Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have one more question. It is great to hear about the consultation and the depth of analysis that it has brought you. Do you have a timescale for when reforms might come in? I remember working with you on the matter, minister; it seems like it was some time ago, so it would be good to hear whether you have a timescale. Do you plan to look at access to justice beyond the legal aid system for people with protected characteristics? I am thinking about the expertise and support that are available from law centres, for example.

Thank you for allowing three questions, convener.

Would that be okay?

I am a bit concerned about the timescale that has been outlined. Is there anything that you can do to look at an alternative mechanism to make, for example, a Covid recovery payment to carers before 2025? There are a number of people who are ineligible for the carers allowance supplement and will not be able to get any support in that time.

I appreciate that some of the argument against the alternative approaches relates to time, but 77 per cent of the people we are talking about have said that they have not had a break this year, so they know about time and they know how they are spending it. It is important for us as a Parliament and a committee, and for the Government, to do something to put money in those people’s pockets before 2025, which is a long way away to consider people’s eligibility.

Yes—I have just one more. I thank the witnesses for their answers to my previous question. I really appreciated them.

How many of the people with whom you work and who get the carers allowance supplement are living in poverty? Are all the carers identified as living in poverty in Scotland getting carers allowance, or are there others?

Welcome to your role, minister. You will have heard this morning and seen in the submissions that what is being provided is too little, too late, and that the supplement will get swallowed up as people pay the bills, especially given the time of year at which it will be paid. We understand that the payment is important, but a lot of it will be swallowed up in paying off debt or paying the bills.

What is your analysis of the adequacy of the supplement? Will you consider increasing it?

Thank you. I understand that there is an increase and that the supplement applies to that. However, as a measure of whether it will get to the carers who are providing the most care and the highest number of hours or the people who live in most poverty, the eligibility for carers allowance does not capture all those people. For example, it is set at a rate that is, basically, 15 hours at the minimum wage, which is quite a low rate. People who are on 15 hours on the minimum wage are also likely to be living in poverty, so it does not capture all those people. A number of people are missing out with regard to caring hours because, for example, of the overlapping benefit rule or the full-time study rule. Those people are still providing more than 35 hours a week of care but they are not able to access carers allowance or the supplement for those reasons. Therefore, the measure does not address any of those concerns about poverty or the intense number of hours that those people are putting in.

I thank the organisations for their submissions, and the people whom they represent—unpaid carers across Scotland. They have done an incredible amount of work in the past year and a half during the pandemic and before. I know that it has been hard and I see the work that you all do.

It is clear to me that many carers are unable to use the payment to benefit their own wellbeing and instead need to use it to pay bills or, as Salena Begley said, to pay off debt on household costs. As it stands, as an income replacement benefit, is the carers allowance and the carers allowance supplement adequate to cover the care that is carried out? How does that make you feel?

Earlier, we heard that there is a significant level of poverty among not just the 10 per cent of carers who will access the supplement, but the 90 per cent of unpaid carers who will be unable to access it. That is an incredibly important issue, and delivery is important, as you have said.

I understand that the bill includes regulatory powers that would allow you to set the rate at a higher amount if you wished. The Scottish Parliament information centre has shown that if the carers allowance supplement were calculated based on the rate of universal credit, rather than being based on jobseekers allowance, as it currently is, that would increase the standard payment to £711.46.

Given that you and your Government agree with many of us that, for example, the uplift in universal credit is essential to bring people up to enough money to live on, have you considered using the regulatory power within the supplementary bill to increase the carers allowance supplement in line with that and making it £711.46?

I have two interests that I would like to declare. The first is that I worked for Public Health Scotland until 11 May, at which point I was elected and resigned the post. In addition, I am in receipt of the higher rate of personal independence payment for both the care and the mobility components.