Shirley-Anne Somerville
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“Laura Moodie: Does the cabinet secretary recognise the distress that is being caused to constituents, including a disabled veteran in my region, by the continued uncertainty around the scheme?”
“The Scottish Government has been working closely with Motability since March, and its notification of changes from 1 July in England, Wales and Northern Ireland—the 1 July commencement—is not set to apply in Scotland.”
“The Scottish Government is committed to working with East Lothian Council and private partners to unlock investment and growth at the strategic site at Blindwells, and we are providing £2.4 million of funding flexibility to support the development of the outline business case.”
“What reassurances can investors be given that the Scottish Government will work with them to deliver the project? Shirley-Anne Somerville: As I mentioned in my original answer, my ministerial colleagues and I recognise the strategic importance of Blindwells not just to housing but to the East Lothian economy.”
“Motability will continue to work with the Scottish Government to see what can be done, because it also recognises the distress and inconvenience that the situation is causing.”
“She said that she did not want to call out only Reform. Will she call out Alex Cole-Hamilton for mentioning the Third Reich or Daniel Johnson for making insinuations about fascism?”
The complete record
Every one of 503 lines we hold for Shirley-Anne Somerville, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 11.
“It happens because of women’s unequal position in society and it exacerbates that inequality by limiting the freedom, choices and opportunities of women and girls. Exposure to online content harms boys, too. At an age when boys are questioning their identity and searching for belonging, online spaces increasingly provide a warped framework for an understanding of gender roles and societal norms. Misogyny is potentially now being written into our future. AI and emerging technologies are not neutral. Unless they are specifically designed with care and with women and girls in mind, they replicate existing biases, particularly sexism and racism.”
“Research indicates a proliferation of harm towards girls online. A recent survey by Girlguiding reported that 77 per cent of girls and young women aged seven to 21 have experienced online harm in the past year. For those reasons, this Government acknowledges the importance of the UN Women theme “UNiTE to end digital violence against all women and girls”. Online abuse has wide-reaching impacts. Beyond the direct harassment, it limits women’s and girls’ ability to take part in online spaces, to learn, to voice opinions, to socialise and even to do their jobs. As our equally safe strategy outlines, technology-facilitated violence against women and girls is both a cause and a consequence of gender inequality.”
“As I open our annual debate marking the 16 days of campaigning against gender-based violence, I reflect once again on the continued importance of this debate and of the part that it plays in the parliamentary calendar. As 2025 draws to a close, violence, abuse and misogyny remain a grim everyday reality for women and girls in Scotland and, although real strides have been made to ensure that women and girls can be equally safe, we have much more to do. That is in part because violence against women and girls evolves. The tools that perpetrators have to draw on evolve, and the rapid evolution of technology has created new tools for abuse. Home security systems, wearable devices and artificial intelligence-generated deepfake images are increasingly enabling the mass creation and sharing of exploitative content.”
“It allows a degree of concern to be built up, both by local providers and communities, because they do not know whether there will be an impact on their services. The gap in information allows misinformation, as well as genuine concerns, to develop. That is why I am very keen that the Home Office comes forward with robust and quick answers to questions about the impacts on local services, with reassurances that services will be provided on site. If they are not, bodies such as local authorities and health boards should be compensated financially for the impact in order to reassure people that we can welcome people to this country and that there will not be a negative impact on local services when we do so.”
“Craig Hoy: Does the cabinet secretary agree that communities have legitimate concerns about the use of asylum hotels, such as the Mercure hotel in Dumfries, particularly when large groups of young men congregate in the town? In her letter to the home secretary, the cabinet secretary made specific reference to “negative impacts”. Is she prepared to put on record what she believes the negative impacts on communities are when asylum seekers are housed in that way? Shirley-Anne Somerville: I remain concerned about the impact of Home Office decisions on local services in particular. That is a continuing difficulty with the Home Office, as the co- ordination between it and local services, including national health service boards, is far from adequate.”
“The Scottish Government has consistently raised concerns about alternative asylum accommodation, including hotels and large-scale sites. Instead, people who are seeking asylum should be provided with safe and appropriate accommodation within communities while they are waiting for an asylum decision. That will allow them to access essential support and services while integrating into a local area. Large sites simply cannot provide that. The Home Office must properly engage with local authorities and communities when considering new sites and ensure that they are part of any planning for the introduction of new asylum accommodation, given that it has responsibility for asylum accommodation.”
