Gloves come off over currency union

A currency union in the event of a vote for independence ‘would not be in the interests of either the people of Scotland or the remaining UK’, Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne told an Edinburgh audience on Thursday. Unsurprisingly his claims have been rubbished by supporters of independence, but while the two sides disagree over currency union, one thing is clear – the gloves are well and truly off …

Mr Osborne’s speech follows official Treasury advice that in the event of independence they would not recommend a currency union to the Government of the continuing UK, and in an unusual departure from procedure he also published the advice he received from the Treasury Permanent Secretary on whether to join a currency union should Scotland become independent.

Speaking at the Point Hotel on Thursday, the Chancellor said: “I hope passionately that the people of Scotland choose to stay within our family of nations in the United Kingdom. I want Scotland to keep the pound and the economic security that it brings. But it is clear to me I could not as Chancellor recommend that we could share the pound with an independent Scotland. The evidence shows it wouldn’t work. It would cost jobs and cost money and wouldn’t provide economic security for Scotland or for the rest of the UK.I don’t think any other Chancellor of the Exchequer would come to a different view.

“The Scottish government says that if Scotland becomes independent there will be a currency union and Scotland will share the pound. People need to know – that is not going to happen.”

The Treasury also published the detailed analysis on the economics of a currency union which underpins its advice to the Chancellor. The paper states that while the United Kingdom is one of the most successful monetary, fiscal and political unions in history, the fiscal and financial risks of entering into a currency union with a separate Scottish state would be too great.

The analysis states:

UK is a successful union because taxation, spending, monetary policy and financial stability policy are coordinated across the whole UK, with risks pooled and clear political accountability

Scotland’s economy would be more exposed in the event of independence, with greater risks from shocks in the financial and energy sectors
in a currency union, the continuing UK would be exposed to much greater risk from a separate Scotland, with the possibility of continuing UK taxpayers being asked to support that state in the event of a fiscal or financial shock
if people in Scotland vote for independence, the Treasury would advise the continuing UK Government against entering into a currency union with an independent Scotland

The Chancellor’s view was supported by the finance spokespersons of both the other main Westminster parties.

The announcement was also welcomed by the Better Together campaign. Former Chancellor Alistair Darling, who leads the campaign, said: “If we vote to leave the UK in September, Scotland will not be able to keep the pound. That is the message Scotland must keep in mind when deciding how to vote. This was the day on which Alex Salmond’s bluff and bluster about independence came face to face with reality.

“Why would taxpayers in England want to bail out the banks of what would be a foreign country? Why would a continuing UK Treasury accept a veto from what would be a foreign government over tax, spending and borrowing?

“And why would Scotland agree to have its budget subject to a veto by the rest of the UK? That’s how a currency union works. You only have to look at the problems of the eurozone to see that. It makes little sense. Yet everything about the First Minister’s case for breaking up the UK rests on keeping the pound. The jobs of thousands of Scots in our financial services industry depend on using the pound. Without the pound, all of these are at risk. That is a big gamble we simply don’t have to take.”

The Better Together campaign called on Yes Scotland to explain what currency Scotland would use if we vote to leave the UK – would we join the euro, or maybe even set up a new, separate currency? Put simply, if yer no’ gettin’ the pound, what’s your Plan B?

Calling for clarity, Better Together campaign director Blair McDougall said:

“The nationalists have been in chaos on currency over the last few days. Alex Salmond is a man without a plan. First he says we will keep the Pound, even though it is now clearly off the table. Now Yes Scotland tell us we can keep the Pound without a formal agreement, even though the SNP’s own Fiscal Commission Working Group ruled this out. And Patrick Harvie, a Yes Scotland board member, today said that Alex Salmond needs to set out an alternative to the Pound.

“It is time they got their line straight. If Plan B really is the Panama plan that would mean if something like the collapse of RBS happened again a crisis would become a disaster in an independent Scotland.

“Leaving the UK and losing the Pound would mean higher mortgage repayments, more expensive credit card bills and a big risk to thousands of jobs in our financial services industry. Alex Salmond is gambling with the livelihoods of the people of Scotland.

“The message from those of us who support Scotland remaining in the UK is very simple – a vote for separation is a vote to lose the Pound. The only way to keep the Pound is to stay in the UK.”

However, supporters of independence have cast doubt on the Chancellor’s assertions. First Minister Alex Salmond accused Mr Osborne of ‘bluff, bluster and bullying’ and former Labour Scottish First Minister Henry McLeish also expressed concern over Osborne’s ‘misguided’ intervention, saying the Chancellor’s heavy-handed tactics could push more Scots into voting Yes.

Mr McLeish said: “He is basically saying vote yes and we won’t allow you to join a currency union. We will withdraw any goodwill and sacrifice the best interests of Scotland, England, Northern Ireland and Wales.

“Do we really believe that would be the response if Scotland voted to exit the Union? I don’t think so. Wisdom and sanity would return. It would help if the Union would spell out their vision, provide an alternative to independence and offer a bit more carrot and less stick to Scots voters.

“Let’s remember that Osborne’s party want to take us out of the EU. It is the Union that is on trial, not Scotland. Creating a currency union is first and foremost a political decision, not a financial or technical one.

The UK and Scotland would have to settle the politics of this in their respective parliaments or at the polls, so the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland could have a say in this significant decision.”

Scottish Finance Secretary John Swinney maintains that an independent Scotland will continue to use the pound as it is in the best interests of Scotland and the rest of the UK .

Responding to the Chancellor’s comments on a currency union, the Finance Secretary said that the Treasury analysis has been developed without any discussion with the Scottish Government – and without acknowledging the independent expert work of the Fiscal Commission Working Group (FCWG).

The Scottish Government last year published comprehensive analysis of the different currency options available to an independent Scotland. This analysis by the Fiscal Commission Working Group, consisting of four pre-eminent economists including two Nobel laureates, considered the full range of options and concluded that a monetary union would be in the best interests of Scotland and the rest of the UK.

The Fiscal Commission provided advice on:

Banking union
Risk sharing
Monetary and exchange rate policy
Duration of a currency union

The HM Treasury has had no discussion with the Scottish Government on any of these points.

Responding to the Chancellor’s comments, Mr Swinney said:

“We welcome the opportunity to continue the debate with the Chancellor on the merits of our proposals on a currency union.

“However the Chancellor made clear his conclusions on currency union were based on the advice of Treasury officials. That advice is incomplete and with regard to the size of the Scottish financial sector and operation of monetary unions is backward looking and takes no account of the comprehensive evidence provided by the independent economic experts of the Fiscal Commission, including two Nobel laureates, Professor James Mirrlees and Professor Joseph Stiglitz.

“On every one of the four points the Chancellor rehearsed today, the FCWG have already published comprehensive advice and analysis and their proposed macroeconomic framework is a workable model that would ensure financial stability and allow both governments autonomy over economic and social policies, including fiscal policy. In addition the Governor of the Bank of England has confirmed the Bank will deliver a currency union if agreed by both Governments.

“On the banking union: no country should have to bail out banks again. Across the EU and UK recent regulation has been designed to break the link between taxpayers and banks. The Treasury hugely overstates the size of the banking sector in Scotland which is in line with the rest of the UK. It is the City of London which is hugely reliant on the financial services sector, accounting for 50 per cent of UK financial services GVA. A banking union with an independent Scotland is in the interests of the rest of the UK as the sector benefits from integrated trade.

“On fiscal risk sharing: Scotland’s fiscal position is stronger than that of the UK. An independent Scotland would have had the opportunity to spend more, tax less, invest in an oil fund and still borrow proportionally less than the UK. The Fiscal Commission proposition ensures a harmonised system for financial regulation and resolution of banks. Scotland would take its fair share of responsibility recognising that ‘both Scotland and the UK have a shared interest in ensuring financial stability’.

“On monetary and exchange rate policy: Scotland would have full fiscal and economic freedom to set taxes and economic policy, as has been shown by many countries in the different currency unions which have operated internationally.

“And on permanence; all Sovereign states have the ability to determine currency arrangements that are appropriate for their circumstances. That is not a barrier to successful currency unions.

“The model proposed by the Fiscal Commission Working Group has not been considered and the Chancellor’s statement today is political and completely counter to the spirit of the Edinburgh Agreement, which commits both Governments to working in the best interests of both countries whatever the result of the referendum.

“If the UK Government is to honour its commitment to the terms of the Edinburgh Agreement, the discussion that the Chancellor has entered into today must be informed by the best evidence available. The Fiscal Commission have recommended early engagement between the Scottish and UK Government to properly address these critical issues. The gaps in the Chancellor’s analysis demonstrates the force of that recommendation.”

So there you have the two sides of the currency union divide. The Unionists say it can’t and won’t happen, the Nationalists say it can and it will. Political panic over narrowing poll leads, or a pie in the sky economic gamble?

You pays your money, you takes your choice. For now at least, that money is sterling.

Independence white paper: Seconds out, round two

‘Rarely have so many words been used to answer so little’

Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael says the independence white paper is a ‘wish list not a price list’ and has called on the Scottish Government to share their figures for the cost of independence with the Scottish people.

Meanwhile First Minister Alex Salmond has said that enhanced childcare entitlement, one of the key commitments of the independence mission statement, would only be possible in an independent Scotland.

MSPs will debate the white paper at Holyrood this afternoon.

The 670 page independence white paper provides no answers on crucial questions like currency, pensions and the cost of independence, Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael said.

‘Rarely have so many words been used to answer so little’, said Mr Carmichael following the publication of the paper.

He also expressed disappointment that the Scottish Government had deliberately sought to ignore the uncertainties and difficulties of independence. He said it was astonishing that the Scottish Government had refused to put a price tag on independence even though their private cabinet paper had discussed costs.

Mr Carmichael said: “This was their chance to level with people. They have chosen a different path and people will judge them on that.

“For years we have been promised that all the answers on independence would be in the white paper. The big day has finally arrived and we have 670 pages that leaves us none the wiser on crucial questions such as currency, pensions and the cost of independence. Rarely have so many words been used to answer so little.

“People will draw their own conclusions that the Scottish Government have deliberately sought to ignore the uncertainties and difficulties of independence. We are simply expected to believe that everything will be perfect after we leave the UK. We are asked to accept that ending a 300 year United Kingdom will be straightforward. We are told it will all be alright on the night.

“We know that the terms of independence would need to be negotiated with many countries including the rest of the UK and the EU. An honest assessment of the challenges and uncertainties of leaving the UK would have seriously helped the debate between now and September. Instead we have been given a wish with no price list. Today was their chance to level with people. They have chosen a different path and people in Scotland will judge them on that.

“It is astonishing that the Scottish Government can sit in private discussing the costs of independence and then refuse to share those figure with the Scottish people. John Swinney’s leaked paper said it would cost £600m every year to run an independent tax system but today we saw nothing about that.

“It looks more and more like the Scottish Government will continue to keep these things private. If they had convincing answers then today really would have been the day to share them with everyone. From now until September 18th we will keep making the positive case for the UK. It works well for Scotland. It gives us the best of both worlds. It offers us a better future. We will fight hard to preserve it against those who have been obsessed with independence for their entire political lives but now seek to disguise it.”

‘transformational change in childcare’

Improved childcare entitlements is one of the most eye-catching sections in the white paper – and would be very popular – but some critics have suggested that the Scottish Government could act now to improve childcare and need not wait for independence.

The Scottish Government says families will save up to an estimated £4,600 per child, per year under plans to extend childcare to every child from the age of one. The proposed entitlement in an independent Scotland is for 30 hours of childcare each week – the same number of hours as a child in school.

The move would benefit around 240,000 children, 212,000 families and has the additional benefit of allowing more women to return to work by removing the barrier of childcare costs.

Implementation would be phased and the proposal will see the workforce expand in line with the hours, creating up to 35,000 jobs in the childcare sector, mainly for women.

The Holyrood government says independence offers the opportunity to bring in this proposal as tax revenues generated by more women returning to work will stay in Scotland. Under devolution, increases in tax revenues – and savings from reduced benefits claims – go to Westminster.

Speaking ahead of a debate on ‘Scotland’s Future – Your Guide to an Independent Scotland’ in the Scottish Parliament, First Minister Alex Salmond said:

“Independence would enable us to bring about a transformational change in childcare. The early years are the most crucial years in a child’s development. Our plan will provide high quality childcare that is both flexible and affordable for parents.

“Our current childcare costs are lower than the rest of the UK but every working family with children knows it is a real burden on the family finances. Improving access to quality childcare will not just benefit children – it will help many more women into work.

“At the moment, without all the powers of independence, we have managed to prioritise childcare and are increasing the number of hours from 412.5 to 600.

“Independence offers us the powers to go much further. If we matched, for example, the female labour market participation of Sweden, this would generate an extra £700 million in tax revenue. As we progressively expand childcare, the tax revenue generated would pay for further expansion. Without independence, however, that revenue would leave Scotland, go to Westminster and not be available to fund the further expansion we need.

“With independence, we would keep this revenue here in Scotland to reinvest it in childcare for all, a model we know from countries such as Netherlands works well for children’s development, female participation in the labour market and the wider economy.

“This transformational change in childcare will help give children the best start in life, allow parents to choose to work without worrying about costs and create up to 35,000 new jobs. This is just one of the many opportunities to make Scotland a fairer, more prosperous country through independence.”

Scotland and the UK: safer together?

Threats to Scotland and the UK from organised crime gangs, cyber criminals and global terrorism are best confronted with Scotland inside the UK, Home Secretary Theresa May claimed today. However ‘Yes’ campaigners have been quick to challenge the Home Secretary’s analysis and say that Scotland will continue to work closely with international partners on security issues.

The Home Secretary (pictured below) was in Edinburgh to launch ‘Scotland analysis: Security’, the seventh in a series of UK government papers to inform the debate ahead of next year’s independence referendum.

The paper examines how the UK and Scotland derive mutual benefit from an integrated approach to security, cyber, justice and policing, as well as from security exports and our international alliances and relationships.

The possible consequences for both Scotland and the continuing UK of a vote for independence are subject to analysis in the paper. It stresses that while the UK does work with other countries, such as the Republic of Ireland, to improve security and fight organised crime, there is a significant difference between these relationships and Scotland’s current position as a privileged and influential part of the UK.

The analysis concludes that independence could disturb the united protection provided to Scotland by the UK’s security and intelligence architecture. The report suggests:

Scotland facing a technically complex and expensive requirement to establish its security infrastructure. In the meantime, there would be a risk to both Scotland and the continuing UK of diminished security.
Scotland no longer being covered by the UK’s National Cyber Security Programme, which strengthens the services the public rely on and makes the UK a safer place for businesses to operate.
Co-operation between Police Scotland and other UK forces may not be as straightforward as it is now. Long established UK-wide laws make it easier to pursue justice across borders despite different legal systems and police jurisdictions.
A limit to the amount of information the continuing UK would be able to share with Scotland. Under the “Control Principle”, the UK could not share the kind of information used to fight and counter terrorism with Scotland, passed to it by another country, unless the UK had that country’s consent.

Home Secretary Theresa May said:

“This report sets out in plain terms the security consequences of independence, not just for Scotland but for the UK as a whole. Undoubtedly we are stronger and safer together.

“The national security risks the UK faces are complex and changing. Terrorists and organised criminals will seek new ways to exploit any weakness in our justice and policing capabilities, and the scale of emerging threats, such as cyber crime, demands a comprehensively resourced response.

Now is the time to work more closely together for the security of all citizens of the UK.”

The UK government believes that Scotland is better off as part of the UK, and that the UK is stronger, safer and more secure with Scotland as part of it.

In the event of a vote in favour of leaving the UK, Scotland would become an entirely new state and would have to establish its own security arrangements.

However, supporters of independence have been quick to refute the Home Secretary’s claims. The Scottish government said that, in the event of independence, Scotland would work closely with the rest of the UK and international partners on security and intelligence matters.

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill (pictured above) told the BBC: “These claims are wrong – not least because Scotland is already an independent jurisdiction when it comes to policing and justice issues, and current cross-border cooperation shows how well that can work to combat terrorism and other threats.

