The next item of business is a member's business debate on motion 3259, in the name of co-cab Stewart, on impacts of benefit sanctions. The debate will be concluded without any questions being put, and I would ask those members who wish to speak in the debate to please press their request to speak buttons. Now I call on co-cab Stewart to open the debate up to seven minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer, for the time today to move my first member's debate. A year ago, I never thought that, as the first woman of colour to be elected to the Scottish Parliament, I would be standing here, and having come from a very modest family background myself, I am well aware of the importance that benefits can have in supporting families at times of unemployment and redundancy. I would like to put on record my thanks to the research team at the Medical Research Council, Chief Scientist Office, which funds the social and public health science unit of the University of Glasgow, based in my constituency of Glasgow Kelvin. Glasgow University has a long pedigree of multidisciplinary research developing and applying the latest methods to help us to identify mechanisms that can bring about change, develop and assess policies and programmes designed to improve health and reduce inequalities. The motion before you is based on research that was recently published in the Journal of Social Policy by Drs Marcia Gibson, Serena Paturow and Nick Bailey. I am hoping that Marcia and Serena will be able to join us in the public gallery very shortly to hear the debate. That research was one of the most comprehensive reviews of the international quantitative research evidence on both the labour market and wider impacts of benefit sanctions. The body of qualitative research has already established that intensified sanctions and conditionality has had important implications for public health and health inequalities. The new scoping review did report positive impacts for employment, but it also reported negative impacts for job quality and stability in the longer term, along with increased transitions to non-employment or economic inactivity. Today, I want to focus on three important issues arising from the study. Firstly, benefit sanctions mask the impact that they have on children and young people through no fault of their own. The Work and Pensions Committee reported in 2018 that children play no part in a failure to comply with conditionality, yet, when a sanction is imposed, they feel the effects just as acutely. How can anyone penalise a child due to the consequences of a period or guardian's actions over which the child has no control? It is heartening to see and know that the Scottish Government took a different path when employment services were devolved. Gone were the mandatory schemes and the new Scottish approach of dignity, respect and fairness to improve outcomes. My second issue concerns benefit sanctions and subsequent reduction in welfare payments. They are a false economy, often hiding the true cost to government in increased crime, poorer physical and mental health and increased need for social care. The wider impact that poverty has on individual and families and communities can manifest itself, for example, in family breakdown, and, sadly, an increase in the number of children entering the care system. Sir Robert Devereaux, the former DWP permanent secretary, admitted as much when questioned how the reduction of the welfare budget under his watch led to increase the costs of other Whitehall departments such as health and justice. He did not know. He was only concerned with reducing the DWP's spending. So while the DWP was being rather smug at its success in cutting welfare costs, other departments were faced with picking up the pieces and paying heavily for it. Who knows who the true cost of society is, but just think of the huge rise in food banks since benefit sanctioning really took off. My third issue is to request—well, no, actually, it is a demand. The DWP needs to give researchers access to data to ensure that there is robust independent scrutiny of the results of benefit sanctions. How many sanctions have been issued? For how long? What impact have sanctions had on job-searching activities? What was the quality of the jobs? How long did they last? How many took a low-quality job in order to escape this decronian regime? Originally, sanctions could have lasted anything from six months to three years. Whilst Amber Rudd did reduce the maximum time to six months, that is still a longer sentence than some criminal convictions. Presiding Officer, I would draw your attention to the 94 studies that have been reviewed from across the world. What would give us the 95th for the UK to release appropriate data to allow independent research to be conducted? Today, I have written to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions calling on her department to promptly grant access to anonymised data from the DWP claims and sanctions histories to the research team in Glasgow so that the scope of their inquiry can be completed. I would encourage my colleagues across the chamber to add their name to the letter, and I will be issuing that out shortly. Since 2010, the coalition and successive Conservative Governments have claimed that it has been helping people to find and use open government data. Yet, despite numerous requests, freedom of information requests and assurances given to successive work and pensions committees such data would be released is still not available. Presiding Officer, I ask myself why. What is it that they do not want anyone to find out? Why would you not want robust independent scrutiny to validate your evidence and confirm your success? In conclusion, this Parliament has debated the impact of benefit sanctions for nearly 10 years now. Despite a Scottish approach, new voluntary employment support services and the new Scottish child payment, management of social security support for the unemployed is reserved. Reserved it may be, but the impact of the sanctions has a knock-on effect for the Scottish Government. It is time that we are open with our data. It is time that the UK Government stepped up to the mark and they were open with their data. Only then can we truly learn from its analysis about what works, what does not, and literally who pays for failure. Once again, children bear the brunt of adult decision making. I look forward to contributions in this debate from across the chamber. I now call Marie McNair, who is joining us remotely, to be followed by Jeremy Balfour. As a long-standing campaigner against the negative impact of the so-called welfare reforms to the UK benefits system, I am keen to participate in this debate. I congratulate Cokab Stewart for securing this debate and highlighting the important work by the researchers on behalf of Glasgow University. It is no surprise to see that they conclude that benefit sanctions do not work and, in fact, they have a detrimental impact on claimants and their children. The sanctions regime in the UK has inflicted much misery and hardship on many of our constituents for many years for no real positive return. They were introduced as part of a callous war on welfare for political impact and gain. They have been a vehicle to penalise those in need of benefits by the success of UK Governments for many years. Tory Labour, Liberal, they all use them. In fact, Dr David Webster, on the way senior research fellow at the University of Glasgow, points us out. The number of sanctions in the UK rose to some of their highest levels when the Labour Party's John Hutton was the Secretary of State at the Department of Work and Pensions. The main benefit for applying sanctions is now, of course, universal credit. The appalling sanctions regime is added to all the other unjust parts of this benefit. The five-week wait that forces people into debt, the removal of the premiums for disabled people, the two-child policy and its appalling rape clause in the list goes on. In his recent regular briefing on sanctions, Dr Webster points out that there is a rapid rise in benefit sanctions again. He states that the harshening of conditionality policy with the instruction of the DWP way-to-work scheme is also bound to increase the numbers, despite that approach being widely criticised. I can also thank Inclusion Scotland for their very helpful briefing. In the briefing, they point out that sanctions have resulted in many disabled people and their families experiencing greater poverty in work than when they were unemployed, and more will face such poverty in the future as universal credit is rolled out. The briefing also agrees with Dr Webster's analyses that the numbers of sanctions have seen a big increase recently to the extent that we will see the highest annual figure for total sanctions on all benefits since 2016. Inclusion Scotland points out that disabled claimants were between 26 per cent and 53 per cent more likely to be sanctioned than non-disabled claimants, so the rhetoric from the Tories and others that it is not impacting on the disabled people is blown out of the water by those statistics. Quite frankly, any politician that is immune to the hardship sanctions are causing needs to get out more. I have seen the impact first-hand when volunteering in a food bank in my constituency. I have seen the look of despair and the empty kitchen covers that causes. I also pay tribute to the advice agencies, council staff, food banks and the caring communities in my constituency for everything that they do to assist those struggling because of benefits sanctions. Out of concern about the impact of this harsh policy, the Scottish Government did amend the Scottish bill for fund guidance to allow crisis grants to be awarded. This is just another example of us having to mitigate against any way in Westminster welfare policy. Given the likely rise in sanctions, it is even more important that the Scottish Government makes sure that support being available is widely known. Inclusion, Presiding Officer, I am in no doubt a policy that leaves people and their families with either no money or less than the need can't have any good in it. It will have no part to play in a compassionate Scotland that has all the welfare powers needed to look after our citizens and help our young people thrive. I now call Jeremy Balford to be followed by Emma Roddick up to four minutes, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. A well-won and an effective welfare estate stands to benefit not just those who rely directly for support, but also wider society, as it allows many people to continue to engage in society even when times are tough. Deputy Presiding Officer, times are just that, tough. However, the country begins to recover from a global pandemic, wrestlers were inflating and dealing with humanitarian and supply chain crisis as a result of President Putin's war in Europe. There has been a continuous and tremendous amount of pressure on the people of this country, which returned to the welfare estate to relieve some of that pressure on their and their families' lives. I would like to take a moment to commend the front-line employees and agents of DWP, who, day in and day out, are working hard to ensure that people are supported by every system and leaver that are available to them. I had the privilege of visiting one of the new Jobcentre Plus centres here in Edinburgh just a few weeks ago to see the joined-up thinking that is taking place. It is sometimes easy in these debates to vilify roles on the front lines, and I would urge all roles to minimise that kind of contribution. However, moving to the substance office debate, I have a couple points that I would like to raise. I have a feeling, Deputy Presiding Officer, that there are going to be