“We are carrying out a public awareness campaign, sharing guidance through multiple media channels and partner organisations, warning about common scam tactics and advising people never to share bank details or personal information with unsolicited callers. We have alerted newspapers to scam texts and have co-ordinated with the BBC to deliver television and radio campaigns to raise awareness. We have also liaised with Police Scotland, which has circulated warnings about potential scams. We will continue to work with Police Scotland and use further opportunities in the press in the coming months to maintain awareness about this important issue. Common Housing Register (Glasgow) 6.”
“Bill Kidd: With UK energy bills already £340 higher due to the recent inept bumblings, we should not forget that one of the first acts of the Labour Government at Westminster was to slash winter heating support for pensioners. The Scottish National Party stepped in to ensure that pensioners in Scotland would not lose out this winter. I understand that most pensioners will receive the winter heating payment automatically, but what advice can the cabinet secretary give to those who are worried about reported scams targeting vulnerable people? Shirley-Anne Somerville: We very much recognise that scams targeting older people in Scotland are a serious concern. I have discussed that with stakeholders and with my officials. To reassure pensioners and reduce risk, we are taking a number of proactive steps with Social Security Scotland.”
“We are putting money into the pockets of Scotland’s pensioners this winter through our pension-age winter heating payment. We are investing about £157 million to help about 880,000 pensioners to keep warm during the coldest months. Payments have commenced and will continue through the winter. Unlike in the rest of the United Kingdom, eligible low-income households across Scotland, including pensioners, are guaranteed support through our winter heating payment. However, energy prices remain reserved, which is why we have repeatedly called on the UK Government to introduce targeted bill discounts that could take up to £1,300 off estimated fuel bills for some eligible households.”
“In the meantime, as Fulton MacGregor will be aware, the Government is also concerned about the hardship that older people are facing. That is why, through our work on the pressure on households, we have allocated almost £3 billion over the past two years to support policies that tackle poverty and protect people as much as possible during the cost of living crisis—something that is made more difficult by the current UK Government’s intransigence on helping the WASPI women. Right to Independent Living (Disabled and Autistic People) 3.”
“Given the levels of pensioner poverty in communities such as Coatbridge, what steps is the Scottish Government taking to protect the affected women from further financial hardship? Does the cabinet secretary agree that the Labour UK Government must fulfil the promise that it made before the election and deliver justice for all WASPI women now? Shirley-Anne Somerville: I agree that the UK Government must deliver justice for the WASPI women. That is what Labour promised in opposition, and it must deliver now that it is in government. Not to do so would be a further betrayal of WASPI women, but then, the UK Government has already shown that it can take such a decision. I am very concerned about how long the secretary of state’s review will take.”
“I wrote to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on the day after he announced his review of the UK Government’s decision not to pay compensation to the WASPI women. I asked for his earliest clarification on exactly when UK Government ministers were first made aware of the new evidence that he has cited, and I urged him to complete the review at pace. I reiterated once again that the Scottish Government has always supported the WASPI campaign and that compensation must be delivered now to right this historic wrong. Fulton MacGregor: For too long, women in Coatbridge and Chryston and across Scotland have lived with the consequences of unfair state pension changes, and too many have died before seeing justice done. What action is the Scottish Government taking with the UK Government to demand redress?”
“For example, steps could be taken in the early years to ensure that people receive the pension credit that they are entitled to, and those steps could include issuing invitations to apply for pension credit to everyone who is approaching state pension age, which would be a proactive role to increase the take-up of benefits by those who are eligible. Housing (Fife Council) 5.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: Although the responsibility for pension credit ultimately lies with the UK Government and the Department for Work and Pensions, we will continue to explore the opportunities to raise the awareness of people in Scotland of that payment—once again, we are doing the UK Government’s job for it. The Scottish Government is delivering a benefit take-up strategy, and I hope that the DWP could have a similar strategy, to include pension credit. As Mr Doris has highlighted, our paper “A Fresh Start with Independence” demonstrated how the social security system could be improved.”
