Seòmar agus comataidhean

As no other members wish to contribute, I will take the opportunity to make a few remarks myself. I wish to reflect on Mr Balfour’s comments about whether the system could be designed to be more flexible—in effect, designing a targeted system that could respond if such an eventuality as the one that we are discussing should happen.

I am just thinking about the politics of this. I say this genuinely and sincerely to Mr Balfour, but had the Scottish Government spent money putting in place a system that could change winter fuel payments to make them a targeted, rather than a universal, payment, some members of the committee—possibly Mr Balfour—would have been wringing their hands about the additional costs that that would incur, and they would have said that it must mean that the Scottish Government intended to move towards a targeting policy.

Perhaps I am being unfair to Mr Balfour, but in the past he has always made it clear that perhaps we do not need a Scottish social security system, and that we should deliver all social security benefits from Westminster—

The question is, that motion S6M-14682, in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

Members now have the opportunity to contribute to a debate on the motion. Does any member wish to speak?

I see that Mr Balfour wishes to speak. I ask the clerks, if any other member wishes to speak, to put their names in the chat function.

Cabinet secretary, I have one brief supplementary question. It might be one for you to reflect on and write back to the committee, because I expect that we will return to this policy matter once the legal case, which is subject to the sub judice rule, is disposed of in one way or another.

How much notice would the UK Government have been required to give the Scottish Government of its intention to scrap the provision of winter fuel payments to all pensioners, to allow you to pivot and to seriously consider any alternatives or mitigations?

I also have another point on which I ask the Scottish Government to reflect. Other measures and mitigations can be brought forward only if the Scottish Government knows how much cash it has in its pocket. How much notice would you need of the financial settlement for the current financial year, which can still be revised, and for the following financial year, to allow you to budget appropriately to do something different?

You might say that, in asking that question, I am drifting away from the regulations, in which case you could perhaps bank it and write to the committee about that at a later date. However, it is clear that the lines of questioning from members so far relate to what could have been done differently, so that information would be helpful.

Katy Clark has a supplementary.

The result of the division is: For 3, Against 0, Abstentions 4.

Motion agreed to,

That the Social Justice and Social Security Committee recommends that the Winter Heating Assistance (Pension Age) (Scotland) Regulations 2024 [draft] be approved.

Of course it is.

Yes, of course I will, Mr Balfour.

Will the member take an intervention?

Is that a very concise way of saying that the Scottish Government will take into account people elsewhere’s experiences of raising issues with independent panels that are not necessarily—albeit that I do not want to use this word—competent? I suppose that some of the narrative around this would be that, if you are dissatisfied with an outcome, you do not like the panel. Is the Scottish Government confident that lessons that need to be learned will be learned during development of the guidance?