many representations made about sanctions over the next few minutes, but I will not be strictly accurate. We will be painted as a regular exercise to deny roles that we need help by heartless agents of the state. However, Deputy Presiding Officer, this simply does not match up to reality. They are used infrequently and executed only after careful consideration. In her opening speech, Ms Stewart asked for data. Let me give you some data from party jobcentre, the constituency that she represents. In that motion, it is also mentioned in the motion today, but between July 2019 and July 2020, according to DWP figures, there was no one sanctioned in that within her constituency. We can see therefore that the handing out of a sanction is not something that is done liberally without thought, but rather than a tool that is used to target and is used in a thoughtful way. It is also worth pointing out and noting that the University of Glasgow study cited in the motion is yet to be published and is not specific to the UK. It rather has a much broader international focus and she will be careful of mapping its findings directly on to the UK. Deputy Presiding Officer, I would like to close again by advising Carson to those who will yet use this unpublished paper that is not specific to the UK to simply make political points. We should keep in mind the way that sanctions are portrayed in the media and by those who have their own political agenda are not always accurate and they are to use the language of the Scottish Government a targeted and proportionate measure. I now call Emma Roddick to be followed by Alex Rowley up to four minutes. The UK benefits system that we have is not set up to help people into work or provide stability. It is set up to punish people who are not in work and it does that regardless of whether they are able to work. Disabled people are more likely to be sanctioned, they are more likely to end up worse off financially when they do take up part-time work and they are more likely to experience serious harms when they are sanctioned. The system is not only punitive, it is discriminatory. Jeremy Balfour just reassured us that sanctions are not carried out liberally. The point is that they are carried out and I frankly do not care whether someone has missed a job interview for a reason not deemed good enough, there is no reason good enough to remove somebody's recourse to purchase food and fundamentally stay alive yet that is what the UK Government does infrequently. There needs to be more recognition that people's lives, particularly the lives of many who need to rely on universal credit, are not predictable or rational enough to be measured by some inflexible flow chart in DWP offices. As just one example of that, I had to rely on universal credit in 2016 after the loss of a job. I soon reported that I had found work, a full-time job in the ambulance service and my monthly payment was duly reduced to £0 a month. My new steady income made me look sensible enough to convince the landlord that I deserved a roof over my head so I moved into a studio flat and got on with my life. Then one lunchtime I unlocked my phone to find that I'd missed a call and I had a stern voicemail instructing me to get in touch as soon as possible. After an impromptu 45-minute performance of Vivaldi, I got through to be told that I had to attend an interview the next day as I'd failed to fill in a change of housing circumstances form. For a change of housing circumstances, it should be noted that it would have qualified me for higher housing support and that it had come to their attention when they received my change of address form. I'd committed this horrendous crime of secretly moving into a flat and then cliping on myself by covertly sending the DWP my new address. I explained that I couldn't attend the meeting because I'd be at work and was threatened with a sanction on my £0 payment. They carried on phoning me daily for almost a week and then I received a letter underlining my transgressions to the address that they insisted they knew nothing about. For me, the DWP's nonsensical approach to my getting a job in a secure tenancy was just ludicrous rather than life-threatening, but it's an indicator of how an uncaring, inconsistent and often incomprehensible process can't be rigidly applied to real lives. Many others learned this lesson in a much harsher way. One of my constituents had to isolate with Covid and ended up in a desperate situation after following stay-at-home guidance meant that she had to cancel on a coach meeting at short notice. She and her children suddenly found themselves stuck in a home that they didn't know if they'd had the money to heat, while waiting for those advocating for her to convince the DWP that quickly and crudely cutting her already in sufferably low income was not the right or reasonable thing to do. That is not unusual. As Coghub Stewer outlined earlier, the sanction situation is so bad that the DWP won't even tell us how bad. That's the same DWP that publicly admitted that it had wrongfully pressurised disabled people to accept less support than they were legally entitled to, and it won't give researchers access to data on sanctions. The research undertaken by the University of Glasgow is therefore vital to help us to understand more about what the DWP won't tell us. I thank them for their work, and I thank my colleague Coghub Stewer for bringing it into the chamber today. I now call Alex Rowley to be followed by Paul McLennan up to four minutes, please, Mr Rowley. I'm happy to add my name to the calls against the inhumane UK benefits sanction regime that so many have suffered under, and I'm glad this has been recognised here in this Parliament today, and I congratulate Coghub Stewer in bringing forward the motion for this debate. The research mentioned in the motion confirms what I'm sure many of us here already knew from seeing directly the impact of social security sanctions have on those that have to endure them, while not specifically in relation to the sanctions, the direct human cost of inhumane practices of the DWP are highlighted perfectly in the film I, Daniel Blake. I would encourage any member of this chamber who has not seen this film to do so, as it brings home the realities of being out of work and trying to get access to basic support. I mention this particularly to the Tory benches, as members across from me specifically, as it is their Government and Westminster that insists that sanctions are effective. Indeed, we found out only two months ago that the UK Work and Pensions Secretary blocked sight of an evaluation on the effectiveness of benefits sanctions that the DWP commissioned as part of its own internal research on the benefits of sanctions back in 2019. The DWP at the time promised to make the findings public. I don't doubt that the research had similar findings to the paper that we're talking about today, which means that it was a political choice to continue punishing people when it's obviously not an effective policy. On top of that, shockingly, we have found out this month that the DWP blocked data from a study on whether benefits sanctions are linked to suicides. Thankfully, there is now a massive amount of public evidence that shows threatening claimants with the loss of benefits does not incentivise them to take up unsuitable jobs and instead has direct impacts on their physical health, mental health and even on economic activity. The only thing that proponents of sanctions claim is their main purpose. What it all shows is that plain and simple it is cruelty that is at the centre of these political choices. Previously, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation made the point clear that sanctions are going too far and causing destitution. Here in Scotland, we now have the opportunity to change some of this culture through the expansion of benefits under Social Security Scotland. I would like to make a call to the Scottish Government today to make clear that under new benefits administered by Social Security Scotland, they will not pursue a sanctions regime here in Scotland. I have already been told by a number of constituents in one of the pilot areas for the new adult disability payment that accessing information on the guidance criteria was difficult and there was a lack of clarity causing stress and confusion. I understand that these transfers and changes of benefits will be difficult but from the outset it needs to be a better system than the one that people face under the DWP. I hope that the Scottish Government will listen to the criticisms that people raise with the new system, move forward and commit to making it much fairer. We all continue to speak out against the DWP's unfair and meaningless sanctions that do not help anyone. I now call Paul MacLennan to be followed by Maggie Chapman up to four minutes please. The University of Glasgow study makes a major contribution to the understanding of the current state of the impact of sanctions. The evidence from the study and Charity's Island reports suggest that sanctions, and I quote, have a wide range of negative impacts, including increased hunger, material hardship and debt and inability to pay bills and deteriorating health. The report also states that, given the evidence of potential harms, policy makers should consider limiting sanctions and policies that remove benefit income from households that are already likely to have very limited incomes or savings. My constituency, East London, was the first to pilot universal credit in Scotland. What my council colleague described as an experiment on cruelty, two thirds of council tenants fell into rent arrears and were left without any money for weeks on end. A report by the local CB found that more than half the people who moved into universal credit in East London were on average £44 a week worse off. East London, like the rest of the UK, was hit hard by the implementation of universal credit and now claimants continue to be penalised with cuts and unfair and unjust sanctions. The new law passed just last month, which reduces the period of which claimants can seek a job within the preferred sector, without being forced to look elsewhere, has been reduced from three months to four weeks. Claimants can now be hit with sanctions if they do not take a job of her after four weeks, no matter what the sector. The emergency spell went through and scrutinised and has come under fire for being unjustified with no means in measuring success. The new rule is lacking, I would say. Reinforcing is an insecure workforce and creating an environment that does not mean meaningful employment. Any slowly and food bank usage in the last three months has grown by 40 per cent, 28 per cent and 54 per cent respectively, year on year. Stats also show that more than 90 per cent of people who use the service are working poor. That proportion has grown in the past few years and months. Boris Johnson has indicated that he wants to see a highly skilled, highly motivated workforce. Benefits sanctions will not achieve that. In fact, it will be counterproductive. This is all about the stick, so there is no carrot. The UK Government claims that sanctions are used to motivate claimants into jobs. However, it admits in its own publications that claimants are more likely to enter jobs that are often low-paid with limited retainment. In fact, evidence from the LSE shows that sanctions are unhelpful in moving people into work. Instead, even just the threat of sanctions creates an unmitigated distress that gets in the way of finding work and potentially life-altering negative consequences. Benefits sanctions cuts in austerity are plunging children into poverty, rising energy prices and the cost of living that is already expected to increase poverty