National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateLord Hope of Craighead
Main Page: Lord Hope of Craighead (Crossbench - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Lord Hope of Craighead's debates with the HM Treasury
(1 day, 11 hours ago)
Grand CommitteeMy Lords, I would like to give one example from the social care sector which concerns this group of amendments. Cyrenians is a charity in the south-east of Scotland that supports people suffering from homelessness. It is a very active charity, with over 60 services, employing more than 200 staff and providing vital support to people who are at risk of homelessness or are suffering from it. It calculates that the effect of these changes will cost it approximately £170,000 a year, which is a very substantial amount, considering that it depends on charity to support the services it runs. As a result of this, it will have to diminish the training and development of the staff it employs, which in turn will have an adverse impact on the quality of the service that it provides to the people in need of it.
This unintended consequence is an example of the severe effect on an individual charity of this kind in the third sector in Scotland that is providing vital help to people facing homelessness. I need not add that homelessness is an emergency in Scotland and is recognised as such by the Scottish Government, so anything that diminishes the support that is given to people facing homelessness is a matter of grave concern. I do not expect that the Government will accept these amendments, but I ask them to consider carefully whether it is necessary for charities of this kind to suffer that kind of consequence. It is not so much the charity that will suffer but people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness.