Seòmar agus comataidhean

It is helpful sometimes if Mr O’Kane keeps talking.

Clearly, there can be more than one outcome that we wish a policy to achieve. To give an example of some of the work in the child poverty plans, we are keen to look at how many children can be lifted out of poverty by a particular measure, and that is where the modelling comes in. That is not an exact science, because you can model what the impact of a policy is, but when you get to the data sets about poverty levels, you can see that a myriad of other things have also impacted on a given family.

Therefore, it is hard to track direct correlations when measuring policies, but we can use the analysis that we have, by modelling and then looking at the data, to see how many children could be lifted out of poverty through a particular measure.

The other wee caveat that I give—if Liz Smith will forgive me—is that some of that process takes longer than other parts. The Scottish child payment has an immediate impact because it immediately goes into someone’s pocket, whereas the impact of spending on employability or early learning and childcare, for example, undoubtedly assists in tackling child poverty but does not have an immediate impact that you can trace.

On that basis, we look at the evidence that has been built up, not just here but internationally, about the best ways to tackle child poverty. That is why we recently reviewed the measures in the “Best Start, Bright Futures” plan to sense check whether they were still the right measures to drive child poverty down. I hope that those points explain that—

Forgive me, convener, but I have not come to the meeting prepared with details of the budget. I am happy to assist in writing, or perhaps I might presume that I will be invited back to the committee to discuss the budget in detail.

We need to look at the level at which the Scottish Government’s expenditure on social security goes up each year and then look at how much is covered by a block grant adjustment. Social security spend might go up, and some of that might be covered by in-year block grant adjustments, because there might also be an increase in the Department for Work and Pension’s expenditure. It would be easier if we could deal with that in detail, with those different types of expenditure laid out. Those two things are sometimes conflated—I am not saying that Liz Smith is doing that at the moment—and it is important that we look at it in the round.

Great advantage can come from data sharing—government at all levels holds an exceptional amount of data—but, clearly, it needs to be done in a legal and robust fashion. That is exceptionally important.

A lot of good work already goes on, between the UK Government and local authorities, and between the Scottish Government, including our public agencies, and local authorities, but we need to look at how we can go further. We can all ask ourselves how data can best be used to assist people. I remember the conversations that I had for many years with Pauline McNeill, when she was on a previous version of this committee. She was a very strong advocate of data-sharing automation and using data to make life easier for people to get what they are entitled to.

There has been continuous improvement in that area, but more work can still be done. Again, I stress that data sharing needs to done at robustly and within a firm legal setting. I appreciate that, often, it is exceptionally frustrating and that, sometimes, it takes too long to happen. However, the legal basis has to be absolutely core at any level of government—whether the UK Government, the Scottish Government or local authorities with third sector partners—as we take data sharing forward.

I am not at the point of having a concern. I think that we need to take the UK Government at its word when it says that it also wishes to take action to tackle child poverty. Clearly, the quickest and cleanest way for that to be done would be for the UK Government to scrap the two-child cap. However, if it does not do that, I am keen for us to work together to see what would be the quickest way that we could have that data in place.

I would not point to it being a concern at this point, because those discussions are at very early stages. We have had a good working relationship on the devolution of social security, under previous UK Governments and the current one, and I hope that those relationships will allow the Governments to work together.

I appreciate that a great deal of work goes on at the DWP, and that the devolution of benefits is but one part of that. The DWP will have other priorities in relation to work that is being done on its system. That is a matter of fact. It is an exceptionally large and complex system.

We will therefore have to have a discussion about how that is prioritised. However, given that there is a UK Government child poverty task force, I hope that those discussions will be fruitful. I will of course keep Parliament updated.

I note that one of the reasons why the work in the next financial year—for which we have just set the budget—is exceptionally important is that it will build the system to allow us to deliver that mitigation. The work that will take place in the next financial year is vital, and the quicker that we can get that work done, the quicker we can deliver that.

The decision was taken following discussions in Government and was part of the budget that was announced yesterday.

We keep criteria under review. In the past year, there has been a change to the criteria for the best start foods benefit. From memory, as a result of that change, an additional 20,000 pregnant women and young children were brought into eligibility for that payment. Part of the reason for that change was to enable us to look at our five family payments—the Scottish child payment, best start foods and the best start grants—in a more joined-up way, which allows for further automation. We already automate the best start grants payments, for example, so people who receive the Scottish child payment do not need to apply for those grants separately.

That is the type of work that we are already undertaking in Social Security Scotland. Any changes to eligibility mean that either we have to increase eligibility, which is a decision that we need to make as part of the budget process, or—I am sure that Mr Doris would not want us to do this—we need to restrict eligibility so that the eligibility for everything is the same. On that basis, those decisions have to be made as part of the budget process.

We can have automation or the sharing of data so that, even if eligibility is different for different payments, we can use data to support the ease of a person’s journey from one qualifying benefit to another. Therefore, there are different ways of looking at this, and in the reasonably short life so far of Social Security Scotland, we have increased automation and data sharing in order to assist with both of those.

We have very much designed the case transfer process to be safe and secure. Ensuring that people receive the right payments at the right time, with no break in entitlement, is important, and is the top priority. As with other case transfers, people will not need to do anything—the process will happen automatically.

As part of the case transfer process, people will receive letters that clearly explain why the DLA award has been selected for case transfer, what they can expect and who they can contact for further information. We will communicate with individuals in the stakeholder organisations through the usual range of channels to ensure that they are aware of what is going on, should they be required to support anyone who is going through the case transfer process.

We recently met the ill health and disability benefits stakeholder reference group to discuss the approach to communications. The group’s members were supportive of our planned approach, which is to provide information that is tailored to individuals’ specific circumstances.

I appreciate what Paul O’Kane said about the timings in some of the earliest areas of case transfer. Timings have improved markedly, and I thank the DWP for its work in speeding up the movement of cases to Social Security Scotland.

The feedback from people who have been through the case transfer process has been positive. The client survey that was conducted in October and November 2023 showed that a significant majority of people felt informed and reassured about the process, and 80 per cent of people said that the communication that they had received was clear and easy to understand. From 2024-25, the Scottish Government has also allocated £12 million to support, for example, third sector organisations in provision of assistance and support.

I hope that that gives the committee reassurance that we are learning with regard to the improvements that we need to make in the case transfer process, and that we are also supporting others who can give independent advice through that process.

You have raised an important point about advice. Social Security Scotland will not give advice to anyone. It is not there to do so, for this benefit or, indeed, for any others. What it can give, and will give, is information. It will give the information that there is the option to move over to the adult disability payment.

As you say, some people will benefit from that information and some people might not. It is not possible to know whether specific individuals would benefit from it until they have gone through the adult disability payment process. However, it is absolutely not the role of the agency—nor should it be—to suggest to someone whether they would or would not be better off after the process.

The important part is to provide the information and, as I mentioned in my earlier answers, to signpost people to those who can give advice. We provide the information; others provide the advice.

I am happy to provide further detail in writing about the success of the case transfer process. I was speaking just this week to DWP and Scotland Office colleagues about how the case transfer process has gone exceptionally well, from the points of view of both Governments. We appreciate that there were lessons to learn about speeding up the process at the beginning, but it is going exceptionally smoothly and well, and to time. I am happy to provide reassurance to the committee on that, and in particular on what will happen with the individuals who will be coming over to Scottish adult DLA.

In addition to the information that I gave in my first answer, to Paul O’Kane, I note that we are keen to ensure that Social Security Scotland is staffed, and that those staff are trained specifically on Scottish adult DLA. Some of them will be new staff, but there will also be experienced staff who have dealt with the case transfer process with the adult disability payment, so the new staff can gain from experience that has already been amassed of the previous process.