The Scottish Parliament is today announcing its first virtual Festival of Politics, with events moving online as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Taking place from Thursday 19th to Saturday 21st November, the entire Festival is free to attend.
The Festival programme – in partnership with the Scottish Parliament’s think tank, Scotland’s Futures Forum – puts the spotlight on the key issues facing society, with COVID-19 and our recovery from the pandemic being a core theme throughout. In addition to COVID-19 and its impact, topics covered include climate change, the American Presidential election, Brexit, and the type of country Scotland is likely to be in ten years’ time.
Speaking as the Festival programme was launched, the Presiding Officer the Rt Hon Ken Macintosh MSP, said:“We are delighted to launch this year’s Festival of Politics which for the first time will be held online and will be free to watch.
“The Parliament has always prided itself on being open and accessible to all and moving the festival online provides us with another method by which we can engage with people of all ages and backgrounds from across Scotland and beyond.
“The challenges posed by the coronavirus pandemic have affected every aspect of our lives and it has never been more important for panellists and audience members to come together to discuss and share ideas on the best way forward for society.
“But we are not just focused on the pandemic. With sessions devoted to climate change, race, Brexit and the American elections, we will be taking on all the major issues of our time.
“I’d encourage everyone to get online from November 19th, watch for free and join the debate for Festival of Politics 2020.”
Offering people a unique chance to engage with MSPs, journalists, academics and commentators, attendees can take part in the Festival at www.parliament.scot/festival
Opening statement by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon in yesterday’s debate (Tuesday 27 October):
Presiding Officer, I will begin by moving the motion in my name and also confirm that we will also consider each opposition amendment carefully.
While we don’t necessarily agree with all of them in their entirety, there are good suggestions in each of them and so, regardless of how the votes go this evening, we will seek to take these forward constructively.
The Scottish Government published our new strategic approach to tackling COVID on Friday. This included the proposed 5 levels of intervention.
I will not repeat all of the detail today. But I will set out some changes we are proposing as a result of our considerations since Friday. And I will give a very preliminary indication of the levels that we think might apply to different parts of Scotland from next Monday.
I would draw members’ attention to a technical paper that we have published today giving more detail of the data and wider factors that will guide these decisions.
Firstly, though, I will just briefly summarise today’s statistics, which were published a short time ago.
The total number of positive cases reported yesterday was 1,327. The total number of confirmed cases in Scotland is now 59,201. The number of positive tests reported yesterday was 8.7% of the total.
1,100 people are currently in hospital – an increase of 48 from yesterday. I think it is worth noting Presiding Officer that for those who think we are being too tough with the restrictions right now.
The number in hospital right now is just 400 short of the number of hospitalisations at the April peak.
82 people are in intensive care, which is 8 fewer than yesterday. And in the last 24 hours, I’m sorry to report that 25 additional deaths have been registered.
Which takes the total number of deaths, under this measurement, to 2,726.
I want to send, again, my deepest condolences to all those who are grieving a loved one.
The rise in cases that we are seeing in Scotland is part of an international pattern.
It is reflected elsewhere in the UK, Europe, and around the world. Indeed, many countries across Europe in particular face a much more severe situation than we do currently.
However, it is to try to avoid that kind of deterioration and to try to avoid mounting pressure on our National Health Service that we are acting firmly at this stage.
It is why we acted back in September to stop household gatherings, and then took further action earlier this month to restrict hospitality.
The positive news is that we believe the restriction on household gatherings may already be having an effect.
The number of new cases is growing more slowly than at the start of the month, and we have not seen the 9 day doubling of cases that was predicted earlier this month.
We hope that the effect of the difficult, and I know unwelcome, restrictions on hospitality, which have been in force now for just over 2 weeks, will soon start to be seen as well.
Our hope is that the rate of increase in new cases will slow even further and we will then see a decline in the number of new cases.
And if we do see that progress, it is important to stress that that will be down to a reduction in our interactions with each other as a result of the restrictions in place.
It’s important to bear that in mind as I run through some of the detail of the new levels because, while this is difficult for all of us and it is difficult for many businesses, it is by reducing our interactions with people – in other households, and in environments with higher risks of transmission – that we will continue to make progress.
All of that said our position just now is still fragile, and it is too early to draw firm conclusions. Cases are still rising, and that is not a stable position to be in.
And given that we are entering winter, COVID is likely to present a significant, continued challenge for us – with higher numbers of cases than we would want to see – for some time to come.
In addition, given the lag effect associated with the incubation period of the virus and how it affects people over time, we know that we are also likely to see hospital and ICU admissions and unfortunately deaths rise for some time yet, even as we hope the rate of increase in cases continue to slow.
So all of this means we must continue to be very cautious – and we must take the action necessary to suppress the virus to the lowest possible levels.
But given that we are likely to be living with this virus for a while, it also means that we must try be as proportionate and as targeted as possible in the actions that we take.
As I was saying the virus, we know, does direct harm to human life and health and that must be minimised. But we also know that the actions we take to do this also cause harm – to the economy and living standards and to wider health and wellbeing.
So the difficult task that all countries have is to balance all of that and minimise the overall harm of the pandemic.
