MSPs alarm over welfare costs as bill to soar to £9 billion
"The committee supports the areas set out in your draft work programme and agrees that the sustainability of public services in their current models are now in doubt and that fundamental change is required. We also share your concerns around the persistent inequalities in areas such as health and poverty," said Mr Leonard.
'We agree with your assessment that 'social security spending is increasingly outstripping Barnett consequentials in Scotland' and that this is a risk to the Scottish Government's financial position.'
READ MORE:
Mr Leonard's letter to Mr Boyle on Monday comes as the fiscal watchdog the Scottish Fiscal Commission forecast that social security spending in Scotland is projected to increase significantly, from £6.8bn in 2025/26 to £9.4bn in 2030/31.
In its report last November, Audit Scotland warned public services were at risk as a result of the Scottish Government's failure to implement meaningful reforms while making a series of multi-billion pound spending commitments.
The spending watchdog accused the administration of not knowing how it will pay for above inflation public sector pay deals or rising welfare costs.
It added that the Scottish Government had set out plans to balance the books in 2024/25 with a one-off raid of up to £460 million on a clean energy fund, but "does not know how this higher spending will be funded in the future".
Meanwhile, spending on welfare has ballooned, owing to policies such as Nicola Sturgeon's Scottish Child Payment which cost £467m in the current financial year.
Mr Boyle told the public audit committee on April 30: "The current context for the Scottish Government and public services in Scotland remains challenging.
"Rising demands together with a constrained financial outlook pose risks to the sustainability of public services in their current form. A clear vision and strong leadership are required to drive the reforms that are needed to ensure the sustainability of services into the future."
He added: "The scale and pace of the public sector reform that is required to support future sustainability have not yet been delivered."
In its latest five-year outlook, published in May, the Scottish Fiscal Commission (SFC) said that while overall funding for the Scottish budget is forecast to grow, much of the increase will be absorbed by the rising cost of devolved welfare benefits, public sector pay settlements, and new policy commitments, such as the permanent scrapping of peak-time rail fares.
The Commission noted that Scotland is forecast to spend £1.3bn more on devolved social security than it receives in UK funding in 2025-26, with that gap widening to around £2.2bn by the end of the forecast period.
A key factor is the Scottish Government's decision to mitigate the two-child limit in Universal Credit, a policy expected to cost £156m in 2026-27 and rise to £199m by 2029-30.
The MSPs' concerns over the rising costs of welfare in Scotland comes after a climbdown by the UK Government on Monday to reform the welfare system.
In a late concession on Tuesday evening, ministers shelved plans to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), with any changes now only coming after a review of the benefit.
The changes, which were made to meet demands from Labour backbenchers, has left Chancellor Rachel Reeves with a £4.5bn gap to fill with tax rises or cuts elsewhere, after the retreat means the package of welfare reforms may end up increasing spending.
Meanwhile, the outlook for the Scottish and UK economies has weakened, with growth now expected to remain sluggish through the rest of 2025, according to the Fraser of Allander Institute at the University of Strathclyde.
The analysis said economic growth is now slowing compared to the start of the year and inflation has also edged up to 3.4%, after staying below 3% throughout 2024.
It added that the business environment is showing signs of strain, with companies reporting cutting back on activities in the first quarter compared to last year, hit by rises in national insurance contributions, which took effect in April, alongside uncertainty surrounding US President Donal Trump's trade tariffs.
Dr Joao Sousa, Deputy Director of the Fraser of Allander Institute, said: 'The fiscal announcements by both governments suggest that there are significant economic challenges in the years and months to come for the UK and Scottish governments.
'Particularly from 2027-28 onwards, the choices of government look to become more difficult. Of course, this is the role of the government in power: but the difficulties of the UK government this week show that events can quickly derail its plans.'
Speaking to journalists in Edinburgh on Wednesday the First Minister vowed he would not replicate the Pip changes in adult disability payment, which is the equivalent benefit north of the border.
John Swinney said: "We will not make the changes or to make the cuts that the UK Government was proposing, we've made that crystal clear."
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: 'Social Security is a vital safety net for families across Scotland and any one of us could need to depend on it at any time.
"Our compassionate approach is based on the values of dignity and respect, and seeks to ensure as many people as possible get the help they are entitled to.
