Dumfries and Galloway residents urged to have their say on plans for old folks' champion
People in Dumfries and Galloway are being urged to have their say on plans for a champion for old folk.
South Scotland MSP Colin Smyth has been campaigning for a dedicated commissioner for Scotland's older people for a number of years.
And now the Scottish Parliament's equalities, human rights and civil justice committee has launched a consultation on his proposal.
The Labour MSP said: 'This is a vital opportunity for older people and those who work with them to help shape what I hope will become an important new voice for older people in Scotland.
'We saw during the pandemic just how often the voices of older people were absent when major decisions were made — from access to visit loved ones in care homes to the withdrawal of care packages and the use of do not resuscitate orders. No one was independently speaking up for them.
'Even now, as we face a growing care crisis, too many older people are stuck in hospital or struggling without the support they need.
'But my motivation for this bill goes beyond Covid. Scotland has a rapidly ageing population — something that should be celebrated. Yet too many older people spend their later years in poor health, in poverty, and facing discrimination. They contribute so much to our communities, economy, and public life — but too often that contribution goes unrecognised. Instead of seeing older people as a burden, we need to do more to celebrate their contribution.
'A commissioner would be a strong, independent champion to shine a light on both the challenges and the achievements of older people — and help make sure their voices are heard loud and clear.
'The committee's consultation is now open, and I would strongly encourage everyone — older people, carers, third sector organisations, and anyone with an interest — to share their views. This is your chance to shape the role and ensure it delivers real change.'
The commissioner would be a dedicated and independent advocate for people over the age of 60, with a remit to promote and safeguard their rights and interests.
Their roles would include raising awareness and understanding of older people's rights, promoting positive ageing and investigating issues that matter to older people.
Convener of the equalities, human rights and civil justice committee, Karen Adam MSP, said: 'Over recent decades there has been significant growth in the number of older people living in Scotland, so, in our consideration of this bill, we're keen to understand whether having a commissioner could help address the needs of an aging population.
'In opening this call for views we'd like to hear what older people think of the proposals. We're also keen to hear the views of carers, Scotland's third sector, public bodies and anyone with an interest in the proposal.
'Whether you think that a commissioner would be a great idea or would like to propose another way that older people might have their views considered, we're keen to hear from you.'
The consultation, which is open until September 12, can be found on the Scottish Parliament website.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
26 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Labour warned to fix trust as well as raising living standards to defeat Reform
The government has so far followed through on only 1 in 3 of its pledges to rebuild trust in politics, according to a new report from campaign group Unlock Democracy Labour hasn't made its first year count when it comes to restoring trust, campaigners say on the anniversary of Keir Starmer 's general election victory. The government has so far followed through on only 1 in 3 of its pledges to rebuild trust in politics, according to a new report from campaign group Unlock Democracy. Released as Labour marks its first year in office, the 'report card' follows the British Social Attitudes survey finding trust in government has fallen to new record lows in the last year. Tom Brake, Director of Unlock Democracy, commented: 'Trust is the lifeblood of democracy - and right now, it's almost entirely drained away. What limited action the government has so far taken has failed to stem the bleeding. 'Labour must move beyond rhetoric and deliver on its pledges to rebuild public trust in full.' Unlock Democracy gave Labour's move to scrap hereditary peers full marks against promises made in its manifesto. But the group expressed disappointment that the government's Elections Bill - which presents an opportunity to fix much of the issues around trust in the political process - has been delayed, possibly into next year. The report calls for Labour to act on tightening restrictions on MPs second jobs, gifts and freebies and lobbying rules. And it warns Labour's prospects of re-election may hinge on restoring public trust - with improvements to living standards not being enough to halt the rise of Reform UK. Mr Brake added: 'Without urgent, visible action to clean up Westminster and modernise our institutions, Labour risks deepening the crisis in mistrust it promised to solve.'