The strategic framework – and the 5 levels – are designed to help us do that.
Having 5 levels does not prevent us from applying restrictions consistently across the country if that is deemed necessary.
But it means we can avoid a one size fits all approach if it is not. It will enable a part of the country with relatively low transmission to live with fewer restrictions than an area with much higher transmission.
Such an approach is more proportionate but the downside is that it makes the messages we communicate more complex.
To help with that, we will be launching a new postcode checker to allow people to know what restrictions are in place in their area at any given time.
The detail within each level is intended to give people greater certainty of what to expect at different rates of transmission.
But it is important that we retain some flexibility.
I want to be clear that we will keep the detail of each level under review as the situation develops.
And that’s a point that may be particularly relevant to the hospitality industry.
Let me, Presiding Officer try to make some progress, I just want to summarise for parliament today the levels we are proposing. Members should note that levels 1, 2 & 3 of the 5 levels are intended to be broadly comparable, albeit not identical, to the 3 levels deployed in England.
I explained on Friday that the baseline level – zero – is the lowest level of restrictions.
It is similar to the state of affairs that applied in August when we had suppressed the virus to very low levels.
We consider this to be the closest to normality we can get to without better treatment or a vaccine for COVID.
Of course, we remain hopeful about the prospects of both these scientific developments over the next few months.
Level 1 is similar to the restrictions we had in mid-September, as cases started to rise again but prevalence remained very low.
Our objective, of course, is to get all parts of the country to level 0 or level 1 and remain there if we can.
The restrictions we propose for level 2 are similar to those that currently apply across Scotland outside the central belt.
Level 3 resembles the tougher restrictions which currently apply in the central belt.
And finally, level 4 – which we hope not to have to use – envisages something closer to a full lockdown. For example non-essential shops would close at that level.
However even in level 4, up to 6 people from up to 2 households could still meet outdoors; and manufacturing and construction businesses would stay open.
Levels 2 and 3 are intended to apply for short periods of time and level 4 will be deployed only if absolutely necessary as a short, sharp intervention to address extremely high transmission rates.
Under all 5 levels, we would expect schools and childcare to remain open if at all possible.
Since publishing our proposed levels on Friday, we have consulted with various stakeholders.
And as I said those consultations included discussion with opposition leaders.
Of course it is not possible to accommodate all the asks of different sectors and still suppress the virus.
But I can confirm that we have decided on some changes that will hopefully be welcomed. These relate to childcare, shared parenting and child contact centres; outdoor retail; bingo; and numbers allowed at weddings at level 4.
Full details are on the revised table circulated to MSPs earlier and will be made available on the Scottish Government website.
Before turning to hospitality in a bit of detail – because that is one of the sectors bearing the biggest impact of current restrictions – let me mention one other, hopefully temporary, change.
The table published on Friday envisaged that at level 1 we would be able to meet with 6 people from 2 households in our own homes. But it also made it clear that this might change in some circumstances.
The public health advice to Ministers is that if a decision is taken this week to move any area to level 1, the current prohibition on meeting anyone from other households in our own homes should remain in place for a period as an extra precaution.
We intend to accept this advice. But, that position will be reviewed weekly.
I want to turn, Presiding Officer, now to hospitality. I will describe the restrictions that will apply in each level and outline any changes from the current situation.
I hope the changes will be welcome but I know that the sector will have wanted to see even fewer restrictions, especially at level 3.
I will explain why that is not possible at this stage. However, I want to be clear that we will continue dialogue with the sector on the proposals it has put forward.
We also intend to establish an expert advisory group on reintroducing safe low level music and background noise.
At level 0, hospitality will operate almost normally – subject to rules on physical distancing, limits on numbers and other mitigations, such as table service only.
Level 1 will be similar but with a curfew closing time. However, that will be 10.30 rather than 10pm.
Level 2 is broadly comparable to the restrictions currently in place outside the central belt.
Currently, in these areas, hospitality can operate normally outdoors with an early closing time. I know this will get more difficult in winter. That will continue to be the case under level 2 – but the closing time will be extended to 10.30pm.
Just now premises in these areas can open indoors until 6pm for the service of food and non-alcoholic drinks only. At level 2, that will be extended to 8pm and alcohol will be permitted with main meals.
In the central belt areas under tougher restrictions just now, only cafes can open, until 6pm and for food and non-alcoholic drinks.
Level 3 is broadly similar but all hospitality premises will be subject to the same rules – so cafes, pubs and restaurants will be allowed to open until 6pm for food and non-alcoholic drinks.
At level 4, hospitality will be closed.
I know the sector wants to see more activity allowed, especially at level 3 and will continue to discuss that with them.
But I must stress that areas at level 3 are the areas with the highest levels of infection.
Our judgment is that to ease up anymore at this stage – particularly as our progress remains so fragile – could risk tipping these levels closer to level 4, rather than have them make the progress we want to see towards level 2.
Assuming Parliament agrees the overall framework today Presiding officer, I will confirm on Thursday what level each local authority will be placed into initially. This will be with effect from Monday and it will be reviewed on a weekly basis.
These decisions will be based on advice from the government’s advisers and the national incident management team. We are also consulting with local authorities.
While we will initially apply levels to whole local authority areas, we will look in future at any situation where it might make sense to be more targeted – for example, a different approach for the Argyll islands than for the rest of the Argyll & Bute council area.
As I said earlier, we have published a technical paper detailing the factors and data that will guide these decisions.
We will look at actual and projected cases per 100,000 of population, test positivity rates, and projections for hospital and ICU capacity. And different thresholds for these will apply at different levels.
It is important to stress though that these decisions will not involve the automatic application of a single statistic or even basket of statistics. These will inform and guide the decisions but judgment will required to be applied to them.
As we migrate initially to this new system, we will be deliberately cautious.
As I said earlier, we are seeing signs of progress but the situation is very fragile and could go in the wrong direction – so we must take care.
I hope that over the next couple of weeks – if progress in slowing the rate of new cases continues – we will see more local authorities dropping down a level.
But initially, most are likely to stay in broadly the same category as now.
Now final decisions have not yet been taken but I want to give parliament a broad indication today of what that means.
The central belt areas currently under the toughest restrictions, are likely to be in level 3 initially. And most of the rest of the country is likely to start in level 2.
There are however some exceptions under consideration.
Firstly, it is hoped that the Highlands, Orkney, Shetland, the Western Isles and Moray might go to level 1.
Less positively, we believe that the escalating situation in Dundee City makes it possible it will go to level 3.
And, as has been reported, we are considering whether the very high rate of transmission and hospital admissions in North and South Lanarkshire may necessitate a move for them to level 4. These are the only areas currently being considered for level 4.
There have however been some encouraging signs in the last few days that the situation in Lanarkshire may have stabilised slightly.
So we will only take this decision if it is deemed absolutely necessary and I hope we can avoid it.
As I say, I hope to confirm these decisions to Parliament ahead of FMQs on Thursday.
For all of Scotland Presiding officer, our aim is to get to level 1, and then to level 0 of the framework as quickly as it is possible to do.
We know this is possible because over the summer, we got to the very low levels of transmission that would be needed for that.
If we can do it once, we can do it again. But it will not be easy. It will take action from the government to support the wider efforts.
That’s why our strategic approach doesn’t simply set out restrictions.
It also explains how we will expand testing, and the steps we will take to better support people to comply with the rules, especially on self-isolation.
We set out details of our testing expansion in the paper we published last week.
And finally Presiding officer,
We know that while government must lead, success against this virus will depend on all of us.
It is difficult and frustrating, and getting more so by the day, especially as we head towards Christmas.
But if we dig in now and get Covid under more control, we perhaps open the door – not to 100% normality at Christmas – but hopefully to more than we have right now.
We all want that.
So please stick with it.
As of Monday, make sure you check what restrictions apply in your area.
Please stay out of other people’s houses, except for the limited reasons allowed.
Follow the rules on:
Face coverings.
Avoiding crowded areas.
Cleaning hands and hard surfaces.
2 m distancing.
And self-isolate, and book a test, if you have symptoms.
And all of us must try to be as patient as possible at not being able to go to the football or for a pint or out for a meal with friends.
These are hard sacrifices – but they will protect you and your loved ones. They will help protect the NHS. And they will save lives.
And right now, Presiding officer, that is what we must all pull together to do.
Expansion of hospitality provisions
Changes to current restrictions
The new levels framework will increase the opportunity for hospitality businesses to operate during different levels of coronavirus (COVID-19) restrictions.
Under the new system set out by the Scottish Government, hospitality premises may sell alcohol indoors with a main meal up to 8pm at level two, enabling the service of an early evening meal. At present, hospitality premises outside the central belt cannot serve alcohol indoors and must close indoors at 6pm.
At level three – equivalent to the current restrictions in the central belt – the definition of cafes will be removed, enabling all hospitality premises to operate in the daytime, up to 6pm, without the sale of alcohol.
Hotels and other accommodation will continue to be able to serve evening meals to residents.
The expansion of the hospitality provisions within the new levels system takes effect from Monday 2nd November and will be kept under review as the spread of the virus hopefully stabilises.
The Scottish Government has also committed to taking forward a range of additional mitigations suggested by the industry with the sector, as well as continuing to consider how low level background sound in hospitality premises can be safely managed.
The changes follow close engagement with the sector, since Friday, including ministerial discussions on Saturday, and discussions are continuing on the content of the relevant regulations.
Cabinet Secretary Fergus Ewing said:“I understand that any restrictions are hard for business and I know that many will want us to go further, however this is a proportionate relaxation of the current rules that will enable premises to serve evening meals and alcohol in level two, in addition to removing the distinction between cafés and other licensed premises at level three.
“We need to be very cautious at level three, to ensure that the restrictions in place contribute to reducing the spread of the virus, so that they can be lifted as soon as possible.
“I want to thank the sector for its constructive engagement over the weekend and commit to continuing these discussions as we go forward.”
Scotland’s licensed hospitality sector presented the Scottish Government with an alternative workable Strategic Framework ahead of yesterday’s debate in the Scottish Parliament.