'This approach allows for support that is not available anywhere else in the UK, including the Scottish Child Payment which is keeping 40,000 children out of relative poverty this year. As of 31 March 2025, 326,225 children aged 15 and under were actively benefiting from Scottish Child Payment."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
an hour ago
- Scottish Sun
DWP confirms Winter Fuel Payment dates and exact amount pensioners can get
Eligible households will receive letters telling them how much they will get later this year TO YOUR BENEFIT DWP confirms Winter Fuel Payment dates and exact amount pensioners can get Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) THE DWP has confirmed key dates for the Winter Fuel Payment including the exact amounts pensioners can get. The website has been updated with eligibility criteria and how much people will receive based on their circumstances. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 1 Millions of pensioners will get a Winter Fuel Payment this financial year Credit: Getty The up to £300 payment was axed for millions of pensioners last winter and only those on certain benefits qualified. But this winter it will be paid to individuals with a taxable income over £35,000 following pubic outcry. The U-turn means nine million pensioners will get a Winter Fuel Payment this year. But there is still eligibility criteria to meet including your age and where you live. Who is eligible? You can get a Winter Fuel Payment if you were born before September 22, 1959, and live in England and Wales. The amount you will receive is based on when you were born and your circumstances between September 15 and September 21 this year. This is known as the "qualifying week". If you live alone or no one you live with is eligible for the Winter Fuel Payment you will get either: £200, if you were born between 22 September 1945 and 21 September 1959 £300, if you were born before 22 September 1945 If you live with someone else who's eligible for the Winter Fuel Payment and are not on benefits you will get a payment of: Keir Starmer confirms huge winter fuel payment U-turn £100, if you and the person you live with were both born between 22 September 1945 and 21 September 1959 £100, if you were born between 22 September 1945 and 21 September 1959 but the person you live with was born before 22 September 1945 £200, if you were born before 22 September 1945 but the person you live with was born between 22 September 1945 and 21 September 1959 £150, if you and the person you live with were born before 22 September 1945 If you and your partner jointly claim one of the following benefits, you will receive a different amount: Pension Credit, Universal Credit, income-based Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA), income-related Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) and Income Support. If you are on one of these benefits, one of you will get a payment of either: £200 if both of you were born between 22 September 1945 and 21 September 1959 £300 if one or both of you were born before 22 September 1945 The payment will be made into the bank account your benefits are usually paid into. If you get any of the same above benefits, but not as part of a joint claim, you'll get a payment of either: £200 if you were born between 22 September 1945 and 21 September 1959 £300 if you were born before 22 September 1945 However, in all the above cases, if your taxable income is more than £35,000, your Winter Fuel Payment will be taken back either through PAYE or through Self Assessment. If you are living in a care home will get either: £100, if you were born between 22 September 1945 and 21 September 1959 £150, if you were born before 22 September 1945 Do I need to claim? Most people eligible for a Winter Fuel Payment don't need to claim it and will receive it automatically. You do not need to claim if you get any of the following benefits: State Pension Pension Credit Universal Credit Attendance Allowance Personal Independence Payment (PIP) Carer's Allowance Disability Living Allowance (DLA) Income Support income-related Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) income-based Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) awards from the War Pensions Scheme Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit Incapacity Benefit Industrial Death Benefit If you do not get any of these, you need to claim if either of the following apply: you've not got the Winter Fuel Payment before you've deferred your State Pension since your last Winter Fuel Payment You can claim the payment by post from September 15, or by phone from October 13. The ultimate deadline to claim for this winter is March 31, 2026. More details on how to claim can be found via Most Winter Fuel Payments are made in November or December. If you are eligible, you should receive a letter in October or November telling you how much you're in line to get. If you don't receive one by January 28, 2026, contact the Winter Fuel Payment Centre on 0800 731 0160. Are you missing out on benefits? YOU can use a benefits calculator to help check that you are not missing out on money you are entitled to Charity Turn2Us' benefits calculator works out what you could get. Entitledto's free calculator determines whether you qualify for various benefits, tax credit and Universal Credit. and charity StepChange both have benefits tools powered by Entitledto's data. You can use Policy in Practice's calculator to determine which benefits you could receive and how much cash you'll have left over each month after paying for housing costs. Your exact entitlement will only be clear when you make a claim, but calculators can indicate what you might be eligible for. Do you have a money problem that needs sorting? Get in touch by emailing money-sm@ Plus, you can join our Sun Money Chats and Tips Facebook group to share your tips and stories
Daily Record
an hour ago
- Daily Record
Councillor call for wider debate on Stirling school mobile phone policies
The current situation allows for individual schools across the region to prepare their own policies on mobile phone usage in classrooms. Mobile phone use in schools could be debated by councillors. Individual schools across the area have their own approach to pupils' phones in their buildings and classrooms. But a rural Stirling councillor has asked when the topic could be brought before elected members for wider discussion. Last year the Scottish Government published guidance that enabled headteachers to limit or ban the use of mobile phones at their schools. But at a recent full meeting of Stirling Council, Forth and Endrick ward Conservative councillor Paul Henke asked just what such bans or limitations existing at each of the area's secondary schools. Children and young people committee convener, Labour councillor Danny Gibson, said: 'The Scottish Government published Mobiles Phones-Guidance for Schools (August 2024). 'The vision of the paper is 'to enable all schools and local authorities to develop an ethos of citizenship that leads to respectful and responsible use of mobile technology. This will encourage schools to positively embrance mobile technology to enhance learning now and in the future, whilst helping them protect staff, children and young people from the possible disruptive and harmful consequences of misuse'. 'All of Stirling Council secondary schools have reviewed their mobile phone policies in line with the national guidance. 'Each school has established a clear and consistent policy on acceptable use of mobile phones, developed in consultation with parents, carers, pupils and staff. 'While each school has tailored their policy to suit the individual context, there are several common themes across all schools.' The themes include: classroom expectations - pupils must deposit their phones in secure storage boxes upon entering the classroom or keep them on silent and stored in their school bags during lessons; use during the school day - mobile devices, including headphones earphones, must not be used during the school day, except before school starts, at break time, and at lunchtime; and responsible use - all mobile devices must be used responsibily and in accordance with the school's policy. Cllr Henke thanked the convener for the response, but further asked him to advise when a council policy covering this could be brought forward to committee for debate. Cllr Gibson said: 'I'll check with officers what the intention is in that regard and I'll advise the councillors directly.'