“Bob Doris: I am glad that the cabinet secretary mentioned pension credit, which is key to supporting low-income households, including those with pensioners, but which often goes unclaimed, as she indicated. Benefit criteria are also too restrictive at times. What can the Scottish Government do to assist with the take-up of pension credit, although it is a reserved benefit? Will the cabinet secretary say how the commitments on pension credit that are included in the Scottish Government paper “A Fresh Start with Independence” could ensure that pensioners get the support that they need?”
“We are delivering real support to pensioners across Scotland by investing about £157 million to help approximately 880,000 pensioners stay warm during the coldest months. Unlike in the rest of the United Kingdom, eligible low-income households across Scotland, including pensioner households, are also guaranteed support through our winter heating payment. We have issued more than £33 million since launching the pension-age disability payment to help to mitigate the additional costs that are incurred by older disabled people and by those with long-term health conditions. Meanwhile, take- up rates for pension credit remain low, and I urge the UK Government to do more to promote that reserved benefit.”
“We stand with the United Nations, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Save the Children UK and the Child Poverty Action Group, all of which are making that call to ensure that the UK Government hears loud and clear that the two-child limit should be scrapped immediately. It must be remembered that, although we can mitigate, we cannot scrap the cap here and that, under Labour, the rape clause will continue to exist. Glasgow Housing Supply 3.”
“The Child Poverty Action Group estimates that 30,000 children have been pushed into poverty because of the UK Government’s continuation of that approach. Put simply, it is Labour’s policy that those children should never have been born. Will the cabinet secretary continue to make representations to the UK Government in advance of the budget and call for it to find some compassion and end that policy, which is harming children and hindering their long-term opportunities and life chances? Shirley-Anne Somerville: Indeed. It should not be for the Scottish Government to have to, once more, mitigate the worst excesses of Westminster austerity—which is what we are seeing again under the Labour Government. The Scottish Government is not alone in asking the UK Government to end the two-child cap.”
“The latest data from the Department for Work and Pensions, in May 2025, suggests that about 1,500 children in Clydebank and Milngavie live in households that are affected by the two-child cap. The Scottish Government’s national mission is to eradicate child poverty, but the two-child cap has been a key driver of poverty among children and their families in Scotland. That is why, subject to parliamentary approval, applications for our two- child limit payment will be taken from March 2026. Our payment will help to keep thousands of children out of poverty and reduce the depths of poverty faced by many more. Marie McNair: It is appalling that so many children in my constituency have been scarred by that brutal policy, so it is no wonder that our plans to mitigate it have been welcomed by so many.”
“As the Auditor General has pointed out, that is because we have a system that supports people to apply for what they are eligible for and that provides for people who were too timid to come forward to the Department for Work and Pensions because they feared the DWP system. If Mr Kerr thinks that we should not spend that money on disabled people, it is up to him to explain that to voters. However, this Government will continue to support Scotland’s disabled people.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: Not for the first time, Stephen Kerr fails to grasp the basic foundations of the social security system. Adult disability payments are provided to support people with the additional costs of having a disability or a long- term condition. A person’s being in receipt of adult disability payments is not reliant on their being in or out of work. Indeed, adult disability payments support people by enabling them to afford to have transport to or support for their employment—that is what disabled people’s organisations have told me. Stephen Kerr referred to an overspend on adult disability payment.”
“Stephen Kerr: The inherent uncertainties are down to the Government’s whole approach, which was highlighted last week by the Auditor General for Scotland, when he warned that the Scottish National Party Government is papering over the cracks with one-off savings and underspends and is taking a short-term approach that is not supporting fiscal sustainability. Audit Scotland has reported that, by 2029-30, there will be a £4.7 billion funding gap, £2 billion of which will come from rising welfare costs, and that the Government does not even have a clear plan to manage the £770 million overspend on adult disability payment. Scotland cannot afford that benefits bill. Does the cabinet secretary agree with the Scottish Conservatives that the only sustainable route out of poverty is work, not ever- higher welfare spending?”
“Social security spending is an investment in the people of Scotland, as it provides vital support to disabled people, unpaid carers and children and families in poverty. The current forecast for social security expenditure in 2030-31 is £9.3 billion. That is about £2 billion more than the funding that we will receive from the United Kingdom Government through the social security block grant adjustment. The additional investment is less than 3.5 per cent of the overall Scottish Government resource budget. In April 2025, the Scottish Fiscal Commission published its “Fiscal Sustainability Report”, in which it set out long-term projections for devolved public spending through to 2074–75. By the very nature of those projections, which extend over almost 50 years, there are inherent uncertainties.”
