does it include the stronger focus on evidence that you had wanted, and does it contain enough on social security to address the cost of living crisis at the moment?