× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

1 October, 2020 Open access

Scottish Parliament consents to UK Parliament legislating on its behalf to determine uprating of industrial death benefit in 2021/2022

Approval of legislative consent memorandum enables competence for uprating the devolved benefit to pass from Scottish Ministers to the UK Parliament

The Scottish Parliament has agreed a motion that consents to the UK Parliament legislating on its behalf to uprate industrial death benefit in 2021/2022.

Introducing a motion in Holyrood yesterday - seeking support for a legislative consent memorandum that, if agreed, would pass competence for determining the uprating of industrial death benefit for claimants in Scotland from the Scottish Ministers to the UK Parliament - Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and Older People Shirley-Anne Somerville said -

‘On 18 September, the United Kingdom Government made a formal request that Scottish ministers give in-principle agreement to the inclusion of provisions in a UK bill [the Social Security (Up-rating of Benefits) Bill 2019-21] relating to the uprating of industrial death benefit in Scotland. Given the disruption caused by the coronavirus pandemic to average earnings this year, UK ministers believe that legislation may be necessary to avoid a freeze of state pensions and other benefits that are uprated in line with average earnings. Legislation sets out that those benefits can be increased only when there has been an increase in earnings. Although that primarily relates to reserved benefits, it also impacts on industrial death benefit, for which the Scottish Government has had executive competence since 1 April 2020.’

Advising that her priority for the 300 or so people in Scotland who receive the benefit is to ensure that the payment rate remains consistent with the rate applying in England and Wales, Ms Somerville said that the transfer of competence is the safest way to achieve this as -

‘The alternative to a legislative consent motion would be equivalent Scottish primary legislation. That would mean seeking to have Scottish primary legislation in force by mid-November, with truncated development time, truncated scrutiny and the need to request truncated royal assent. Given the pressures on the Parliament’s time and the fact that the legislative consent motion affects only one benefit, I do not consider that a viable option.’

Following Ms Somerville’s presentation to parliament, MSPs agreed to the motion.