ONE of the most frequent arguments heard in 2014 in favour of Scotland becoming an independent country was that it would give us an opportunity to operate our own social security policy, setting a different political course from Westminster.
In the face of the UK Government’s full-scale assault on the welfare state, many people saw the need for a radical change and saw independence as the means.
Yes campaigners are all too aware that Scotland is not independent yet, but we still have some meaningful opportunities to do things differently, albeit with limited devolved powers coming our way from the Smith Commission’s recommendations.
In the near future we’ll see one clear situation where the Scottish Government must act and where business as usual will not do. Today the Scottish Greens published a report showing that 80,000 benefits sanctions have been issued to people on employment programmes in Scotland since 2010, and that 13,000 people a year might soon face sanctions under benefits devolved to Scotland.
Our report also makes the case that when employment programmes are devolved in April next year the Scottish Government should insist on contracts that prevent sanctions being implemented.
Sanctions simply don’t work. They do not help people into long-term employment and they clearly contribute to worsening physical and mental health. Scotland has an opportunity to take a different and positive approach.
For the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to implement a sanction, it needs information from the provider of the employment programme. The Scottish Government could insist that programme providers do not pass information on. This already happens in a smaller way with young people involved in the Sector-Based Work Academy, so there’s no reason we can’t apply this approach more widely.
There is a wealth of evidence to show that benefit sanctions have increased hardship, fuelled the need for food banks and worsened sanctioned claimants’ health, and all this while having a minimal impact on helping claimants return to work.
While the sanctions regime itself will remain a reserved matter, devolution of responsibility for employment programmes means that the Scottish Parliament can significantly reduce the level of sanctioning in Scotland and ensure that no employment programme run by the Scottish Government is associated with sanctions.
The UK Government remains either unable to see, or worse still blithely untroubled by, the negative impact their policies are having on debt, health and wellbeing. It’s critical that we don’t copy their attitude, or their policies. The Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government must take seriously our responsibilities when these powers are devolved, and we must ensure that reducing the human suffering of the people involved is our highest priority.
This semi-devolved system will be far from perfect, and our hands will still be tied on many issues. But we must listen and respond to the lived experience of people who face the threat of sanctions; people who are struggling to meet household expenses such as housing costs and utility bills. One survey of 500 Employment and Support Allowance claimants being supported on the Work Programme showed that 61 per cent said participation had worsened their health condition and that participants with mental health conditions are the most likely to report a negative impact on their health. We also know rises in benefit sanctions drive up reliance on food banks, and that as many as 30 per cent of food bank users have had their benefits sanctioned.
There is strong evidence suggesting that forcing benefit recipients onto employment programmes under threat of sanction does not achieve positive, long-term outcomes in terms of helping unemployed people into sustained employment. Moreover, mandatory participation appears to be particularly ineffectual for benefit recipients with multiple and complex barriers to work, and it is these recipients who will make up the bulk of referrals to Scottish employment programmes.
It’s for this reason that the Scottish Greens are recommending that when Scottish employment programmes start to operate in April, these should be voluntary as far as possible. While the new Scotland Act does not devolve the sanctions system, its operation relies heavily on employment programme providers reporting behaviour that could draw sanctions to the DWP so that it can apply them.
The Scottish Government must therefore oblige Scottish programme providers not to share such information with the DWP. This would insulate tens of thousands of non-employed Scots from sanctions every year. With the average benefit sanction for Jobseeker’s Allowance recipients being about £530 and an average of 13,000 Scottish benefit recipients being sanctioned as part of employment programmes every year, such a move could put nearly £7 million back in the hands of some of the poorest citizens in Scotland.
If we get this right, as a parliament and a nation, we can give a practical demonstration of how fairness, and ultimately full control of our own affairs, is worth fighting for.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here