rates across Scotland and the UK. The Scottish Government has put in place six new benefits, including the Scottish child payment, to try and mitigate the impact of these toxic policies. With 40 per cent of children in poverty coming from a single-parent household at its peak, around one in five single parents a year were referred for a sanction, one in five, and one in seven had a sanction imposed. That is why it has only pushed single-parent households further into poverty. Research by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has shown that benefits sanctions are having a disproportionate effect on young people under 25. There is also evidence of severe impacts on homeless people and other vulnerable groups. There is a strong link between benefits sanctions and increased poverty. Those on the bed line cannot afford to have the little amount of income support removed as cruel, archaic punishment. In conclusion, I stand by the Scottish Government to review a Scottish social security system with dignity, fairness and respect, one that does not impose life-altering sanctions on the most vulnerable in our society. Politics is all about choices and priorities. The UK Government has made the wrong choice, the poorest in our society will suffer. I would advise that, due to the number of members who wish to speak in this debate, I am minded to accept a motion without notice under rule 8.14.3 to extend the debate by up to 30 minutes. I now invite co-caps Stewart to move motion without notice. The question is that the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. I call Mackie Chapman to be followed by Siobhan Brown up to 4 minutes please, Ms Chapman. Can I start by congratulating co-caps Stewart for giving us the opportunity today to discuss benefits sanctions and to thank the University of Glasgow researchers for their very important work? When a new drug is developed, it must go through careful testing and it will not be approved unless there is clear evidence that it does what it claims to do and does so safely. It is strange that we do not apply the same principle to benefit sanctions. Hundreds of thousands of benefit sanctions are issued each year yet there is very little evidence that they have significant positive impacts. On the contrary, there is strong evidence to suggest that they have a range of highly negative outcomes, both for individuals and for society at large. I want to highlight the mental health impact of sanctions. Take some of the poorest people in the country, make them live off an income that does not stretch to putting three meals a day on the table and eating the house properly and then threaten to remove even that meager amount at any moment.   On Christmas day, I was sat alone at home just waiting for darkness to come so that I could go to sleep. I was watching through my window all the happy families enjoying Christmas and that just blew me away. I think that I had a breakdown on that day and it was really hard to recover from and I'm still struggling with it. A University of Glasgow study tells the same sad story. Every 10 sanctions applied per 100,000 people were associated with an additional eight people experiencing anxiety and depression and an additional one person receiving mental health treatment. No wonder that National Audit Office found that receiving an employment and support allowance sanction resulted in reducing disabled claimants' time in employment, precisely the opposite effect to that intended. Meanwhile, the DWP refuses to acknowledge the harm it is causing. All this is before we consider the equality's impacts. An LSE study found that independent of age and gender, white claimants were less likely to be referred for a sanction and less likely ultimately to receive a sanction than were claimants from other ethnic groups. Black claimants and claimants of mixed ethnicity were more likely than claimants from other groups to be referred and sanctioned. Benefit sanctions quite simply are racist. However, there is another way. I'm proud that it was Greens who first pointed out that the devolution of employability programmes to this Parliament was an opportunity to reduce the number of sanctions. That's why Fair Start Scotland has been, from the outset, entirely voluntary. It works. Participants benefited from, and I quote, not feeling pressured by the service and felt more able to engage with the support on offer willingly and more effectively. Finland's national trial of universal basic income, something that the Scottish Greens have long supported, which removed all the requirements to seek work, did not reduce the likelihood of becoming employed and that it also led to less mental distress, fewer feelings of depression and loneliness. These are the things we should be talking about. These are the things we should be focused on. To close, Benefit sanctions are not only dangerous and a form of violence against some of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged people in our communities. They don't help people find work and they can make it even harder to find work. Most fundamentally of all, they contravene basic human rights. We all have the right to live in a warm, safe home, to food and to clothing. That is why we pay social security and that should never, ever be taken away. I now call Siobhan Brown to be followed by Emma Harper up to four minutes please, Ms Brown. I begin by congratulating Co-Cab Stuart on securing this debate and I welcome the opportunity to speak in it. We have heard that the recent paper by researchers at the University of Glasgow notes that the cruel and heartless benefit sanctions imposed by the UK Government have a significant impact internationally on the labour market and have negative widespread social effects. What's more, the sanctions do the exact opposite of their intention in that they result in unemployment and economic inactivity as people are forced into low-quality jobs that they are not matched to. Allow me to raise the work of Dr David Webster from the University of Glasgow whose research into labour market contributes to the work of the child poverty action group. In his most recent publication for February, he states that the rapid rise in universal credit sanctions, which was noted in November 2021, has continued. Last month in the unelected house of Lords, Baroness Steadman Scott, the junior DWP minister, was adamant that we are not having tougher sanctions, but that is simply not true. In November, the number of claimants serving a universal credit sanction was nearly 50,000, well above the pre-pandemic of 36,780. Yes, I did say pre-pandemic peak. Meaning, as we look forward from Covid and aim to build a fairer society for everyone, the Conservative Government are increasing cruel and ineffective sanctions and, being no doubt, they do not work. The UK Government has announced the new way to work initiative, which has the noble ambition of getting half a million people into work by June this year. But how is it going to do this? It will use the threat of sanctions to force claimants to look for work more quickly outside their chosen sectors. This will force them to widen their search into fields where they have no experience after just four weeks. According to Dr Webster, it is bound to increase the number of sanctions handed out by the DWP and will result in worse matches between people and jobs will damage earnings, morale and productivity. Exactly what we do not need right now. We often talk about evidence-based approach to policy, while there is evidence. Of course, the UK Government is not interested in the evidence. Dr Webster found in his research that, under Secretary of State Theresa Coffey, the DWP appears to have adopted a comprehensive policy of blocking information on the effects of benefit sanctions. Of course, begging the question, what do they have to hide? He is not the only one who thinks this. Chair of the House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee, Stephen Timms MP, said that this emerging pattern of obstruction suggests that there is a culture of secrecy entrenched in the DWP. The ignorance of the UK Government results in people having to make choices between heating their home and feeding their children. This, unfortunately, is Great Britain in 2022. This is the real experience of people who are being hit hard by the cost of living crisis in which the Conservatives have no intention of doing anything meaningful about. It is the ignorance that is forcing these people into the arms of food banks in my constituency. Let me be clear, I think that the volunteers at food banks are doing a fantastic job, but they should not be needed in 21st century Britain. Of course, Jacob Rees-Mogg thinks that food banks are rather uplifting. Kind, compassionate and caring conservatism is not. Let me close by saying that, while I am glad that we are getting a chance to debate this today, be under no illusion. Boris Johnson does not care what we have to say.  What is the way out of this mess for the people of Scotland? I know what it is, and it is most certainly not Boris' benefit sanctioned Britain. It is that Scotland becomes an independent country, with full powers, showing more compassion to those who need it. I thank Cocab Stewart for securing this member's debate. Colleagues have outlined extremely well how benefit sanctions are inhumane, callous and cruel, and are nothing other than a symptom of the UK Tory Government's out-of-touch and hostile culture towards those who require support the most. Sanctions have consequences. Evidence from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation shows that benefit sanctions increase the risk of homelessness and they put financial and emotional stress on families that do harm children. Ms Stewart has described that in detail. Sanctions also cause health harms and tackling poverty in the cost-of-living crisis already has so many challenges. We have already heard about people's choice of paying their bills or buying food, heating versus eating. There is no evidence that sanctions work. In 2018, I supported a constituent who had been battling the DWP for three years before contacting me to receive the support that she was entitled to. I contacted the local MP, who is now the Secretary of State for Scotland, to help as the DWP is a reserved matter. He offered no support and provided no help. He said that he had full confidence in the decision-making power of the DWP. Because of the issues with the DWP and the extreme stress that has piled on her, she sadly took her own life, leaving a young son and a partner behind. That directly links to what Alec Rowley said about suicide linked to sanctions. That is an absolutely tragic case. It simply highlights how the UK Government and the welfare system do not treat people with dignity and respect. Finally, I want to highlight the particularly negative impact of benefit sanctions on rural areas, including across the Freeson Galloway. Rural transport, particularly for people on welfare support, who are more reliant on public transport to attend job centre appointments, is hugely challenging. Job centre appointment times do not coincide with rural transport timetables. I have found the job centre approach to accommodate in the needs of people living in rural settings to be extremely inflexible. One person I supported was sanctioned and lost 100 per cent of his income because his bus was five minutes late. That punitive approach appears to be continuing now that face-to-face appointments have resumed following Covid-19 protections. I would call on the minister to work with the UK Government to consider the needs of people across rural Scotland to have a flexible and person-centred approach to appointments and not penalise people for living rurally. In