Industry Groups wrote ahead of the scheduled debate on the Scottish Government’s Strategic Framework that will set the course of hospitality for the next six months.
While emphasising that hospitality in Scotland is not to blame for the spread of the virus, the trade bodies have sought clarification on a number of issues and made proposals designed to support a sector that has been devastated by the COVID-19 crisis.
Higher levels of restrictions will require higher levels of support for businesses. These must be at least in line with levels in England.
The economic support made available in the form of grants will not be sufficient. There must be information from the Scottish Government as soon as possible on how it intends to use its share of the £700 million funding allocated recently by the Chancellor to the devolved governments.
Urgent confirmation of how the Job Support Scheme will work for Scottish businesses to save up to 70,000 jobs.
Support must be provided for sub-sectors including music and entertainment venues, nightclubs and conference centres, that are unable to open.
Anomalies regarding the serving of meals in cafes but not pubs or restaurants, or hotels unable to serve alcohol to residents, must be reviewed immediately.
The letter also urged the Scottish Government to ensure it does not impose any restrictions longer than is necessary, with any measures regularly reviewed.
There also needs to be a clear roadmap for how areas facing tighter restrictions can work towards exiting those restrictions, with comprehensive guidance for businesses, based on consultation, issued in advance of any new measures.
The sector has confirmed it is prepared to make additional concessions to assuage concerns of the MSPs and the Scottish Government.
In a joint statement, the trade bodies said:
Today the Scottish Parliament will debate the Scottish Government’s proposed Strategic Framework for dealing with COVID. The framework, as it was announced last week, will clearly have an enormous impact on the lives of people and businesses. No other sector has been as heavily disrupted as hospitality and the planned framework looks set to provide further restrictions which may destroy businesses and wipe out jobs.
Clearly the objective for everyone must be to contain the spread of the virus. It must, however, be done in a way which gives the incredibly valuable businesses in our sector the best possible chance of survival and a more equal shouldering of the burden at this time. If we are not careful, businesses will be closed for good and jobs permanently lost.
We are now calling on the Scottish Government, and all MSPs, to acknowledge that our sector stands to lose the most if the framework is not absolutely right. They must take on board our points and ensure that any legislation, that is designed to keep communities safe and businesses intact, does not have the unintended consequence of delivering the final blow.”
New approach will ensure dignity, fairness and respect
There will be no DWP- style assessments to access disability assistance under the new Scottish social security system, says Social Security Minister Shirley-Anne Somerville.
Decisions will be made using information gathered through the applications process including from health care providers
Should more detail be required to make decisions on an application for the new Adult Disability Payment, it will be gathered through a consultation which will be based on a conversation between a healthcare professional employed by the Scottish Government and the client. There will be no private sector involvement in this process.
Most consultations will be by phone but can be face to face in a GP practice or even at home, whatever works best for the person applying. No-one will be asked to carry out tasks in order to prove the impact of their disability or health condition.
Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and Older People, Shirley-Anne Somerville, said: “Two of our principles enshrined in law is that social security is a public service and an investment in people – it is there for all of us when and where we need it. So no one should ever experience stress when accessing the support they are entitled to.
“People who require disability assistance will already face a number of challenges and interacting with a benefit system shouldn’t become another one. That is why I am pleased to set out plans for Scotland’s new system – plans that will make sure that people are treated with dignity, fairness and respect.
“We want people to feel that they have been treated well and fairly at every stage – from having an application form that is clear and easy to use right through to how we make sure someone is still able to access money when they want to appeal our decisions.
“Getting rid of degrading assessments that our Experience Panels told us were ‘traumatic and intrusive’ is the right thing to do. It is an obvious change but one that will make a massive difference to people.
“I’d like to thank the people who have worked with us to design this service – the volunteers on our Experience Panels and stakeholders. Together we will deliver a markedly different benefit system and create a public service that we can all be truly proud of.”
2200 paediatricians sign open letter to Prime Minister urging Government to extend free school meals to cover holidays
Thousands of health professionals have signed an open letter urging the UK Government to change course on free school meals during the holidays. They praise footballer Marcus Rashford’s campaign tackling food poverty and call for the Prime Minister to follow the lead of the devolved administrations.
In 24 hours, 2200 Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) members have signed an open letter to Prime Minister Boris Johnson, calling for the UK Government to match the pledge made by the Welsh and Scottish Governments, and the Northern Ireland Executive to provide food vouchers to cover school holidays for children from low-income backgrounds.
More than 800 paediatricians signed the letter within an hour of circulation.
The letter argues that childhood hunger is an issue that should transcend politics, and that good nutrition is at the heart of health, wellbeing and development for children and young people. It notes that without it, children’s health outcomes worsen, and with that, so do their life chances.
With over four million children in the UK living in poverty and the current pandemic entrenching this reality, children desperately need government support.
The letter says that while food vouchers will not solve the problem of child poverty, they do offer a short-term remedy for children that don’t have enough to eat.
Professor Russell Viner, President of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health said: “I’ve rarely seen such anger among our members. We care for children who don’t have enough to eat. We see far too many of them. It is heartbreaking that it has become a normal part of our jobs and hunger is all too common for millions of families in the UK.