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Rachel Reeves should be as open as possible about tax rises
It has been clear for months that taxes were likely to rise in the Budget this autumn. Rachel Reeves left herself so little margin for error in last year's Budget that any bad fiscal news would mean that she would have to come back for more. Almost from the moment the chancellor sat down after delivering last year's speech, the bad fiscal news has come thick and fast. She sought to stay on track in March by announcing savings in welfare spending, but those have now been blocked by her own MPs. Before that, the prime minister announced a U-turn on means-testing the winter fuel payment, restoring it to most pensioners. Meanwhile, the global economic outlook has worsened and tax revenues have fallen behind the forecast. The question now is not whether she will have to raise taxes, but whether she can do so without breaking Labour's manifesto promises not to raise any of the taxes that produce the bulk of the government's revenue: income tax, national insurance and VAT. Jim O'Neill, the former Conservative minister who advised Ms Reeves in opposition, tells The Independent today that, 'without changing some of the big taxes', the chancellor cannot make her sums add up. 'The past few days should force government to truly prioritise,' he says, 'and, crucially, recognise it can't deliver on all three of its fiscal rules, growth mission and manifesto tax commitments. Something has to give.' The Independent 's view is that we are not quite at that point yet. It may still be possible for Ms Reeves to raise the sums of money required without breaking into the 'big three' taxes – or even into the fourth, corporation tax, which Labour has also promised not to raise. But any prudent chancellor needs to be prepared for more news on the downside. She needs to take the British people into her confidence and explain that, painful as last year's Budget was, it may be necessary to take further painful decisions this year. If she does have to break manifesto promises – as opposed to merely bending them with sophistry about the incidence of taxation on 'working people' with her increase in employers' national insurance contributions – she needs to persuade people that the alternatives are worse. She needs to explain that she cannot simply 'relax the fiscal rules' and borrow more, as some of the voices from her own party seem to imagine. She did this rather well at a conference of CEOs last month: 'Fine, we can change the fiscal rules to borrow more. What would happen? Gilt yields would go up more, so the cost of servicing the whole stock of debts goes up. The fiscal rules aren't a construct that we've pulled out of thin air, they're to meet the real constraints that exist – that if we want to borrow somebody has to be willing to buy those bonds.' But she, the prime minister and whoever is the minister for the morning news round need to make this argument repeatedly. Then she – and they – need to explain why it is so hard to cut public spending. Labour MPs may have been guilty of wishful thinking about the consequences, but they were not wrong to block the rushed and crude cuts to personal independence payments that Ms Reeves wanted. It has been reported that the chancellor, rather sulkily, wants the Labour rebels to take the blame for the tax rises that will follow: it would be better if she could set out a better path to welfare reform that might end up saving money rather than starting from the demand for cuts. There are still many options for tax rises that do not touch manifesto promises. Ms Reeves could perhaps explain to some of her ill-informed backbench colleagues why a wealth tax is a bad idea that has been abandoned in every country that has tried it. She could go on to explain that there are other ideas that could achieve the same objective. Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, helpfully set out a few small-ticket items in her memo in March. Beyond that, the freeze in income tax thresholds could be extended. Tax reliefs for pensions remain an unjustified benefit for the better-off. A mansion tax on properties worth more than £2m is long overdue. Openness and transparency have never been the watchwords of the Treasury in tax policy. Chancellors have tended to hoard their power to surprise people with the big decisions at Budgets. But this chancellor and this government are in an unusually difficult situation. Ms Reeves needs to explain the trade-offs behind the difficult decisions that she is about to make if she wants people to support them.
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
People wait months to get help on key benefit - including one very long delay
Data uncovered by the Liberal Democrats show the average wait time for a decision under the scheme was 57 days in the last year People with mental health conditions or disabilities are waiting months to get help under the government's Access to Work scheme, figures show. Data uncovered by the Liberal Democrats show the average wait time for a decision under the scheme was 57 days in the last year. And one person had to wait 393 days. The government's Access to Work scheme helps people get or stay in work if they have a physical or mental health condition or disability. It can include a grant to help pay for practical support with work, support managing mental health at work or money to pay for communication support at job interviews. But the Lib Dems argue slow progress through the system can disincentivise employers from offering jobs to disabled people as they can hire non-disabled people into roles faster. The figures emerged after a furious backbench rebellion forced Labour to drop elements of its welfare reform plan which would have cut billions of pounds from the benefits bill. 'This is no way to make legislation let alone run a country,' Daisy Cooper, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesperson said 'The past week has caused anxiety and confusion for all those who were at risk of being affected by these changes.' Responding to a written question from Ms Cooper, Work and Pensions minister Stephen Timms said: 'We are committed to reducing waiting times for Access to Work and are considering the best way to deliver that for customers. 'We have increased the number of staff processing Access to Work claims and applications from customers who are about to start a job or who are renewing are prioritised.' He added that the Government's benefits reform green paper included plans to improve Access to Work, and 'we are considering further options to reduce the waiting time for customers.' She added: 'The original bill would have stripped support from disabled people and those who care for them and actually put up more barriers to work rather than bringing them down. 'The Government must accept that this gutted bill is not fit for purpose, withdraw the legislation and come forward with a properly thought through proposal to reduce welfare spending without targeting those in desperate need of support. 'That means speeding up Access to Work decisions, ending the crisis in our NHS so people can go back to their jobs rather than languishing in pain, and making people's money go further, such as by introducing an energy social tariff.'