contrast, I welcome the Social Security Scotland does accommodate rural needs by offering telephone appointments and advisers that will even visit people at their own home. In conclusion, this Parliament and the Scottish Government are so constrained because we do not have complete control over welfare. We cannot mitigate every measure foisted on the Scottish people. The only way to truly address the unequal cruel carless Tory welfare system is by Scotland taking our own future in our own hands and becoming a normal independent country. I thank my colleague Co-cab Stewart for securing this important debate. I want to take a moment to remind us all how we got to where we are today. Co-cab Stewart said that, alongside what we have already done with the mandatory work programme and our tougher sanctions regime, that marks the end of the something-for-nothing culture. Let that sink in. Treating those of us who have been recipients of UK Social Security has taken something that we do not deserve—a speckless, as lazy, as grubbing. The stigma of that experience for me is still lurking there in the recesses of my mind. If I think back to using my income support to buy my baby's son's baby grows from the charity shops, I was not thinking about the circular economy, nor reducing reusing and recycling. I was trying to figure out how to make the small amount of money that I had go further during a time before baby boxes. How 24-year-old me could have been doing with one of our amazing levelers, the baby box, again seemed by some quarters as being something for nothing. Make no mistake, benefit sanctioning is a political choice. We have yet to be presented with any real tangible hard facts that show that removing people's only source of income, income at a level so low that it is already recognised as the minimum amount that someone needs in order to survive, has any positive outcome. That is a choice that politicians have made and a culture that they have created within our UK benefits system—punitive and punishing, all-stick and scant carrot. When I worked as a senior case worker for an MP, I will never forget the benefit sanction cases that we had coming into our office in desperate need of support. I did not see someone standing in front of me for whom hunger and destitution was an appropriate punishment for missing an appointment, for being on a late-running bus, for being ill, for having the audacity to have to collect kids from school at the same time as a DWP appointment or for not showing 35 hours of job searching. Who knew that you could demonstrate 35 hours of job searching? That blows my mind. I saw many people experiencing multiple and complex trauma re-traumatised by a system that was designed to be hostile, designed to end the something-for-nothing culture, designed to reduce people to being so hungry that they would open a can of soup to drink it cold straight from the tin in a food bank as they had not eaten for days, and the pittance of a hardship payment was gone within seconds of receiving it. What kind of country creates a system that is designed to punish people for being poor and for having everyday real-life situations like I have outlined to happen? Imagine that each time you miss an appointment or didn't manage to finish something in the time allotted, you lost a full months' pay. Imagine losing six months' pay whilst you are living a chaotic life beset with substance use, trauma and built on a foundation of adverse childhood experiences. Is this someone living the high life and getting something for nothing? I would actually proffer the radical thought that this individual's life's chances were continually knocked and that a imposition of hard sanctioning would, in fact, only add to and exacerbate the deep poverty that they are experiencing. Contrast this with our Scottish social security system that is being created with dignity and fairness at its heart, lifting people out of poverty and supporting folks instead of punishing them. I now call on Minister Ben Macpherson to respond to the debate up to seven minutes, please, minister. Thank you, Presiding Officer. First of all, we also want to commend my colleague Ocab Stewart for bringing this important issue and research to the chamber and for all colleagues who have contributed to this important debate. The strength of feeling from across the chamber, most of the chamber, is that the punitive sanctions imposed by the UK Government when it comes to universal credit simply do not work. The Scottish Government, like colleagues I've articulated today, has for some time now been deeply concerned about the UK Government's current sanction policy for universal credit, which allows any claimant, as we've heard, to be sanctioned at any time at the discretion of job centre staff. Would you recognise that, back in November last year, 0.88 per cent of those in universal credit were sanctioned? We're talking of less than 1 per cent, so this is not something that's being used nearly well. Take Jeremy Balfour in good faith in the statistics that he's relayed to Parliament. However, I would also point out, and I'll say something more about that shortly, that during the pandemic there was a position from the Department for Work and Pensions to move away from sanctioning that is now being reintroduced and potentially ramped up to great concern. I would also state that my gratitude for many job centre staff who do important work to help people, but the discretion of job centre staff to impose sanctions can be problematic, as we've heard, from different accounts across the chamber, and some personal, in MRODIC's case. Sanctions are just part of a number of issues with the current universal credit system, which is failing the people that are designed to help and should be helping with punitive policies such as the five-week wait, which I can't believe is still in place, two-child limit of course, and the benefit cap that we have just as a Scottish Government announced recently that we will mitigate. As today's discussion has emphasised, there's long-standing evidence of the detrimental impact of sanctions with organisations such as the Mental Health Charities Mines and Activity Alliance both reporting that sanctions can instill in many people a sense of fear and distrust of the welfare system. That is something with our new social security system that we are trying to change with regard to Scottish benefits. The new study by the University of Glasgow further emphasises the appalling impact of sanctions and the wrongheadedness of them on people's job stability, health and more widely. I'm just wondering if the Scottish Government were in charge of universal credit. Would they get rid of all sanctions completely? Would we simply get rid of them or would we amend them to do it in a different way? I think that we have shown, and again I'll say more about this shortly in time, allowing that in terms of our employability programmes we have shown. This is a conceptual point, but we all know it instinctively from an anecdotal experience that people respond much better to support and encouragement and threat and fear. That's at the heart of our principles of social security of dignity, fairness and respect, and it has been shown to be, as Maggie Chapman emphasised, effective when it comes to employability through our employability programmes. Sanctions increase hardship and they lead to poorer child wellbeing. As the report concluded, the high proportion of adverse impacts on measures of material hardship, health and child outcomes is sufficient to give sufficient cause to concern us all. As others have said, and Cocab Stewart emphasised that in her opening remarks, the unintended consequences of benefit sanctions are significant. The cost on the state and on all of us as citizens in different areas is significant and the report rightly emphasises that. Of course, that falls on community organisations, whether that is food banks or third sector organisations. It falls on UK Government departments, as Cocab Stewart emphasised, but it also falls on the Scottish Government. That is exactly why we are right to be talking about this issue today, because the costs that happen elsewhere in the system are significant and detrimental. It is clear from the research and the debate that we have had as well today that sanctions are ineffective at helping people to pull out of long-term employment, and that is why, unlike UK Government approaches, our employment support services are voluntary, meaning that people are not driven to take part in those through fear of benefit sanctions, but are instead supported. The UK Government suspended sanctions during the height of the pandemic, which I referred to earlier. However, since its reintroduction in June 2021, the number of sanctions being issued has risen sharply, and almost 50,000 people in the UK received a sanction in November last year. Sanctions can cut a person's standard universal credit payment or, in some cases, reduce it to zero. I want to make an important point here in response to Alex Rowley. With regard to the Scottish social security system, there are no sanctions applied to Scottish government benefits, so that is already the position. If sanctions are applied to someone in receipt of universal credit within the UK system and resulting in a zero award, people will still be entitled and eligible to the Scottish benefits linked to universal credit, so there are no sanctions and we are doing what we can to help people if they receive a sanction in the UK system. The points that Mr Rowley made about information sharing in his region please write to me about that and we will work together to make sure that we get the information out that you said people need more clarity on, because we are absolutely committed to that. I want to underline the fact that sanctions are nonsensical. The UK Government tells us that sanctions get people into work faster, but as research highlights, that is nothing more than a quick fix, which then adversely impacts people's longer-term outcomes. It is more about filling gaps in the labour market that is created by bad economic management from the UK Government, including their Brexit position than other things in many cases. As the report highlighted, sanctions were associated with a range of adverse impacts in terms of worsening job quality and stability in the longer term, so they do not make sense and they do not work. The report goes on to state that, although it might get people into work quickly in the short term, sanctions fundamentally lead to higher rates of exit to non-employment or economic inactivity and more rapid returns to benefit claiming, so they do not help people into the labour market in a way that is good for them and the economy as a whole. Just to back up Cokab Stewart's point, it is important that the UK Government release the research. I add my voice to the calls that this information should be issued by the UK Government in a transparent way. In conclusion, the debate and research that is generated prove that the UK Government punitive sanctions policy is ineffectual, unfair and fundamentally damaging those very people that a social security system should be supporting. It is clearly ideological from the Conservative Party and that is why they do not want to release the information—they should release the information—and that is why they continue to undertake the policy position of sanctioning when clearly it does not work. They should change their position and I am glad that the Parliament has, in the vast majority, made its case very clearly today that our social security system should be helping people and when it comes to our devolver's that is exactly where we will be focused on. That concludes the debate and I suspend this meeting until 2 pm.