“An independent Scotland will have first-rate security arrangements to counter any threats we may face. And we will continue to work in very close collaboration with the rest of the UK and international partners on security and intelligence matters, which is in everyone’s interests.”

Government cash to support families in need

The work being carried out by Pilton-based Circle Scotland was praised by Aileen Campbell, the Minister for Children and Young People, during a visit to the project yesterday. Ms Campbell also announced details of £10 million Strategic Partnership Funding for voluntary sector organisations working with children and families.

Families across Scotland will benefit from better support services with 45 third sector organisations receiving a funding boost from the Scottish Government. This £10 million of Strategic Partnership Funding will strengthen the work of young people’s organisations working across Scotland, in areas such as adoption, vulnerable families, child health, literacy, bereavement counselling and parental support.

Minister for Children and Young People Aileen Campbell (pictured below, right) said: “We are working to make Scotland the best place in the world to grow up, including increasing the level of free early learning and childcare through the Children and Young People Bill, which will save families equivalent to around £700 per child. Scottish families already benefit from a wide range of support and the organisations receiving a share of this £10 million will help to improve what is on offer. Thanks to our investment, great organisations like Circle, which I am visiting today, will be able to take their work further into the community, helping families in need across Scotland get access to the right information and resources.”

Funding of £20 million through the Third Sector Early Intervention Fund and £10 million through Strategic Funding Partnerships was announced last month.

The following 45 organisations will receive support through the Strategic Funding Partnerships to enhance or develop work focussed on supporting the needs of young people and their families:

Article 12 in Scotland, Asthma UK Scotland, Birthlink, British Association for Adoption and Fostering Scotland, Capability Scotland, Care and Learning Alliance, Comann nam Pàrant (Nàiseanta), Cruse Bereavement Care Scotland, Dyslexia Scotland, Families Need Fathers Scotland, Family Service Unit Scotland (Circle), Fathers Network Scotland (FNS), Genetic Alliance UK, Girlguiding Scotland, Health and Social Care Alliance Scotland, Hearts and Minds, John Muir Trust, Federation of City Farms and Community Gardens, Lead Scotland, Learning Link Scotland, LGBT Youth Scotland, National Day Nurseries Association, Parent Network Scotland, Partners in Advocacy, Relationships Scotland Core, Relationships Scotland Project, Scotland’s Learning Partnership, Scottish Association of Young Farmers Clubs, Scottish Community Development Centre, Scottish Environmental & Outdoor Education Centres Association, Scottish Marriage Care, Scottish Trades Union Congress, Scottish Youth Parliament, Sense Scotland, Sleep Scotland, The Boys’ Brigade, The Girls Brigade in Scotland, The Iona Community, The Mentor Foundation UK (Mentor), Working On Wheels , The Princes Trust, The Scout Association, Woodcraft Folk , Workers’ Educational Association and YWCA Scotland.

Holyrood Bill will support families

Charities have welcomed news that three and four year old children will, for the first time in Scotland, be entitled to 600 hours of funded early learning and childcare through the Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill, published today. Third sector organisations will also receive an additional £10 million.

The Bill proposes a range of measures which also include:

Looked after two year olds and those with a kinship care order will receive the same entitlement as three and four year olds
A named person for every child and young person from birth to safeguard and support their wellbeing, working with other bodies as required
Providing kinship carers with more support from local authorities to increase family stability.

Minister for Children and Young People Aileen Campbell (pictured above) also announced an extra £10 million on top of the £20 million third sector fund to be shared between 45 organisations working closely with children, young people and families, as part of wider investment in prevention and early intervention. This lifts the total budget for the fund to £30 million over two years, an increase on the funding available over the previous two years.

Ms Campbell said: “There is excellent work being done across Scotland to support parents, carers, children and young people. This Bill will improve levels of care and support to children and families across the country through an increase in free and more flexible early learning and childcare from 475 to 600 hours, as well as more joined up services to support the wellbeing of all children and young people through a named person. Further measures will also add stability to kinship care arrangements. The level of investment the Scottish Government is putting into ensuring the Bill works for Scotland’s young people also demonstrates our commitment to investing in our children from the very start.

“We must also recognise the important role of the third sector in reaching out to families and children in inventive and inspirational ways, which is why I am providing an additional £10 million on top of the Third Sector Early Intervention Fund for groups working directly with children, young people and their families. The £20 million Third Sector Early Intervention Fund captured the imagination of many key organisations that work with children and young people. This additional funding means that even more organisations will be able to work with the Scottish Government and each other, as they continue to improve the lives of Scotland’s children, young people and their families.

“Together with the publication of the Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill, today is the biggest step forward so far on the path towards making Scotland the best place in the world to grow up.”

Anne Houston, Chief Executive of CHILDREN 1ST, said: “The Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill has a key role to play in achieving the Scottish Government’s ambition of making Scotland the best place for children to grow up. For CHILDREN 1ST, that means a place where every child and young person has a happy, healthy, safe and secure childhood. We support the Bill’s intentions and must all now maximise the opportunity before us to achieve the Scottish Government’s vision.

“We are heartened by the proposals to provide 600 hours of flexible early learning and childcare for children in kinship care aged two and to provide a statutory definition of well-being.”

Martin Crewe, Director of Barnardo’s Scotland, said: “Barnardo’s Scotland is pleased to see the introduction of the Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill in Parliament. This Bill will be an important step forward in improving the lives of Scotland’s most vulnerable children and young people. We are particularly pleased to see more support for those young people leaving care, many of whom are not getting the help they need to make a successful transition into adulthood.

“We are looking forward to scrutinising the Bill and working with the Scottish Parliament to ensure that it delivers on the Scottish Government’s aim to make Scotland the best place in the world to bring up children.”

A 12 week consultation on the Bill was launched in July 2012 and was accompanied by extensive stakeholder communication, including national engagement events with over 800 stakeholders and activities with nearly 2,400 children and young people.

The Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill will also increase the powers of Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People as well as improving support for kinship carers, families and care leavers

Provisions relating to a ‘named person’ will:

Place a duty on NHS Boards to allocate every child with a named person from birth to school age
Place a duty on local authorities to allocate every child with a named person until they are 18 or leave school, whichever is later.
Oblige all relevant authorities to share information with the named person if it is necessary to safeguard, support and promote the wellbeing of the child.

The £10 million will go towards Strategic Funding Partnerships for children and youth organisations.

The Third Sector Early Intervention Fund is managed by the BIG Lottery on behalf of the Scottish Government.

Edinburgh to act against impact of welfare reforms

Plans to mitigate the impact of national welfare reform measures on the capital have been announced by the City of Edinburgh Council. The plans, which will see an additional investment of £350,000 in advice and support services, will be discussed by the Corporate Policy and Strategy Committee on Tuesday (16 April).

The introduction of policies such as the Housing Benefit Under-occupancy Restrictions (or ‘bedroom tax’), which are expected to affect 3,800 Council tenants, and around 2,500 Housing Association tenants, combined with national reductions in benefits will have a significant impact on some Edinburgh residents and the city’s economy as a whole.

The Council has taken steps to minimise these repercussions where possible and is considering further actions to offer support. Residents affected by the under-occupancy restrictions have been contacted to provide advice about options such as moving to a smaller home, taking in lodgers or budgeting on a lower income.

Health, Wellbeing and Housing Convener, Councillor Ricky Henderson, (pictured below)said: “The new changes to the national welfare system will have a significant impact on the city and particularly those receiving benefits. It is also expected that the introduction of the under-occupancy changes will lead to increasing rent arrears, which may have an adverse impact on the Council’s ability to deliver services and capital investment in its homes.

“We have taken steps to bolster Council and voluntary sector advice services to make sure that residents are aware of these changes and the help that is available to them. It is vital that we support our most vulnerable citizens and do what we can to minimise these repercussions where possible.”

The committee will be asked to approve an investment of £350,000 to provide additional advice services. Of this sum, £100,000 will be provided to Citizens Advice Edinburgh, £22,000 to the Community Ability Network, £15,000 to The Action Group, £15,000 to FAIR and £7,000 to COSS. Some of the extra funds will also be invested in the Council’s own Advice Shop service and Contact Centre.

An additional £67,000 has already been agreed for the Welfare Rights and Health Project, CHAI Advice Service and Granton Information Centre.

Recent Scottish Local Government Forum Against Poverty figures suggest that changes to the national welfare system will lead to a loss of income of £223 million by 2015/2016 for people in Edinburgh. These changes mainly affect individuals and families living on low wages, those seeking work and disabled people who are unable to work. This will result in a greater need for advice about benefits, debt and budgeting, as well as an increased demand on social work, housing and homelessness services.

The administration of Crisis Grants and Community Care Grants is now the responsibility of the Council, after being transferred from the Department for Work and Pensions on 1 April. Crisis Grants are available as emergency payments where there is an immediate threat to health or safety and are now paid out from Council Neighbourhood and City Centre Offices with an out of hours service also available. A new team has been recruited to deal with the assessment and processing of claims, which can be made by phone, online, on paper and in person. Community Care grants will help to enable or continue independent living by providing furniture, carpets and white goods.

Further measures will be discussed by the Health, Wellbeing and Housing Policy Development and Review Sub Committee on Tuesday 23 April 2013.

The city council’s announcement comes as new independent research by Sheffield Hallam University has shown that welfare cuts will take more than £1.6bn a year out of the Scottish economy and hit the poorest parts hardest – the equivalent to about £480 a year for every adult of working age. The biggest losses are from reforms to incapacity benefits at about £500m a year.

The report states: “The financial losses arising from the reforms will hit the most deprived parts of Scotland hardest. Glasgow in particular, but also a number of other older industrial areas, will feel the impact most. The loss of benefit income, which is often large, will have knock-on consequences for local spending and thus for local employment, which will in turn add a further twist to the downward spiral.”

The report added: “A key effect of welfare reform will therefore be to widen the gaps in prosperity between the best and worst local economies across Scotland.” Researchers note that the scale of financial loss in Scotland would have been greater if the Scottish government had chosen to pass on the cut to council tax benefit.

The report was commissioned by the Holyrood’s welfare reform committee, and while it’s findings are unlikely to come as a major surprise, committee convener Labour MSP Michael McMahon said: “Our committee wanted a detailed picture of what would happen on the ground when these reforms were fully implemented. It is obvious to all that the impact is dramatic – and more so in the areas that can least afford it.”

A Scottish government spokesman said: “Sheffield Hallam have used the same publicly available data as the Scottish government analysis and reach broadly the same conclusions on the scale of the cuts. It is completely unacceptable that hard-working people and vulnerable groups will bear the brunt of the UK government’s welfare cuts.”

The UK government insists that changes must be considered alongside other measures like the increase of the tax threshold, that changes to the welfare system were necessary and that reforms will benefit the Scottish economy in the long-term.