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Sometimes what communities really need from councils is bravery
Schools across Scotland have shut their doors for the summer, but not all will reopen for the autumn term. If you have followed any of The Herald's education coverage in recent months, you have read stories about council strategies for mothballing schools and nurseries and the Scottish Government guidance which sets the rules for this process. Mothballing refers to the temporary closure of a school (or nursery), and local authorities are required to review this decision at least once a year. Mothballing is intended to provide schools with a lifeline. Instead, it is often used as a way for councils to prolong the inevitable. As a result, painful decisions become more painful and drag on for years. The vast majority of mothballed schools never reopen, to the point that campaigners have come to describe mothballing as 'closure by stealth'. Read more: It is not difficult to see why this is the case. Technically, local authorities are only allowed to mothball a school when the roll has fallen to zero, or very close to zero, according to guidance for the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010. At first glance, a recent decision regarding Fountainhall Primary School in the Scottish Borders Council appears to be a textbook case for mothballing. On closer inspection, however, it proves to be a better example of a council trying to soften the blow — and likely deflect some heat — by kicking the can down the road on a likely closure. Between 2020 and 2024, Fountainhall's roll fell from 24 to five pupils, with a total capacity of 50. There was only one child enrolled for the start of the 2025-2026 academic year. Fountainhall fits some of the criteria established in the mothballing guidance: it is only for schools with a 'very low' roll where education for the pupils is 'not presently viable.' However, there is another important criterion that the Scottish Government guidance outlines. Local authorities should only mothball schools when the roll is low and there is good reason to believe that the low roll is only temporary. According to the guidance, the 'and' is crucial and it is clear about why. Even though permanent closure is more final than mothballing, it triggers a statutory consultation process that involves extensive community engagement, culminating in approval from the Scottish Government. This consultation process places additional requirements on local authorities and, in theory, provides more protections for parents and community members to have their voices heard. An important side note: councils love to use the word 'consultation,' but they do not usually mean this type of statutory consultation. What they usually mean is engagement, not the legal definition of consultation found in the 2010 Act. I like to think of it as the difference between a consultation and a Consultation. The mothballing process requires consultation, not Consultation, and councils have much more freedom to decide what that looks like. This game of semantics frustrates parents and rural campaigners, because the guidance explicitly states that mothballing should not be a way to deprive communities of their legal right to a Consultation about the potential closure of their school. However, because mothballing often leads to closure, parents feel that the ultimate Consultation isn't an accurate reflection of the situation. If a school has been 'temporarily closed' for one, two, three years, is it any surprise that few parents asked about enrolling their children or considered moving to the area? This means that when the legal Consultation on closure finally rolls around, the picture is skewed. Interest has fallen off. Parents who had battled the original mothballing have since been forced to move on. Their children attend schools in other communities, and a fight for another transition is different from a fight to keep children in place. All of this is why guidance states that if a council wants to mothball a school, it must be more likely than not that the school will be viable in the long term. Otherwise, the council should initiate the more formal process of permanent closure. And yet, during the recent debate at Scottish Borders Council (SBC) over whether to mothball Fountainhall, the language made it clear that the assumption was that the school would not become viable in the future. The council papers were explicit: 'The Fountainhall school roll is projected to be 1 from August, which is an out of catchment placement. 'Based on this, and considering future planning and migration, Officers project that the number of children will not significantly increase in the coming years within the Fountainhall catchment area.' If the school is being mothballed due to low enrollment, and the council has no expectation that the enrollment will increase, then the question should be about closure, not mothballing. In their objections to the mothballing decision, a group of parents seized on this. In a letter to councillors on the eve of the vote, they called for a statutory consultation on closure to begin "without delay". "Fountainhall deserves proper consultation and legal safeguards – not administrative shortcuts that carry permanent consequences." On the surface, this sounds counterproductive for a group that is fighting to save their school. However, what the parents recognised is that the permanent closure process should provide them with more protections and impose greater oversight on the council's ultimate decision. If nothing else, it offers parents a sense that the democratic process is being followed. As many have told me, an unwanted decision is easier to swallow if there is trust that decision-makers were brave enough to take the hard way out. Instead, another community is looking at unknown years of uncertainty, likely followed by a painful trek towards an even more painful conclusion.