Picture if you will the UK in the late 1970s and a very young impressionable Alex has been given his very first camera. Into these very hands was placed a Spider-Man toy camera but you know what it took film it it made real photographs so you know it's it's a real camera and I did what every one of us has done the very first time that we picked up a camera is that we photographed the things that interested in us that Andrew standing in front of my parents front door doing silly shapes and what have you fair game the apple trees in the back garden the Star Wars toys all of these things were photographed for the simple pleasure of just photographing the the things that amused me as a child I didn't give any thought about composition or lighting or any of the stuff that would come later on it was simply just that process of there's a thing that interests me take a picture end up with a print yeah job done it was only later on one side got into grips with the technical side of photography that the the specter of does this photograph have meaning started to loom it loom large you know but are we being told through reading many books about you know photography and how to improve as photographers that photographs should have stories they should have some sort of hidden depth and hidden meaning for the viewer to one pick and in certain circle that's that's probably true certainly documentary photography or if you're photographing with the express intent of trying to create an emotion then sure these things matter but for you know for you if you just want to take photographs for the sheer pleasure of taking photographs are your images somehow lacking simply because they fall into the realms of I didn't think much more about this photograph then simply I liked what I saw and I just photographed and it's as simple as that if you've been involved in competition photography or camera clubs or anything like that at some point no doubt you have come across these these gatekeepers if you want to call it that who guard the great mysteries of photography and and throw out little little baubles for us to play with from time to time and they will quite often say to you is what what is the meaning in this photograph I'm not really getting the meaning what's your intent what's your purpose with this photo that you know the idea within their minds is if there is no meaning no intent that you just created it without adding any of these elements that somehow then it's deficient that god forbid you should create something just because it looks pretty that's and that was probably you know certainly for me when I was younger one of the most damning pieces of praise you could ever get you know why would I create pictures that are pretty and of course now that we are sort of becoming more you know so more mature as photographer certainly I'm becoming more mature as a photographer I am less inclined to try and shoehorn story and meaning into my photographs where there really isn't any to be had so that leaves us with two options either we are going to photograph with the intent of having story in our images or we're just going to go well I don't really want any stories and stuff so how do we how do we go about achieving those two goals and because it's probably useful at this juncture always is to look at some photography and I you know this is why we're here we love photography and let's look at story first there are two photographers whose images jump to mind immediately whenever I think of story or narrative in a photographer who's not working in in documentary circles and the first guy is Dwayne Michaels his photo stories his little essays his little comics if you want to call them that something like that they are fantastic and the very first time that I saw one of these images it lingered just me not because of the story not because of the the the narrative that was building up throughout his photography but from a from a technical point of view I was like well how how does he do this kind of cyclical nature of these photographs it is a wonderful thing to look at his photography and think you know certainly in regards to how is this planned out in his head because obviously he's gone off and photographed this with purpose with intent it is not just the result of of random photographs and and he's quite happy also to use the you know use words use words that go beyond just simply a title you've no doubt seen these kind of titles at some point in sort of print judging competition or something that you know here's a picture of of you know child with a bear and it's it's oh the boy's best friend or you know that sort of kind of odd thing I never understood titling photographs but Dwayne is bringing into his photography a story not just visually but also with text and and I think that's kind of it's fairly on the nose you know if you want to talk about story in photography that here is Dwayne Michaels giving you a visual story and they're sort of telling you much of what's about it but that's that's fine if you don't overdo it so if you want to include text and stories with your images don't feel that just because you worry a photographer that you only have to have just images and that you cannot have have text you can certainly do do both the second photographer who is into storytelling and has a very strong idea of of narrative and lots of depth in his photography is Erwin Olaf and his photographs are unlike Dwayne Michaels they're not really a series they have a bit of a theme but individually they stand alone there's nothing else to suggest a story beyond the confines of the frame so we are left as viewers to kind of look at it and go wow you know what is going on here and he's planting little ideas for our minds to seize upon and work through and it is a great idea or a great example rather of how photographs can have many elements within them that can draw upon us as a viewer in a way that we are is so open to interpretation that all of us would look at Erwin Olaf's photographs and see different things there's a feature you know there's a clown that features quite often in a lot of his photography and you know the way that you interpret the figure of a clown is going to change the way that you think about the photograph now one of the problems with both of Erwin Olaf and Dwayne Michaels is that they are open to interpretation and we can get a little bit serious about the images we can go well it's all about this and it's all about that and and we we gravitate into the strokey beard world of of of sort of naval gazing and ending up with books and books and books he says trying to pull them all out like this they're all talking about how you interpret a photograph and it's like do we really need a pile of books like this to tell us how to interpret photographs it's wonderful to hear so many stories from photographers like yourself from all around the world and if you are new here just you know drop us a high in the comments below let us let us know where you are watching these videos from if you read all of those would you get any lesser or more enjoyment from Dwayne Michaels or Erwin Olaf I don't know it's I it's certainly not really changed the way that I enjoy those kind of photographers and and the messages I don't feel that I am getting any more from the images because I've read Zontag it doesn't really make a difference so it's kind of up to you so those stories those images that have stories and and if you want to create images that have story then just say that it's got a story you know ultimately the story that you want it to have is not going to be read by anybody else because everyone else is going to interpret your photographs differently boom there we go right so that noise just is in and out done and dusted it has no purpose beyond just simply you know a little loud shop noise but it's still music after a fashion and photography is very much like that that you know we have images that have gravitas and that meaning in that story that we've just been talking about but also they're on the flip side of that coin these photographs that fall into this lollipop sort of idea so these are photographs that really don't have much of an impact on us much like that snap of my clap of my hands is now faded from me it's not it hasn't these photographs too they they we see them and we go oh that's nice and it moves on and in certain circles people will give you a hard time about this they will say that oh no you know photography if you want to be a proper photographer with a capital P your photographs need to have some sort of purpose they need to have an intent that goes beyond I just quite liked this photograph and I'm sure we've all met people who think that way from time to time but much like from time to time I like to go out to a fancy restaurant and eat fancy food I also like to eat lollipops or suckers depending on where you are in the world and there's nothing wrong with that and to illustrate this I'm going to share as a rare treat some of my own photography which regular viewers of the channel will know I don't really share my photography because it's it's it's personal and it's it's for me but in this case this is a great example because these photographs are not created for any intent or purpose beyond I like the thing that I saw the thing that I saw in front of me I wanted to see what it's how would look on on on film for want of a better word and and so that's kind of their their their whole reason for being is that I just wanted to photograph that thing in front of me and that's and nothing more than that there's no hidden meanings in them there's no there's no depth I wasn't thinking of story I wasn't thinking of of you know hidden layers of meaning they're just photographs that that scene intrigued me for whatever reason and and I photographed it now of course that does mean that you know that there was an intent behind them and don't don't you know don't confuse intent with with story because the two are very different things there is so much photography that doesn't have story specifically in you know in it certainly people like Dwayne Marcus and Erwin Olaf there's a lot of story in there and and portrait I believe has story as well but beyond that there are you know people like you people who take photographs of musicians you know live performances there isn't really a story they're trying we you know we weave in some sort of narrative into them they're just you know photographing the things that are in front of them you know you know sports photographers they are also they're not really creating anything that's beyond the the the the action that's happening in front of them and interpreting that in an artistic sort of way they're not building story on it so don't feel absolutely do not feel that you are required to constantly put narrative to put story throughout all your photographs don't get hung up on this idea that you have to have these things because it stops you being creative you should be having fun with your photography and it's something that I'd like to you know touch on in other videos is is we so easily lose sight of the fact that the thing that drew us that that spider camera that was exciting that was fun was just that it was exciting and fun and I was seeing the world in a way that was new and and I wasn't worried about compositions and all the things that we let our our minds get wrapped up in so much when we take photographs we should be just doing it for you know just because we like the thing in front of us it doesn't matter what other people think about it doesn't matter if if somebody says well there's there's no meaning to your photography it doesn't it makes no difference just do your own thing I'm going to issue a challenge that's it so yes you you there right I'm going to give you a challenge is for the next few weeks whenever you got taking photographs try and not worry about stories try not worry about meaning try and be more reactive in your photographs just respond to the things that interest you that intrigue you go out take photographs take them for that sheer pleasure of just seeing the world represented in in in whatever format that you choose use film or digital doesn't really matter just experience the world without trying to make it more than it is just just relax for a minute in your photography if you like doing stories that's that's cool right but just relax let's just just just lean back let's just chill and put our feet up and and just just have fun just just be be present in in the moment and just you know put all the academic stuff to one side put all the the theory and the and trying to be a better photographer you know just just yeah just hang it up for a minute right and just go off and just have fun man you know I'm guilty of being strokey beard I've you know I'm also there so let's remember let's just let's take up that challenge let's try and just have a bit more fun with our photography and if you're struggling to kind of get into the concept of fun and how it all comes together I put a video together that I'm going to link to right here that talks about the idea of putting fun back into images


The Bemidji Area Chamber of Commerce has a new president. Deb Pfaff of St. Charles, Illinois has been selected to succeed Lori Parris, who held the position since 1999, but will be retiring at the end of the year. Pfaff's first day with the chamber will be November 27th. As president, she will work to oversee the chamber's operations. Before joining the chamber, Pfaff was the marketing supervisor for the Addison Park District located in the western suburbs of Chicago, Illinois. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.