‘Bedroom Tax’ – minister demands fair deal for Scotland

Today (1 April) is day one of the Westminster government’s controversial welfare reforms. The Scottish government pre-empted the changes with two statements on the eve of the changes:

If the UK Government proceed to impose their plans for the bedroom tax on Scotland then Scotland must get its fair share of funds to deal with both the human and financial impact, Welfare Minister Margaret Burgess said yesterday.

In a letter to the UK Welfare Reform Minister Lord Freud, Mrs Burgess (picured below) demanded a fair deal for Scotland to address the potentially devastating impact of the bedroom tax, which is set to impoverish families and individuals.

The Scottish Government is completely opposed to the bedroom tax, which will affect 16,000 families with children in Scotland, but if UK Ministers proceed with cuts then Scotland must get its fair share of Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP) funding, says Mrs Burgess.

Despite both Scotland and London having the same number of households hit by the bedroom tax, Lord Freud is set to award London with £56.5 million of DHP compared to only £10 million in Scotland.

Welfare Minister Burgess said: “The bedroom tax is a socially divisive measure that will increase social inequalities across Scotland. It’s a policy that the Scottish Government is totally against as it hits our most vulnerable citizens in these already challenging economic conditions.

“This is a policy devised in London on the basis of housing benefit increases and overcrowding. However, in inflation-adjusted terms, 93 per cent of the housing benefit increase is attributable to the situation in England whilst London has almost two and a half times the level of overcrowded households compared to Scotland.

“We have consistently made that case to UK Government Ministers that we are opposed to these cuts – if they proceed to impose their plans then Scotland must get its fair share of funds to deal with both the human and financial impact.

“The small levels of DHP in Scotland is woefully inadequate and unfair to deal with the impact and scale of this policy.

“Civic Scotland is united in opposition to the bedroom tax and this Government has already taken action to strengthen the protection against eviction for rent arrears in advance of the introduction of the tax. From 1 August 2012 we brought pre-action requirements for rent arrears into force to ensure that proceedings for eviction is always the last resort.

“We are also providing an extra £2.5 million to social landlords for advice services to ensure there is support on hand for people who will lose housing benefit due to the under occupancy measures and other housing benefit cuts being introduced by Westminster from April.

“The UK Government’s agenda is completely at odds with the values of the people of Scotland and the aspirations that this Government has for our nation. Only through independence can Scotland have the levers required to create a welfare system that is aligned to Scottish needs and values.”

Thousands of vulnerable people in Scotland will be protected from increased Council Tax bills following the UK Government’s abolition of council tax benefit this week, Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth John Swinney announced yesterday.

Around 560,000 people will receive support to ensure they are not affected by the UK Government’s 10 per cent cut in funding for Council Tax Benefit successor arrangements.

The Scottish Government and local authorities in Scotland are working in partnership to invest £40 million in 2013/14 to bridge the funding gap and mitigate the impact of the UK Government’s benefit cuts.

Mr Swinney (pictured below) said: “Hard working and vulnerable people are having to bear the brunt of these Westminster benefit cuts. Instead of protecting our poorest households, Westminster has responded to this recession by imposing deeply damaging welfare cuts which will make it far harder for people to meet the rising cost of living.

“To ensure households across Scotland do not face additional burdens the Scottish Government and Scotland’s councils are providing £40 million in 2013/14 to ensure that around 560,000 people in Scotland are protected from this reduction.

“Whilst Council tax bills will be increasing in many areas of England as a result of benefit cuts we are using the limited resources we have to ensure vulnerable people do not have to face increasing bills.

“We are determined to do everything that we reasonably can to help those who need it most, however we cannot meet every Westminster cut. We are making available an extra £2.5 million to social landlords to help them ensure that people affected by housing benefit changes have the advice and support they need.

“And we are providing £5.4 to organisations such as Citizens Advice to help those affected by benefit reforms. This extra support will assist social landlords in their efforts to engage directly with affected tenants and seek to identify ways in which they can deal with the impact of the changes.

“These unjust policies show why we need the powers of independence to protect vulnerable people rather than simply trying to cushion the blows in Scotland. It would be far better to control benefits and welfare so unfair policies like abolishing Council Tax benefit are not even considered, let alone implemented. “

Swinney calls for welfare cuts U-turn

The Chancellor should use next week’s UK Budget to revisit welfare reforms which stand to place real strain and hardship on Scottish families, Finance Secretary John Swinney said today. Writing to the Chancellor ahead of Wednesday’s Budget, the Finance Secretary has highlighted the impacts in Scotland of the UK Government’s welfare reform programmes.

The letter sets out Scottish Government analysis which shows, for example, that whilst the bedroom tax will save the UKG money, this will be outweighed by the costs imposed on the Scottish economy. Over time the policy will remove £110m from the economy, through its impact in Scotland alone. This does not capture the wider social costs of the policy nor the distress and disruption that it will cause.

The letter also highlights that the full package of welfare reforms will present significant financial and operational challenges for all layers of government in Scotland. In his letter to the Chancellor Mr Swinney urges the UK Government to:

Provide immediate support for investment and jobs
Withdraw its bedroom tax policy
Take action on the distribution of European Structural Funds (ESF)
Improve access to finance for small and medium sized enterprises
Devolve responsibility for Air Passenger Duty to the Scottish Parliament

Commenting on his letter Mr Swinney (pictured below) said: “Since 2010 the UK Governments fiscal policy has been premised on the need to maintain market confidence and the UK’s AAA credit rating. The Chancellor has chosen austerity over investment in growth and jobs and the cost has been the continuing deterioration in the public finances, prolonged recession and the downgrade of the UK’s credit rating.