“There is an opportunity to put this right. It is pointless to talk about levelling up the country, an ambition which we support, while refusing to offer temporary relief to children and families.
Dr Max Davie, Officer for Health Improvement at the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health said: “We’re a rich country. This isn’t about money, it’s about making sure people have food to eat, and it’s about doing the right thing for children who need a hand up.
“We shouldn’t have to fight for food vouchers when we’re in the middle of a pandemic.”
Dr Liz Whittaker, Consultant Paediatrician at St. Marys Hospital, London said:“Household food insecurity is linked to long-term negative consequences for health, educational outcomes and future income.
“Missing meals isn’t just about going hungry on an individual day, it has a lasting impact on a young person’s life. Aside from the fact that it is wrong to see children go hungry, it is impossible to justify any argument that this saves the state money.”
The open letter pays tribute to Marcus Rashford for his influential and inspiring advocacy on behalf of children and young people. RCPCH is proud to support his campaign.
Letter text:
As paediatricians we are shocked by the refusal of the UK Government to extend the provision of free school meals in England to children from low-income backgrounds during the school holidays.
Childhood hunger is an issue that should transcend politics. Few would disagree that one of our most basic human responsibilities is to ensure children have enough to eat.
Every day, we see the impact of hunger and malnutrition in our work as paediatricians. It is not unusual for us to care for children who don’t have enough to eat or who don’t have access to a substantial meal outside of what is provided in school. Good nutrition is at the heart of health, wellbeing and development for children and young people. Without it, children’s health outcomes worsen, and with that, so do their life chances
More than 4 million children in the UK live in poverty and around one third of those are reliant on free school meals. The pandemic has entrenched and exacerbated this reality; families who were previously managing are now struggling to make ends meet because of the impact of COVID-19. It is not good enough to send them into the holiday period hoping for the best, while knowing that many will simply go hungry. Food vouchers will not solve this problem, but they offer a short-term remedy.
We call on the UK Government to match the pledges of the Welsh and Scottish Governments and the Northern Ireland Executive, to continue to provide children from low-income backgrounds with free meals over the coming weeks and to then extend this at least until the Easter school holiday, as they have done in Wales and Scotland.
We pay tribute to Marcus Rashford and his powerful campaigning. His advocacy for children and young people has been a source of inspiration in difficult times. We are proud to stand with him on this issue.
Marcus Rashford MBE said: “If you can do one thing for me, sign the petition:
Advice on safe and enjoyable Halloween celebrations
Families and children are being urged to avoid guising this Halloween to minimise the risk of spreading Coronavirus (COVID-19).Deputy First Minister John Swinney says the move is necessary to ensure people stay within the current restrictions on indoor and outdoor gatherings.
Advice on the Parent Club website suggests ways for families to have a safe Halloween at home including ideas around party games, fancy dress and storytelling.
For Bonfire Night, the advice includes guidelines around group sizes, distancing and FACTS precautions to reduce the temptation for people to hold gatherings and firework displays in their back gardens.
Mr Swinney said: “Under the current restrictions it is not possible to meet up indoors or in large groups outdoors, so the safest thing to do this year is to stay at home.
“I know guising is a big part of Halloween and children will be sad to miss out, but as door-to-door guising brings an additional and avoidable risk of spreading the virus, our clear advice for families is to avoid it.
“Children can still get dressed up and share jokes with their families, and our Parent Club guidance has lots of fun and creative ideas for families to enjoy a safe celebration at home.
“On Bonfire Night it is vital the public adhere to the rules on meeting up with other households to help stop the spread of the virus. We know that some people may consider using fireworks in their back gardens If you do plan on using fireworks this Bonfire Night, please do so responsibly and safely.
“Adapting alternative celebrations and sticking to the rules in place can go a huge way to ensuring everyone’s safety.”
Five level plan to vary rules for rapid but proportionate response to COVID-19.
A five-level framework which will allow for a refreshed strategic approach to suppressing Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreaks across Scotland has been published.
The framework indicates different levels of protection that might be needed based on different levels of transmission for the virus. It will allow for rapid but proportionate responses on both a local and national basis using a transparent range of measures and options.
The framework will comprise five protection levels. ‘Level 0’ is effectively the same level of protection as the Route Map Phase 3 measures Scotland reached in August and will act as a baseline, with four levels above that designed to apply increasing protection from the virus in areas according to prevalence, the risk to communities and the need to protect the NHS.
Levels 1, 2 and 3 will be broadly equivalent to the UK Government levels to offer some uniformity with measures south of the border. Levels will be reviewed on a regular basis.
Ongoing financial support is set out in the framework and will be available to businesses which are required to close or which can remain open but will be directly affected by restrictions. The Scottish Government will work with local authorities to ensure grants are made available quickly and efficiently.
In the coming days the Scottish Government will engage with local government, stakeholders, economic groups and other partners, prior to a final version of the strategic framework being debated in parliament next Tuesday (27 October).
Further details on which local authority areas of Scotland will fall under which levels will be announced following discussions with directors of public health and local authorities, taking on board recommendations from the national incident management team, before coming into force on 2 November.
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said: “It has become increasingly clear that we need to update our approach to tackling Coronavirus to adapt to this latest phase of the pandemic. The draft strategic framework we are publishing sets out how we intend to do that.
“It tries to balance different types of harms. But it is worth stressing that if we allow the virus to run out of control then that will exacerbate every other harm.
“In the coming days, we will listen to views from stakeholders on any suggested changes they might have, or how they would like to see it implemented. Although the framework we have published is new, the principles behind it will be familiar.
“I know that when people hear the daily figures it’s easy to feel as though the hard sacrifices we are all living with are not making a difference. But by taking these difficult steps we will help suppress the virus, and that is why I am asking everyone to stick with it.”
‘We have an economic plan that will protect the jobs and livelihoods of the British people wherever they live and whatever their situation’ – Chancellor Rishi Sunak.
Thank you, Mr Speaker,
And let me speak first to the people of Liverpool, Lancashire, South Yorkshire, and Greater Manchester, and indeed other areas moving into, or already living under, heightened health restrictions.
I understand your frustration. People need to know this is not forever.
These are temporary restrictions to help control the spread of virus.
There are difficult days and weeks ahead, but we will get through this, together.
People are not on their own.
We have an economic plan that will protect the jobs and livelihoods of the British people wherever they live and whatever their situation.
And just as we have throughout this crisis, we will listen and respond to people’s concerns as the situation demands.
And I make no apology for responding to changing circumstances.
And so today we go further.
Mr Speaker,
The Prime Minister was right to outline a balanced approach to tackling coronavirus:
Taking the difficult decisions to save lives and keep the R rate down, while doing everything in our power to protect the jobs and livelihoods of the British people.
The evidence is clear: a regional, tiered approach is the right way to control the spread of the virus.
My Right Honourable Friend the Chief Secretary yesterday set out for the House our economic support for businesses who are legally required to close under those new restrictions.
We’re providing billions of pounds of support for local authorities; a grant scheme for affected businesses worth up to half a billion pounds every month;
And, of course, we expanded the Job Support Scheme – with the government covering the cost of paying two thirds of peoples’ normal wages if their employer had been legally required to close.
And for areas in local alert level 3 we have made available over a billion pounds of generous up-front grants so that local authorities can support businesses, protect jobs and aid economic recovery, in a fair and transparent way.
That is our plan to support closed businesses.
But it is clear that even businesses who can stay open are facing profound economic uncertainty.
This morning, I met with business and union representatives, including those from the hospitality industry, to discuss the new restrictions.
Their message was clear: the impact of the health restrictions on their businesses is worse than they hoped.
They recognise the importance of the tiered restrictions in controlling the spread of the virus.
But a significant fall in consumer demand is causing profound economic harm to their industry.
It is clear that they, and other open-but-struggling businesses, require further support.
So, Mr Speaker, I am taking three further steps today.
First, I’m introducing a new grants scheme for businesses impacted by Tier 2 restrictions, even if they aren’t legally closed.
We will fund local authorities to provide businesses in their area with direct cash grants.
It will be up to local authorities to decide how best to distribute the grants giving them the necessary flexibility to respond to local economic circumstances.
But I’m providing enough funding to give every business premise in the hospitality, leisure and accommodation sectors a direct grant worth up to £2,100 – for every month Tier 2 restrictions apply.
And that’s equivalent to 70% of the value of the grants available for closed businesses in Tier 3. And crucially, I am pleased to confirm these grants will be retrospective.
Businesses in any area which has been under enhanced restrictions can backdate their grants to August.
I have been listening and engaging with colleagues around the House including but not only my Honourable Friends for Heywood and Middleton, Hyndburn, Penistone and Stockbridge, South Ribble, Burnley, Keighley, Cheadle, Leigh and Southport.
I’m pleased to confirm the backdating of the new grants means we are being more generous to businesses and places which have been under higher restrictions for longer.
Let no one say Mr Speaker this Government is not committed to supporting the people and businesses in every region and nation of the United Kingdom.
Second, to protect jobs, we are making the Job Support Scheme more generous for employers. If businesses are legally required to close, as we’ve already outlined, the Government will cover the full cost of employers paying people two thirds of their salary, where they can’t work for a week or more.
For businesses who can open, it is now clear that the impact of restrictions on them, particularly in the hospitality sector, is more significant than they had hoped.
So I am making two changes to the short time work scheme to make it easier for those businesses to keep staff on, rather than make them redundant.
First, under the original scheme, employees had to work for 33% of their normal hours.
Now, we will ask them to work only 20% of their hours.
Second, the employer contribution for the hours not worked will not be 33%, as originally planned, or even 20% as it is in the October furlough scheme – it will reduce to 5%.
And the scheme will apply to eligible businesses in all alert levels, so businesses that are not closed but face higher restrictions in places like Liverpool, Lancashire, South Yorkshire and Greater Manchester, as well as the devolved nations, will be able to access greater support.
These changes mean more employers can access the scheme and more jobs will be protected.
We have made this one of the most generous versions of a short time work scheme anywhere in the world.