“I would like us to have that at the forefront of our minds when it comes to how we can support asylum seekers and deliver local services. However, I can do that only if the UK Government works with the Scottish Government and local government. Edward Mountain: It sounds as though the cabinet secretary has been in negotiation with the UK Government for some time. [Interruption.]”
“I say at the outset that Scotland welcomes refugees and asylum seekers, and it is important that we have our moral and international responsibilities at the forefront of our minds as we look to do that. That is exactly why such decisions should be taken collaboratively between the UK Government, the Scottish Government, local authorities and local service providers. Given the way in which the decision was announced, I can understand why there are concerns about the provision of health services and about other local services. That is exactly why I have written to the Home Secretary to ask specifically for reassurance that full wraparound services will be provided in such a way that there is capacity on site to deal with the health or other requirements of those who may be moving.”
“What assurances can the cabinet secretary give me that people in the Highlands will continue to get some level of health cover, with the extra 300 people who will be moving into Cameron barracks? Shirley-Anne Somerville: I am happy to give Edward Mountain further detail on the timeline in writing, because it is important that we deal with the issues that his constituents have raised. I say again that, when we had word that the move was being considered, I raised concerns in a letter to the Home Secretary, and those concerns have not been answered. If that is what the UK Government considers to be a collaborative piece of working, we will have to agree to disagree on that point. I hope that I will meet the relevant UK minister in due course, because I have written to the Home Secretary again today to raise a number of concerns.”
“Edward Mountain: I am a bit confused because, when Alex Norris stood up in the House of Commons at 2 o’clock today to answer an urgent question, he said: “My officials have been engaging directly and regularly in advance of this announcement with the Scottish Government, the relevant councils and local service providers, and will continue to do so.” That does not quite chime with what the cabinet secretary said. My constituents are rightly concerned about their safety—not on the streets but in relation to their health. There are simply not enough resources in the Highlands. Inverness general practices are creaking at the seams, Raigmore is unable to keep up with appointments, and there are not enough dentists to go round.”
“I was deeply disappointed to learn about the Home Office’s plans to accommodate people seeking asylum in Cameron barracks in Inverness from the media yesterday, rather than through, at the very least, a formal notification—or, as should have been the case, as part of a collaborative discussion before any decision had been made. On hearing that Scottish Government officials had been notified that the Home Office was considering Cameron barracks, I wrote to the Home Secretary in September to seek an urgent meeting. I have been clear with the Home Office that the plans must fully consider the impact on the local community and the appropriateness of the site to accommodate that group of people. I understand that a meeting is in the process of being scheduled.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I could not connect to the app, but I would have voted no. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms Somerville. Your vote will be recorded.”
“I move, That the Parliament agrees that the relevant provisions of the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill, introduced in the House of Commons on 22 January 2025, and subsequently amended, relating to clauses 78, 90, 98 and 99, and schedule 4, so far as these matters fall within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, should be considered by the UK Parliament. The Presiding Officer: I call Bob Doris on behalf of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee. 17:04”
“As a result, it will be necessary to adjust the working arrangements between the Governments to ensure that those specific new powers do not apply to the recovery of devolved debt that was accrued while the DWP delivered benefits on our behalf under agency agreements. However, I want to be clear that that does not mean that the approximately £35 million of historic debt that is covered by those arrangements will not be recovered. Officials are now in discussions with the DWP to identify the debts, the arrangements for transfer and, therefore, the options for recovering the debt in line with the extensive powers and administrative arrangements that are already at Social Security Scotland’s disposal.”
“Social Security Scotland has a long-established zero-tolerance approach to fraud, which is outlined in its published counter-fraud strategies, and a wide range of investigative tools at its disposal, including intelligence sharing, fraud reporting channels and the use of surveillance where appropriate. All of that is rightly designed to protect the public purse. Therefore, I reassure members that, although it is still maturing, the fraud and error service clearly adds considerable value in protecting the public purse. Although we are content with many of the measures in the UK bill, the Scottish Government does not support the provisions that would allow the DWP to deduct money directly from a person’s bank account without a court order or to suspend a driving licence.”
“However, it cannot be done at the expense of our principles and ethos. A range of powers is already available to Social Security Scotland to recover overpayments that arise as a result of fraud and error. The agency’s published error control strategy sets out that it already uses routine quality checking, data analysis and claim reviews to detect error and routinely recovers debt. Social Security Scotland’s next set of annual accounts, which are due for publication in November, will set out that more than £9 million of overpayments were identified and corrected in the financial year 2024-25 as a result of fraud or error interventions, with almost £3 million of associated estimated future losses prevented.”
“There is precedent for that approach: immigration legislation allows immigration officers to seize evidence of non- immigration offences to ensure that it is not lost and can be passed to appropriate law enforcement authorities. Therefore, there is nothing in those provisions that conflicts with the principles that underpin the devolved social security system. The provisions on overpayment recovery do not appear in the motion because the UK Government amended the bill to ensure that devolved benefits, including those paid under agency agreements, will not be subject to the new recovery powers. However, I know that they will be of interest to members. I acknowledge that the UK Government has a duty to manage public finances responsibly. The Scottish ministers share that responsibility.”
“Furthermore, future devolved payments that could be administered by the secretary of state and might fall within the scope of those powers could themselves require primary legislation and, subsequently, Scottish parliamentary consent, which would ensure due parliamentary process before any introduction. In the bill as introduced, authorised Department for Work and Pensions staff would have been able to seize evidence relating to the commission of a DWP offence—that is, an offence that relates to a social security fraud. The provisions have been amended and will allow authorised DWP staff to preserve evidence found that relates to any crime should they encounter it when entering or searching premises.”
“First, in regard to non-benefit payments, the UK Government proposes to use recovery and enforcement powers under the Social Security Administration Act 1992 to recover payments that it makes beyond social security. For example, using that legislation, it might seek to recover grants that it pays out. I am content to recommend consent because, although the definition of “non-benefit payment” might be broad enough to encompass the recovery of devolved payments, the UK Government has confirmed in writing that it has no intention to recover such payments now or in the future, which renders any potential impacts on devolved matters theoretical only.”
“This is an opportunity to speak to the motion in my name on legislative consent in respect of the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill 2025. When I spoke to the previous consent motion in my name on the bill, I was clear that, although I support efforts to reduce fraud and error in public finances, that cannot be done at the expense of treating people with fairness, dignity and respect. Today’s motion relates to two areas in the bill for which I am happy to recommend legislative consent. I will also cover the overpayment provisions, for which I previously said that I would not recommend legislative consent and which the UK Government has subsequently amended to ensure that they do not apply to any devolved benefits, including those that are administered under agency agreement.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: I am sure that the member would also want to point out that the main responsibility for many of the employability schemes lies with the UK Government through the Department for Work and Pensions and its Jobcentre Plus centres, and it would be fair to say that the success of those has been mixed. The member talks about what is happening for those in a household with a disabled person. That is why, just a matter of weeks ago, I was delighted to announce that there will be further funding from the Scottish Government to ensure that particular support for those with a disability or a long-term condition is available right across the country. I hope that the member will welcome that. That is, once again, a case of the Scottish Government stepping in where the UK Government has, as yet, failed to deliver.”
“We are working with local authorities to reach younger children by maximising the take-up of the ELC offer for eligible two-year-olds. Martin Whitfield: I am grateful for that answer, but 41 per cent of families are still dipping into their savings. The cabinet secretary spoke about employability support, which is a crucial measure and is, of course, devolved to the SNP Government, although it has been repeatedly cut. What specific action is the Scottish Government taking to expand employability support for the nearly 40 per cent of households in which someone is disabled that are in poverty?”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: I recognise the fact that we have a lot of in-work poverty in the UK as a whole, and we recognise that one way to assist parents is to assist them into sustainable employment and to support them to increase their income once they get into a job. That is why we have parental employability support, which has been broadened to include parents in low-income employment and is enabling more parents to access person-centred employability support. When it comes to childcare, members in the chamber will be well aware that the Scottish Government’s annual investment of around £1 billion in the delivery of the 1,140 hours of funded early learning and childcare is providing vital support and that that offer would cost families more than £6,000 per eligible child per year if they had to pay for it themselves.”