“That cost is increasingly borne by the most vulnerable in our society and public services in Scotland urgently seeking to mitigate the worst impacts of the UK’s disastrous welfare reform programme. Scottish Government analysis shows that based on reasonable assumptions the projected UK Government savings from the bedroom tax are significantly outstripped by the net loss to the UK of over £100 million over the long-term. This policy is unfair, is unlikely to deliver savings in real-terms and cuts across devolved policies. The Chancellor should use his forthcoming Budget to withdraw it.

“While we welcomed the Chancellor’s partial recognition of the need for urgent investment to boost growth in the Autumn Statement. we again call on the Chancellor to use this Budget to provide a real stimulus and greatly expand capital investment With colleagues from Wales and Northern Ireland, I have also called on the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to invest in growth.

“Small and medium sized businesses are the lifeblood of Scotland’s economy. Growth will be led by the private sector yet it continues to be choked by half-hearted Coalition measures. Figures released last week on bank lending again confirm that the UK Government’s action to improve access to finance for the country’s small and medium sized businesses is failing to deliver. We continue to press the Coalition Government to go further and faster in improving access to finance.

“With the powers of independence Scotland would have the economic levers and the scope to tailor welfare policies in line with Scotland’s interests, to ensure that Scotland’s businesses and people no longer have to fund the failures of a UK Government.”

Welcome news as unemployment down in Scotland

Scotland’s jobless total fell by 13,000 to 206,000 between October and December, according to official figures published by the Office of national Statistics (ONS) today. The total number of employed in Scotland now stands at 2,461,000. ONS figures showed that the Scottish unemployment rate was 7.7%, marginally below the UK average of 7.8%. UK unemployment fell by a total of 14,000 to 2.5 million.

The number of people claiming Job Seeker’s Allowance in Scotland fell by 600 from December to 137,000 in January – down 5200 on the January 2012 figure. The ONS figures also showed that youth unemployment in Scotland fell by 28,000, or 5.9%, over the last year.

Scottish Secretary Michael Moore said: “The government continues to work hard to reduce unemployment by laying the foundations for a stronger, more balanced economy.”

Scotland’s headline employment rate (for those aged 16 to 64) rose by 0.1 percentage points over the three month period to 70.7 per cent, while the claimant count in Scotland fell by 600 over the month of January 2013 – the third consecutive monthly fall.

At Holyrood, government ministers particularly welcomed a significant fall in youth unemployment, which has fallen by has fallen by 28,000 over the last year. The youth unemployment rate fell by 5.9 percentage points – the largest annual fall since the series began in 2006, and the rate is at its lowest since November to January 2011.

Finance Secretary John Swinney said: “This is the third set of monthly unemployment figures in a row that have shown a fall. What’s more, the fall in youth unemployment is particularly encouraging. Scotland has lower youth unemployment, higher youth employment and lower youth inactivity than the UK. This month’s release sees the largest annual drop in the youth unemployment rate since the data series began in 2006.

“Unemployment fell by 14,000 across the UK as a whole with Scotland accounting for 13,000 of this net fall. But we must not be complacent – too many people are still looking for work, and the Scottish Government is taking action to address this by maintaining the most competitive business environment anywhere in the UK and investing in our infrastructure.

“The budget passed last month includes a tax relief package for business worth over £540m this year and bring forward a further £385 million package of economic stimulus. But with the full economic and fiscal powers of independence the Scottish Government could do even more to strengthen our economy and create jobs.”

Youth Employment Minister Angela Constance said: “Today’s figures are the clearest demonstration yet that the Scottish Government’s action on youth employment is helping to support more young people into jobs. It is fantastic that we have achieved an historic high in the number of school leavers going into work, education or training. A record 89.9 per cent of our young people are rightly securing opportunities after school. However – one young person not in training or employment is one too many. The biggest fall in youth unemployment since 2006 is something that the public, private and third sectors can be very pleased with, but our work must continue.”

Should Scotland be an independent country? That is the question!

The Electoral Commission has published its assessment of the Scottish Government’s proposed independence referendum question and has also given its advice on what campaign spending limits in the run-up to the poll should be.

John McCormick, Electoral Commissioner for Scotland said: “Voters are entitled to a referendum which produces a result they can have confidence in. The recommendations we have made today are an important part of giving voters that confidence. But it is of course for the Scottish Parliament to have the final say.”

The Commission was asked to test the following question by the Scottish Government:

“Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country? Yes/No”

The Commission’s established question assessment process involved talking to people across Scotland, asking for advice from accessibility and plain language experts, and writing to people and organisations, including the main political parties represented in the Scottish Parliament and campaigners to seek their views.

We found that the language in the proposed question is clear, simple and easy to understand. However, we also concluded that the words ‘Do you agree’ potentially encouraged people to vote ‘yes’ and should be replaced by more neutral wording.

The Electoral Commission recommends the question should be altered to:

“Should Scotland be an independent country? Yes / No”

The research also showed that voters want factual information ahead of the referendum. In the event of a “Yes” vote there would be a range of issues to be resolved within the UK and internationally about the terms of independence.

Although we would not expect the terms of independence to be agreed before the vote, clarity about how the terms of independence will be decided would help voters understand how the competing claims made by campaigners before the referendum will be resolved.

The Commission has therefore recommended that the UK and Scottish Governments should clarify what process will follow the referendum, for either outcome, so that people have that information before they vote. To avoid confusion we have asked the Governments to agree a joint position if possible.