Yes, with children, I would say that the most important thing that you can realize and this will help you with all of your mind training is that every relationship that seems to be a relationship of this world is like a mirror or a reflection. So in one sense first there should be this feeling of immense gratitude for these mirrors we'll call them that are children because they're just acting it out just like kids like to play act and they like to act and play mom and dad and and and play store and and You know play acts of vocation and everything like this. They they are mirroring back everything that you think and everything that you believe and In that sense, they're doing a great service. So there should be an underlying sense of gratitude for that We've talked a little bit when you and I've talked to about how it's a tendency in this world when you when you've gone through Extreme kind of traumas, you know, we could call it, you know Abandonment or all the different things to want the best for your children, you know to to make sure that they never have to be subjected to that kind of thing and It's it's still kind of as if that they're like these autonomous beings with minds of their own and and Willows of their own and so on and so forth and you don't want them to be tainted by these worldly experiences When really underneath we start to see that the world is not outside of our consciousness at all we just drew forth all the Interpretations of the script the interpretations of the circumstances and situations based on our belief system So if we believe in an abandonment even if it's of course a very buried unconscious belief then we will Perceive scenes of abandonment if we believe it in rejection. We will perceive scenes that we interpret as rejection You know the world is just a an outward picture of an inward condition And so while we still have a sense of lack and and emptiness and disharmony and Loneliness and shame and guilt on the inside then the world just Does its job and just outpictures them for us and in that in one sense it's good because Because we really do need to get in touch with what we've pushed out of awareness and that the world gives us that opportunity so I think with children you can find that Whenever there's a desire to protect them which can seem like a very natural Parenting desire to protect a child just like in nature You know even muskrats, you know protect their their offspring and so forth that all of nature and everything is still all a Projection from the ego so all the protectionism that's involved in those kind of relationships is still part of of the same ego belief system But as you start to practice everything in terms of your own mind training and you start to be clear of this unconscious darkness and guilt then you know the law of attraction kicks in or The law of witnessing kicks in and you keep drawing forth these witnesses to your own healing and in that sense children can be very much a part of that that The love that you wish for them you find within yourself and then extend and radiate that and then they reflect it back and It's really a that's a joyful use of children and family to to go through that deep transformation for most people they They don't really see a lot of reflections in their biological family of some of these deep insights and truths Usually it's the opposite. They have a lot of doubt thoughts Reflected and so it's you really have to go on that journey to find it in yourself and Glory, hallelujah when you do it it everything turns around all of the reflections in your whole world Turn around and reflect that love back to you but In terms of of being very very practical It's not like you can set up like the perfect environment but you can work on lessening the sense of control lessening the sense of Superiority the sense of judgment within your own mind within your own consciousness and they will receive the immediate blessings from that One time I was in South America and I was down in Argentina I was off in the rural areas and I was working with a group of Women who were course of miracles students and they they all the whole group had young children and They said oh, we are so grateful for what the little small children are teaching us They are like our teachers and I said can you summarize the teaching of the small children? You know for me to share with the whole world And they said it came through in Spanish But basically the English interpretation of of the great lesson that the children had for the paint for these mothers was you're done It was really short and sweet you're done I said can you explain a little more and they said well This game of superior and inferior is over We're here to teach it. We're gonna do a good job Teaching this, you know it is done, you know just because you have a bigger body Or a bigger brain or have read more books or whatever Cannot obscure our perfect equality and that that's the only lesson That there is To for this world is the only one lesson is perfect equality. So it was you're done It was like resigned now from from this arrogant position That you feel like you are over us in some way and So I really have enjoyed sharing that as I've traveled around as well because that is a is an extremely important lesson that lesson of perfect equality and It's not so much that you can control the environment for people or for children But it's more like the environment of your consciousness You do pay much more attention to that Then you did before you know you really are watching your emotions. You're watching your your feelings You're watching your thoughts You're paying much closer attention, and that's a good thing too. That's just part of a natural Attentiveness that's required for this mind training


In October 2010, Corporal Christopher Ferris' squad was attacked by Taliban fighters in Afghanistan's Khajaki district. Today at Camp Pendleton, he's receiving the Navy Cross for his actions in that fight, an honor which originally was a nomination for the Silver Star. I was told it was upgraded, I was told I was possibly going to get it, and I was like what I did was to me not a big deal. What he did was turn the tides of a three-sided ambush, exposing himself to enemy fire while directing suppressive fire and casually care for his wounded Marines, until an airstrike ended the engagement. To me, I don't see it, it's actually for me. I see it that it's for India battery, but for me to stand there to be the representation for India battery, for that award, it's like, it's a huge surprise. Just as surprising as the ambush, he says, and with equal reaction. Just like what I went through, life could throw you a curveball. You see that it's going to be a hit or miss. From Washington, I'm Sergeant Todd Hunter.