It is better for businesses, better for jobs, and better for the economy.
Third, as we increase the contribution we’re making towards employees’ wages, I’m increasing our contribution to the incomes of the self-employed as well.
Today, we are doubling the next round of the self-employed income support from 20% to 40% of people’s incomes, increasing the maximum grant to £3,750.
So far, through this crisis, we have now provided over £13 billion of support to self-employed people.
Sole traders, small businesses and self-employed people are the dynamic entrepreneurial heart of our economy – and this government is on their side.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker,
A wage subsidy for closed businesses.
A wage subsidy for open businesses.
Cash grants of over £2,000 a month for Tier 2 businesses and up to £3,000 for closed businesses.
Support for local authorities.
Support for the self-employed.
Support for people’s jobs and incomes.
All on top of over £200 billion of support since March.
This is our plan: a plan for jobs, for businesses, for the regions, for the economy, for the country; a plan to support the British people.And I commend this statement to the House.
A starter payment should be made to people claiming Universal Credit (UC) for the first time to ensure that everyone has enough money for basics such as food and heating during the wait for their initial monthly payment, the Work and Pensions Committee says.
The Committee’s report on Universal Credit: the wait for a first payment finds that the current wait of at least five weeks causes difficulties for some households. While the existing system of Advance pay-ments for those in need can provide a valuable financial lifeline, the Committee is concerned that some people are unable to afford the required repayments.
The Committee warns that this leaves people with a difficult choice: five weeks with no income, or the risk of debt and hardship later.
The report concludes that the introduction of a new payment – equivalent to three weeks of the standard allowance – would be a simple way of ensuring that new claimants had the money they needed for basic living essentials. For people moving from existing benefits, DWP should make the move seamless wherever possible—and pay a starter payment in other cases.
Advances should still be available for people who need further support to get by, but they should be renamed ‘new claim loans’ to make clear that they will need to be repaid. The DWP should also recognise that a request for a loan is a clear indication that someone is struggling and offer support as early as possible.
Reflecting evidence from Sir Iain Duncan Smith, among others, the Committee has also called for changes to the way that historic tax credit is clawed back from people when they move to Universal Credit—and for DWP’s debt collection to follow best practice in the private sector.
In addition, the Committee calls on the Government to make permanent the £20 per week increase in the standard UC allowance announced in response to the coronavirus pandemic.
Rt Hon Stephen Timms, Chair of the Work and Pensions Committee, said: “There is a growing body of evidence that moving to Universal Credit leaves many reliant on food banks, falling seriously behind with their rent, and even experiencing increased levels of psychological distress.
“The Government’s response is that there is no proof that Universal Credit—and in particular the wait for a first payment—is the direct cause of those difficulties. So DWP needs to commission research, and quickly, to find out what lies behind these deeply worrying findings.
“Our social security system should not be leaving people without the money they need for food and heating.
“In the meantime, the Government must face up to the fact that its current system of Advance loans simply isn’t working. They leave people facing the toughest of choices: go without income for at least five weeks, or have repayments subtracted from their future UC payments—which are already barely enough to get by on.
“We cannot understand why people who are already claiming benefits need to wait for at least five weeks when they move to Universal Credit—especially when nothing in their lives has changed. Their move should be seamless.
“For people claiming benefits for the first time, or people who’ve faced a significant change in their circumstances, the Government should provide starter payments. Doing so would both cut down on the need for Advance loans and ensure that nobody is forced into debt just to be able to afford to eat and keep a roof over their heads.
“UC is a highly automated system. That has been a real strength over the last few months, with the huge influx of new claims caused by the coronavirus pandemic. But it can also be a major weakness, leaving people without the tailored support they need, and Ministers unable to make the changes they want to see.
“There is much the Government can do without completely dismantling the UC system: we hope that our proposals, taken together, offer practical solutions for making Universal Credit work for everyone who needs it.”
Key report findings and recommendations
Starter payments
All first-time claimants of UC should receive a starter payment equivalent to three weeks of the Standard Allowance.
The payment should be made two weeks after the initial claim and only once the claimant’s identity has been verified, to guard against fraud.
People claiming legacy benefits should be moved seamlessly to UC, but where they cannot be they should receive a starter payment instead.
The impact of the wait
The Committee received evidence from both organisations and individuals which suggested that a significant proportion of people face financial difficulties during the wait for a first UC payment.
Citizens Advice said that half the people it helps during the wait period are ‘unable to keep up with bills, rent or are forced to go without the essentials such as food and heating’.
The National Audit Office said that the wait for a first payment can exacerbate claimants’ debt and financial difficulties.
DWP must carry out research to develop its understanding of the possible impact of UC, particularly the wait for the first payment, on the use of food banks; on claimants’ levels of rent arrears; and on levels of psychological distress.
Advance payments
Even with starter payments, the Committee anticipates some people claiming will still need to ask for an Advance (a loan to tide them over during the wait).
The DWP risks misleading claimants, and damaging its own credibility, if it insists on denying the obvious fact that these Advances are interest free loans.
Advances should be renamed ‘new claim loans’ so it is clear that they need to be repaid.
The Department should offer support to anyone requesting a substantial Advance, as it would be a clear indication that someone is struggling with the transition to UC.
Tax credit debt
Repayments of tax credit overpayments can compound hardship for people who may already be struggling.
The Committee recommends that recovery of tax credit debt from people claiming UC should begin only when the claimant has repaid their Advance (if they have taken one out).
Repayments of remaining debts should be capped at 10% of UC standard allowance and written off entirely if they have not been pursued for more than six years.
Universal Support and Help to Claim
The DWP must invest in expanding and developing its Help to Claim service so it is closer to its original plans for Universal Support.
The service must go beyond assisting with an initial claim and should include debt advice, support for people struggling with repaying Advances and support for people with complex needs.
The Work Capability Assessment and support for disabled people
The Committee finds it troubling that, because of the time taken to complete a Work Capability Assessment, some disabled people and people with health conditions must wait much longer than five weeks to receive their full UC entitlement.
Four months, on average, is too long to wait and the DWP must work to speed up the process.
Coronavirus measures
In its report DWP’s response to the coronavirus outbreak, the Committee welcomed the decision to increase the standard allowance in UC and the basic element in Working Tax Credit by £20 per week.
The Government should now extend the increase past April 2021 and make the rise permanent.
The decision by the Pubs Code Adjudicator for England & Wales to fine Edinburgh-based Heineken UK’s pub arm, Star Pubs and Bars, £2 million for serious and repeated breaches of the Pubs Code should be a wake-up call for the Scottish Government.
That’s the message from CAMRA, the Campaign for Real Ale, which is calling on the Scottish Government and all parties in the Scottish Parliament to give their backing to the Tied Pubs (Scotland) Bill being put forward by Neil Bibby MSP.
Licensees in Scotland are currently exempt from regulations that are in place across the rest of Great Britain which stop large pub companies from taking more than is fair or sustainable from pub profits by forcing licensees to buy their beer from them rather than on the open market.
It means whilst Heineken’s pubs arm Star Pubs and Bars were found to be making pub tenants sell “unreasonable levels” of the company’s beer and cider brands, the Pubs Code Adjudicator can only stand up for publicans and fine pub companies for unfair practices south of the border because no legislation exists in Scotland.
The proposed Scottish Tied Pubs legislation is due to be debated and voted on by MSPs next month and would give tied pub tenants protections in law from unfair practices from pub-owning businesses.
Commenting, CAMRA Chief Executive Tom Stainer said: “This announcement from the Pubs Code Adjudicator is a good and deserved outcome for Star’s tied pub tenants – but disappointingly only for those in England and Wales.
“It isn’t fair that Star’s tenants in Scotland don’t have the same protections in law from any unfair practices like pub companies taking more than is fair or sustainable from tied licensees’ profits – or making it harder to sell a range of locally-brewed products.
“The fact that the Adjudicator for England and Wales has felt the need to use their financial penalty powers clearly shows that pub companies need to be regulated, in law. We are appealing to MSPs from all parties to support Neil Bibby’s Pubs Code Bill, which calls for a powerful pubs code to govern the relationship between pub companies and their tenants to ensure licensees are treated fairly.
“The pub sector as we know it is currently under threat due to the ongoing Coronavirus crisis. Pub companies operating across Scotland need to be supporting their tied tenants through this, treating them fairly and making sure they can earn a decent living. One way the Scottish Parliament can help is by voting in favour of the Tied Pubs Bill next month.”
Holyrood’s Local Government and Communities Committee is seeking views on a new Bill which aims to increase private tenants’ protection by limiting rent increases and allowing them to seek a “fair” rent.
The Fair Rents (Scotland) Bill, a Member’s Bill from Pauline McNeill MSP, would prevent a landlord of a private residential tenancy from increasing rent in any year by more than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus 1%.
The Bill seeks to provide greater protections for private tenants by allowing them to apply at any time to a Rent Officer for a ‘fair open market rent’ to be set for a property. In deciding the application, the Officer would take into account matters like whether the property has poor energy efficiency or is in a bad condition.
The Bill would also make private landlords enter more detailed information about their property in the Scottish Landlord Register, including the monthly rent charged.
Local Government and Communities Committee Convener James Dornan MSP said: “The proportion of households in private rented housing now stands at just under 15%.
“As the private rented sector in Scotland has grown over the last couple of decades there have been various reforms to tighten the regulation of landlords and give tenants more rights. But the stated ambition behind this Bill is to change the balance of power further. It would cap rent increases to 1% plus CPI and to allow tenants more scope to challenge rents.
“We are keen to hear views about whether this further change is necessary and whether the provisions in the Bill are workable and will have the intended impact.
“We also want to find out what the financial impact of this Bill would be upon private tenants, landlords, the wider rented sector and others, and we welcome the opportunity to hear views on this proposed legislation.”
The cap on rent rises imposed by the Bill and the right to seek a “fair open market rent” apply to holders of ‘Private Residential Tenancies’ which have been the standard type of tenancy since 2017. The Bill will not impact rent-a-room agreements where the lodger rents in the owner’s home.