John McCormick, Electoral Commissioner for Scotland said: “We have rigorously tested the proposed question, speaking to a wide range of people across Scotland. Any referendum question must be, and be seen to be, neutral. People told us that they felt the words ‘Do you agree’ could lead voters towards voting ‘yes’.

“People had a clear understanding that ‘independent country’ meant being separate from the UK. But they did want factual information in advance about what will happen after the referendum. We’re asking the UK and Scottish Government to provide that clarity and we’ll then make sure it gets to voters as part of our public awareness campaign.”

The Scottish Government has welcomed the announcement, and confirmed it will accept all of the Electoral Commission recommendations on the referendum question and campaign spending limits.

Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said she was delighted with the recommended question – ’Should Scotland be an independent country? Yes/No’ – and confirmed that it will be this question that is put before the Scottish Parliament. The Deputy First Minister also said she was satisfied with the recommended spending limits as they provide a level playing field for both sides of the debate.

In line with established practice in referendums throughout the UK, the Scottish Parliament will take the final decision on the wording of the question and campaign spending limits as part of its consideration of the Referendum Bill, which will be introduced in March.

Ms Sturgeon also welcomed the Electoral Commission’s calls for clarity around what a ‘No’ vote will mean for Scotland and its recommendation that the Scottish and UK governments work together to give clarity to the process that will follow a ‘Yes’ vote. She called on the UK government to accept these recommendations.

Ms Sturgeon said: “I would like to thank the Electoral Commission for the work they have done on testing our proposed referendum question and giving advice on campaign spending limits. I am pleased to confirm we will accept their recommendations in full.

“I am particularly delighted with the conclusion the Electoral Commission has reached on the question. While its view is that our proposed question was clear, simple and easy to understand, I am nevertheless happy to accept their recommended change.

“Their advice is based on rigorous testing and we will submit the Electoral Commission’s recommended question – ‘Should Scotland be an independent country?’ – to the Scottish Parliament as part of the Referendum Bill.

“I am also pleased with the spending limits proposed by the Electoral Commission – they deliver a level playing field and will allow a fair and balanced debate on both sides. I am also pleased that the Commission has modified the position set out in their response to our consultation in March, as this would have resulted in an imbalance between the two sides of the campaign.

“We have always said that Scotland’s referendum will be run to the highest international standards of fairness and transparency, and the Electoral Commission plays a vital role in that.

“The Scottish Parliament will take the final decision on the wording of the question and campaign spending limits as part of its consideration of the Referendum Bill which reinforces that this is truly a referendum made in Scotland.

“I also welcome the Electoral Commission calls for both the Scottish and UK Governments to clarify what process will follow the referendum if most voters vote ‘Yes’ or most voters vote ‘No’ vote. The Electoral Commission rightly point out this is in line with the Edinburgh Agreement.

“I have been calling for the UK Government to enter discussions to allow the voters to be better informed, but so far they have refused. This would not be pre-negotiation on the terms of independence but vital information for voters that will allow them to make an informed choice in autumn 2014. Given the Scottish Government is accepting all recommendations from the Electoral Commission I would hope that the UK Government is prepared to do the same.”

The leader of the Labour Party in Scotland Johann Lamont MSP has also welcomed the EC’s findings. Responding to the Electoral Commission report on the proposed referendum question and campaign financing, she said: “We welcome the Electoral Commission’s findings and will, of course, vote for them to e accepted in full. We did not get everything we asked for, but the most important people in this process are the people of Scotland and we believe that in the interests of clarity and certainty all parties should agree to these proposals which have been arrived at independently.

“We also welcome the suggestion that both sides of this debate clarify what will happen after the referendum. The Scottish Labour Party plans to set out before autumn 2014 proposals for how devolution can be developed and extended after Scotland has reaffirmed our place in the United Kingdom in the referendum. I believe it is only right that we set out the process by which such a development of devolution can be achieved after the referendum in which I am confident Scotland will vote to remain in the UK.

“I hope that the Scottish and UK governments, civic Scotland and all interested parties can at least outline how this can be achieved before we go to the polls. The people of Scotland deserve to have as much clarity and certainty in this process as possible.”

Campaign spending limits

As part of the Edinburgh Agreement the Electoral Commission was asked to provide advice on the spending limits for the referendum campaign.

In deciding what advice to give the Commission has applied its established principles for well-run referendums, taking into account the specific circumstances of this referendum, including the Edinburgh Agreement and information we now have about the likely shape and scale of campaigning.

The Commission invited views from campaigners and political parties on what the limits should be, and has considered what campaigners will need in order to put their arguments to voters.

John McCormick, Electoral Commissioner for Scotland said: “The campaign spending limits we have recommended are designed to ensure there are no barriers to voters hearing from campaigners in what will be a historic vote for the people of Scotland.

“We have listened carefully to the views of the Scottish Government and to campaigners, and have set out proposals based on our principles that spending limits should allow effective campaigning for all outcomes, deter excessive spending and encourage transparency.”

The Electoral Commission recommends that campaign spending limits for the independence referendum should be:

Designated lead campaigners: £1,500,000

Political parties represented in the Scottish Parliament:

Scottish National Party: £1,344,000
Scottish Labour: £834,000
Scottish Conservative & Unionist Party: £396,000
Scottish Liberal Democrats: £201,000
Scottish Green Party: £150,000

Other registered campaigners: £150,000

Threshold for registration: £10,000