Going on everyone Sam here with late in sports cards ripping 22 upper-deck skybox metal universe champions hobby one box break number 11 random pack style We've got our 15 participants our 15 pack numbers one through 15. Let's roll the dice. We're gonna go nine times on each one two three four five six seven eight and nine that's Nathan B down to willsy nine times on your numbers one two three four five six seven eight and nine 15 9 to 9 Nathan B 15 Jonathan B 8 D 9 14 11 Christopher C 5 Richard H 3 William M 6 D 9 7 will Z 12 Steve C 13 will Z 2 and Tony will be 4 Troy H 10 Steve C 1 and will Z 9 I'm gonna get these copied over There you go, Toc we've got 1 through 5 6 through 10 7 11 there you go Dean playing some craps All right pack one Steve C. Good luck here Steve. Hello, Houston, Jose Prado mo and Jose Prado mo Pack two is will Z. Here we go again. Will that is a Jackson holiday on the Z-Force John Pack and Isaiah Spiller back trace Richard H. We got a PMG it is price young to 100 Richard H on the PMG congrats, buddy Holy that's nasty PMG Bryce young Red to 100 that's so sick and Michael Foster Richard. That's awesome my friend for Antonio B a yellow Marcello Meyer premium to 150 Roger Garriott's and Riley green And five is gonna be a Christopher C. Good luck here Christopher rice McGowan's Francisco Trinchao and a Keedon slovis Six now we're on to William M. So sick congrats rich slovis there's Francisco Trinchao and can you pick it again? 7 Dean Dino Mom baby, let's see it Lucky number seven sure over nice a cut above Michael Jordan on the insert. There you go Dean congrats, buddy the goat MJ Nicola Jovic and Maria Sharapova a couple of goats right there very nice Dean good pack for you, buddy John can be at eight now Randy Someone's got to get Randy out of here. That's what I know Kessler intimidation nation Bryce young. Oh, yes, please do please do Ryan Marjan Pojamp Yes, please do. We'll see it nine. I will very very well Take a look into that for sure Tiger Master Teague another tiger. What's this? That is a Bryce McGowan's green to 25 You go will congrats buddy some nice numbered stuff in here to Armando crew So we had a PMG to numbered card so far trade surrounding us out at 10 now So Han seaforce Dyson Daniels a Jabari Smith jr.  Oh, that's cool Dean again at 11. Good luck here Dino Yes, it's the purple PMG's are one of ones in this. Yes, you know, we've got a Kenny Murphy jr. 2,500 degrees ice and Catarina Macario Yes, there are Jordan and LeBron PMG's in this. Also. We pulled the Tiger Woods on Friday, I believe there's also Tiger in there will see Gretzky's also got PMG's as well as Sharapova. Those are some of the big names Watson looking in the future Michael Foster Sohan and Brady house That's a 13 is Steve C. It's kind of true actually Chris. You're right about that CJ Stroud Brady house premium Maria Sharapova and Ken Griffey jr. No, I saw it on and when it was in theaters Macroon it was really sad Dean. I at 14 really sad movie It was dude Diego Jota Z-Force Adrian Griffin jr. Garrett Wilson and Nathan B at 15. It was a sad movie. What can I say Michael Jordan? It was sad Jackson holiday Francisco Trinciao and Sam how awesome awesome break there. Thank you all again for getting that filled up We got number 12 and final coming up


Trinity Girl Natural. Hi everyone, welcome to my channel. So we talked about the basic role of protein in terms of kind of temporary plugging holes in the strand. Plugging holes in the cuticle, helping the show of the structure of the strand. So those are the strengthening roles. High utilize protein can come in different types and sizes and have different effects based on the type and size. They can be strengthening as we know, as we kind of typically hear about in terms of protein. They can be moisturizing. They can be conditioning. They can add body. They can add volume. They can actually hydrate the strand. They can add elasticity even. I think that's part of why you see protein in a lot of products. The really small ones, they penetrate, but they don't stick around that long. But they are generally humectants. So they can get your deep moisture. The medium ones, they penetrate not as deeply as the small ones. I mean, I get all the way to the cortex, but they penetrate to be lower cuticle. And then they can help seal the cuticle. The larger ones, they don't really penetrate that far or but they can help patch up holes in the cuticle as well as seal the strand, seal the shaft. Silk proteins and milk proteins. Those are the smallest proteins. They are moisturizing proteins. So you don't have to worry about them making your hair hard in any way, shape, or form. They penetrate into the strand. They penetrate actually into the cortex. They moisturize and they add elasticity. And they can also add shine and just conditioning and so on. But they're too small to plug gaps in your cuticle and help prevent breakage and damage that way. So the medium sized proteins are collagen and keratin, which are small enough to moisturize and have humectant properties, but are also large enough to help stop gaps in the cuticle and help plug up the holes in the cuticle and temporarily repair the cuticle. And they also last a couple washes on your hair because like I said, they penetrate as well as temporarily plug gaps. So in a sense, those are really ideal proteins, especially for those who maybe have normal porosity and medium sized strands. They're going to do a little bit of moisture and they're going to do a little bit of damage prevention. So if you don't have extremely damaged hair or high porosity, those might be good proteins for you. Even for me, I guess, with my low porosity coarse strands, I can venture into trying collagen and keratin on my hair. Of course, I wouldn't use them too often because my strands don't have that many physical gaps in the first place, especially since I don't even use heat or color. And last, we have the larger proteins, which are like Wheat and Cunin, right? So those plug up holes in the strand, those are not moisturizing proteins. So those are the ones that really tend to make your hair stiffer. But they do plug holes in the cuticle and as well can actually coat and seal the whole cuticle. So they can help trap moisture in. They can help prevent like break it from really happening when it's about to happen right now kind of thing by actually coating the entire strand and they can help plug gaps in the cuticle. So if you have extreme damage, you want to look for wheat, rice, cunin, maybe oats. So which one is right for you? Basically, my guide is if it's milk or still go for it, it's moisture, don't even worry about it. If it's collagen or keratin, fine strands, high porosity, go for it. Don't even worry about it. People like low porosity coarse strands, double as needed. It's like wheat, rice, cunin, et cetera. It's more for those with more damaged hair, but those with normal porosity and medium strands can dabble in it to like where the ingredients listed up. It appears because I have used KNO protein and it did give me a wash trauma. I don't know what I was using before, but it didn't look my hair because it was really pretty far down in the ingredients list. So in terms of figuring out which one is right for you, definitely start mild and then go higher as needed. Start off with a conditioner because most of these proteins come in conditioners whether leaving or insult. So start off with a conditioner containing maybe collagen or keratin, maybe somewhat far down. Try it out. See if you see a difference. If you don't see a difference, maybe try something with wheat or oat next time. If you do see a difference and you like it, a difference kind of goes away. Like you stop seeing the benefit and then try it again or try something stronger. If you try and you hear it, then try something milder. But say, you know, your twist out came out really good. You retain extra moisture. This was all great. Then just take a note of all the good things that happened and when you hear the moisture retention drops again or something, then that's when you make the decision. Do you want to use this exact one years before? Do you want to even be adventurous and try something a little stronger? So maybe try something a little higher up in the ingredients list or try leaving it on a little bit longer. Try something with more proteins in it, things like that. It is an as needed thing and at first you may do it more often than eventually. As you're here, guess how regular protein you may need to do it less and less in the future. So how to apply protein? The first thing you want to do is start off with clarified hair because protein is obviously meant to penetrate the strand and it can't do that if your strand is coated with oil and product builder. And of course whenever I say clarified hair, I always have to add with shampoo, then you apply your protein treatment. Definitely follow the instructions of the protein treatment at least to start because you really don't want to go too brave and have a setback or something. So apply how they say, leave it on how long they say, you know, etc, etc. In terms of if they don't say add heat, maybe don't add heat the first time. If they say leave it on 20 minutes, just leave it on 20 minutes the first time. And then the next time you're doing it, like I said, if it went well, you can try adding heat, you can try leaving it on longer. You can try a product with protein higher up in the ingredients list. You can try a product with more proteins, more types of proteins. After applying the protein, after you rinse your protein treatment, I always start to follow up with a deep conditioning treatment. Protein actually binds to water, so it does help with moisture retention. So you have all that protein there. Now would be a great time to add some really deep conditioning moisturizing treatment to help give yourself a little moisture boost. So yes, it can be water, but what about that nice honey in that deep conditioner? I mean, you might want some of that stuff in there. The protein is going to trap all that deep penetrating stuff in as well, let it be good stuff, right? Especially with milder proteins, it may not feel necessary, but I always think that it gives you a good moisture boost. And I do notice a difference, although it could just be from double conditioning, but I always notice a difference when I do a deep conditioner after my protein treatment. So in terms of some of the popular protein treatments out there, of course, everybody has heard of Apogee. The two-step protein treatment is very strong, so I don't recommend that unless you have extremely damaged hair. Apogee two-minute keratin is moderate, but still rather strong, so you can use it just follow the instructions carefully and do a moisturizing treatment after. When I'm doing protein, I tend to use the She-Send-It Okra Reconstructor, which is a rather mild protein, because I don't need protein that much. It's just kind of good for long-term maintenance of my hair to do protein every now and then. So I kind of go by how my hair looks and feels, and how long since I've done it, and how much moisture I've been adding recently, and so on in terms of deciding when to do it. Another thing to note is just be aware of the protein in your products. So I'll start doing an actual treatment. A lot of the products that we use contain protein, so like I said, the milk and cell proteins, you can pretty much ignore those. But check your ingredients. Listen, if you see things like wheat protein, rice protein, oat protein, K-O protein, it's just something to keep in mind. So if your hair doesn't have any adverse effect, that's fine. But if you start feeling like your hair might be too stiff or brittle, you might want to ease off on the protein a little bit. So you can give yourself too much protein or protein over the world. Yes, by doing too harsh on your protein treatment or doing it too often, but also by using too many products for just a little bit of protein in them. Okay, so I think that's it. I hope I answered all of your questions about protein. If not, definitely let me know down below. So I hope all of that was really informative and helpful for you. Let me know if you plan to try protein if you have been using protein. Thanks for watching. I'll see you in the next one. Bye.


Of course we would all love the idea of not being beaten by husbands. I don't know what country you think people want this to be the case. I'm sure you really love the idea to not get beaten by your husband, but the way that you behave here on YouTube, I'm sure your husband will beat you very, very soon. My friendly ex-Muslim.