“Martin Whitfield: The report shows that relative child poverty remains at 23 per cent, virtually unchanged since 2021, and that, worryingly, three quarters of children in poverty are in households where someone is in work. The report highlights that well-paid, secure work is a key guard against poverty and that, in order to get more families into work, we need a focus on childcare. According to research from Pregnant Then Screwed, 41 per cent of families have had to use their savings or take out loans to afford childcare. Why is the Scottish National Party’s childcare policy putting families into debt and keeping them mired in poverty?”
“One child in poverty in Scotland is one too many, and we need to work together across this Parliament and, indeed, all Parliaments to deliver the change that is needed. Our action is making a real difference to families. On average, households with children that are in the poorest 10 per cent of households are estimated to be £2,600 a year better off in 2025-26 as a result of Scottish Government policies. Although the Joseph Rowntree Foundation predicts that child poverty will rise elsewhere in the United Kingdom by 2029, it highlights that policies such as our Scottish child payment and our commitment to mitigate the two-child limit are “behind Scotland bucking the trend”.”
“That work will continue, and the work that the chief executive has already undertaken alongside the commissioner is part of that process of ensuring that we are delivering for all.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: The way in which the service is designed in Social Security Scotland means that it has already considered a range of interests and the needs of many seldom-heard groups such as veterans. It is important that Social Security Scotland staff are trained to deliver person-centred support right across the range of benefits that they now deliver, regardless of background or need, and that they provide tailored support for the individuals. That is why I reiterate the point that the agency is working through the recommendations in that report to see what can be done to ensure that the service that is being provided is working for all, including our veterans.”
“Paul Sweeney: Last month’s report by the Scottish Veterans Commissioner recommended that veterans who are accessing benefits through Social Security Scotland should be identified and supported by staff who are trained to be veteran aware and that veteran support needs to have a clear, designated point of contact. That recommendation was made even more urgent when last week’s figures showed that 925 veterans in Scotland made a homelessness application in the past year. I am sure that the whole chamber agrees that that is not acceptable. Will the minister confirm that the Scottish Government will implement the Scottish Veterans Commissioner’s recommendations in full and consider creating a veterans network in Social Security Scotland, so that veterans can get support from those who most understand their lived experience—other veterans?”
“We welcome the Scottish Veterans Commissioner’s report and the recommendation to improve access to devolved benefits for veterans. Social Security Scotland’s chief executive recently met the commissioner to discuss shared priorities, including the report and how access could be improved in the Scottish social security system. The agency will work with the Scottish Government to provide a response to that report in due course. In designing its processes, the Scottish Government is taking into account the views of veterans and Social Security Scotland trained staff to deliver person-centred support. Support for veterans is currently available within existing services without their having to go through a separate process.”
“As Craig Hoy goes through his pre-written comments, I wonder whether there is another paragraph that tells us whether he is going to take money away from disabled people, people on low incomes, carers and the children and young people whom I met this morning. That is where the disappointment comes, and it is where Craig Hoy and the Scottish Conservatives’ true colours are shown. They have absolutely no sympathy for the fact that there are people in our society who are struggling. They have absolutely no compassion for disabled people, their carers or those on low incomes. That is telling to members in the chamber and to people throughout the country.”
“We should not be surprised because, whether through the soaring number of highly paid public sector workers or the ballooning cost of benefits, this Government is surely and stealthily building a client state for electoral advantage. Is it not the case that it will be ordinary hard-working Scots who are already struggling to pay their bills who will pay for that reckless welfare spending through higher tax and poorer public services? Shirley-Anne Somerville: I wonder how Craig Hoy’s statement would have gone down with the parents of disabled children and young people whom I met this morning. They talked about the fact that the support that they get from the Scottish Government through social security is an important part of the support that a society should be providing for people.”
“I met the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government and the Minister for Public Finance in April to discuss the fiscal sustainability delivery plan and public service reform strategy, and more recently, in September, for a review of portfolio spending as part of the budget and spending review process. Discussions will continue between ministers as we work through the budget and spending review process during the coming months. Craig Hoy: The minister might be holding meetings, but the meetings are not solving the problem, because the minister’s complacency about the benefits black hole that she is creating is staggering and fiscally irresponsible.”
“Amendment 117 disagreed to. Amendments 388 to 390 not moved. Section 56—Commencement Amendments 118 and 23 not moved. Amendment 119 moved—[Jeremy Balfour]. The Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 119 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed.”