Okay. Andrew Waugh is from the communities analytical services division; Ann McVie is from the welfare team; and Jamie MacDougall is from the housing team.
I welcome the opportunity to appear before the committee to give evidence on the Scottish welfare fund and discretionary housing payments. The discussion is timely, as the statistics for DHPs were published this morning. They show that £21.9 million has already been expended, to 31 December. As members are aware, we have asked the DWP to lift the cap on DHPs. The Deputy First Minister wrote to Lord Freud on 31 January, to Iain Duncan Smith on 10 February, and again to Iain Duncan Smith on 26 February to request an urgent phone call to discuss the matter. We have had no response.
The Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth, John Swinney, also wrote to George Osborne about the matter on 10 March, because we firmly believe that lifting the cap on DHPs would allow the Scottish Government to take the most effective action to help those who are affected by the bedroom tax, and it would cost the DWP and the Westminster Government nothing. They would make the savings that they intend to make through the bedroom tax, but that approach would allow the Scottish Government to take the actions that the Scottish Parliament passed by agreeing that lifting the cap on DHPs would be the most effective way forward.
11:15
However, lifting the cap would not make up for the cost to the other parts of the Scottish Government’s pressured budget, and it would not be a solution to the bedroom tax. I think that we are all agreed that only abolition will solve the issue but that DHPs are the best way to mitigate the effects. The Scottish Government is of the view that it is shocking that, to protect our citizens and our devolved housing policy, we have had to divert funds from other devolved responsibilities to mitigate the damage that the Westminster Government has done. We continue to pursue that. We think that it is wrong, because we cannot mitigate all the impacts of welfare reform.
I listened to the discussion with the previous panel, and it is agreed that the Scottish welfare fund had a slow start. However, informal monitoring of the fund is showing that the spending in the fund is increasing and is coming close to the projected levels. We reacted to what we heard from practitioners and local authorities and we widened the guidance to make access to the fund easier. We also co-ordinated a significant marketing effort to publicise the funds through various media channels and through third sector contacts, because we recognise that it is not always individuals who approach local authorities to make an application; often, that is done by a third party or third sector organisation that works with vulnerable groups, so they had to be well aware of the fund. We believe that those actions are working. I have some copies of our latest leaflet, which I will leave with the clerk.
We think that the fund is on track. We have in place a scheme that benefits from local delivery, as was clear from the previous panel. It offers the potential to address the underlying needs of applicants by providing access to a broader range of services. I am pleased with the part that all of us have played in establishing the fund and with the hard work that local authorities have done. We recognise that the fund has been a challenge and was something new, but we can see how it is helping vulnerable people in communities throughout Scotland. We are not complacent—we know that we can do more and we continue to work with our local authority partners to ensure that the fund gets out to everyone who requires assistance from it.
I am happy to take questions.