Great to hear Gary. Okay. Yeah, I'm good. Thanks Mark. How are you? Yeah, good. Thank you The first time we've had the opportunity to speak to you since deadline day Could you just give us a bit of an insight into what it was like for you? It certainly appeared to be quite dramatic and busy from the outside Yeah, it was it was busy obviously When when you're on the inside of it, obviously, you know, you have a knowledge of what's going on and what's in place So probably not as dramatic from from my point of view Obviously we had a plan that we we set out to to achieve in in January and Yeah, everyone everyone did a good job. We we've recruited areas that we look at what we were looking to recruit in Added some quality to the group So yeah was a was was a good good month for us two key players came in on deadline day in itself Let's just talk about those individually and what they'll bring Elias a Barney from Dynamo Kiev a player with a huge reputation and Someone who's played in the Champions League already for just a young 20 Well, what will he bring and how pleasing was it to get a deal like that over the line because it's a real statement signing, isn't it? Yeah, it is. Yeah, as you say real talented boy Physically impressive as well moves well strong can handle the ball And as you say has played a lot of top-level football matches for his age, so yeah real good signing Obviously he arrives sort of in a mid-season break at the moment from from where he was so Yeah, that that that needs to be managed, of course But the light the light to have in fantastic signing for us and how much I already from sasuolo another player 20 plus million pounds of a big investment. What will he bring? We bring quality definitely he's obviously his last performance in in the San Siro at the the weekend was Yeah, he played a big part in a fantastic victory. So yeah, he's got quality again has been playing The top level in Italy and slightly different to Iliad he comes in and has been playing 90 minutes for The sort of last few months. So he's he's ready to go So yeah, they're likely to have him as well. And I think if you look at the whole window this rule It was we were really clear on what we were trying to do So if you start with a goalkeeper, for instance, we needed we needed three needed three senior goalkeepers in the in the squad we were slightly short before and Think back to when Travis sort of felt his calf in the cup game at Newcastle and you got Cameron playing on the bench and Yeah, great great young goalkeeper But that you know at that point I think to put Cameron playing on the pitch in a Premier League or a cup match That's how short we were at times. So that needed that needed rectifying. We've got three senior goalkeepers And then from that the rest of the business you can see with the profile of the players the age the transfer fees there's a Real plan in place to to move the club forward Not only short term, but but long term as well Is this now an AFC Bournemouth side that that's got your mark on it and your stamp on it because This is obviously your first transfer window to to make decisions and work with Richard and Neil on the players You bring in is this where now the fans should Judge you not on a team from the past or the players that have been injured that you haven't had This is now going to be your team that you can start to shape No, I'm fine with being judged always. I'm fine with being judged on what we did before Yeah, so I think I'm I'm delighted that we've added. I'm delighted that we're stronger now than we were which I always said we would be I think Also important to understand that the All the players you've signed barring Darren Randolph have to adapt to the to a new league Most of them need to adapt to a new country. So we understand that that can take time But they're on the back of that they can definitely help us in the here and now But I'm convinced as time goes on will they'll we'll get better and better. So we can we can expect us to improve I think once the boys settle Understand what we what we do or how we work What it's like to live in this country what it's like to play in the Premier League Yeah, they're that a lot just a final one on the transfer window Chelsea Made moves once again. That's over 300 million in January alone What's that like for you as a as a Premier League head coach watching another side invest Significant some one of which was over a hundred million for one player Yeah, it doesn't really mean anything to me. I didn't pay much attention Obviously Chelsea are in a slightly different market and trying to retrieve slightly different things to us at this moment Yeah, just each club to their own decide what's best for them For focus purely on what we were doing here Good month for us and happy it how we come out of it come 31st of January We're in a better place than we were at the start up next Brighton in the Premier League Like you say a real positive window bit of an energy a bit of a lift around the place How much does that excite you now to to take your your new look side to the annex and see if you can You know pick up three points in the Premier League. Yeah, good test Obviously, they're they're a very good side going extremely well this season They've had a style of play and sort of a process for for years now that obviously managers change But style of play seems to stay the same excellent recruitment Science and fantastic players Increase their value Yes, I real a club in a real good place and a real clear style so Yeah, they managed to dominate the ball from there more than 50% of the ball against Arsenal one man city Which is impressive. No one no one does that really so Yeah, they have a real unique style So we have to have an understanding of what the game is going to look and feel like and then Things in place for for how we can cause them problems as well. And finally for me just team news I know there's there's doubts Phil Billing Dom Salanki netto Lloyd Kelly You've got a bit of an injury crisis at the moment. Just can you update us on potentially any positive news? Yeah, I think we've been really unfortunate with injuries a lot sort of impact ones or ones that have yeah innocuous ones that have Been to real key players as well. So we have suffered a tough spell injury wise. I don't like Talking too much about it a day before a game because you don't want to give too much away What I can say is David Brooks won't be involved junior Stanislas won't be involved Ryan Fredricks won't be involved this weekend Dom and Tav have had really good weeks on the grass Yeah, and then there's a couple of late calls on others so Yeah, I'll make you wait till 2 o'clock tomorrow to find out who's fit and who isn't but that's as much as I can tell you at the moment Thanks, Gary. Cheers. Gary good to see you spoke about the six new faces in January is The difficult part now. How do I successfully implement them? How do I get them hitting the ground running as soon as I can? That's where the hard work begins. Yeah, of course, I think they as we've said that the sort of the profile the age None of them have been playing in the Premier League. So there's adaptation to the league needed and We obviously a work been working on that since the moment that they arrived. So We'll be looking to to get them up to speed and understanding things quickly The other side of that is not even football related the area the new country for most of them how quickly they can settle Our comfortable they feel around the place So yeah, lots of stuff that that goes into making new players feel welcome and feel settled And as I said, I think they no doubt they can help us here and now but they also have Real good years still ahead of them I still think they will have huge room for improvement with their age and The work that can be done with them. So, um, yeah real real positive additions felt a long few weeks. I'm sure since your Last game have we been trying to use that time constructively of course with form to improve? Yeah, working hard working hard with a group Trying to get some of the the injured lads back as well Because as well as the the new additions that we've made Getting the key players that we're missing back will be equally as big you think Lewis Cook Philip Billing Dom Selenki Tav all missing from the last game David Brooks Junior Stanislaus so big players for us that were all missing from from the last game. So Being able to put them back in a matchday squad would be equally as big as the as the players that we managed to add in January I was gonna ask that how vital it is having familiar faces Returning it's as crucial. I guess for you and your staff as having these new faces have come in January Yeah, when they're when they're as key as those boys are that I've just mentioned them. They're huge huge players to the club Especially if you think back to the the good run that we went on When I first took charge that they were all of they all played a big part in that so Really important that we we get them back with the addition of the new ones the the group starts to look really really strong from that point I think it's one defeating seven in all competitions for Brighton of Roberto deservedly How impressive you've been with his ability to go in there and to fill the void that many felt was gonna Gonna be there one grand potter left the Chelsea. Yeah, they haven't changed too much really similar similar way of playing slightly different formation sometimes But yeah, it's sort of been seamless really Impressive obviously is good coach It's done a good job before as well. It's previous clubs. So Yeah, we'll be we'll be a tough afternoon. I don't think we're at a 6 7th in the league So, yeah, it'll be a tough one for us away at Brighton. They haven't lost too many deaths. So, um, but one that we look forward to Yeah, so looking forward to tomorrow that you might be coming up against Moses Kaiseido. I guess do you have to praise? Brighton stance with him in the January window. I don't know too much about the situation So I won't comment too much on on that, but I I expect him to play. Yeah, I mean, he's a he's a top player So I would expect him to play Yeah, we'll we're well prepared for what we expect Brighton to be Looking back finally from even in recent history at both clubs Bournemouth and Brighton had to endure Testing difficult times in the past battles off the field to see where they're both are now under new ownership Ownership focusing forward It's encouraging for both fan base isn't it pleasing for both fan bases where both clubs are Yeah, it is it is I think obviously Brighton slightly further along in theirs But a good for us for for FC Bournemouth for one that you look at and go, yeah We can one that you can aim to be and aim to get to so Yeah, they've done a fantastic job to progress and then stabilize and Now it starts to flourish at the level as well is yeah, it's impressive So and as you say rightly so about ourselves, it's an exciting time obviously The owner has said that he was gonna make sure we were strengthening in January. We have Long-term plans are equally as exciting. So yeah, so Exciting time to be a Bournemouth fan Just need obviously the the short term is equally as important to us all right Gary, can I just ask you about? Adam Smith if selected against Brighton he will become the club's 11th highest all-time appearance maker 295 games now Almost a dying breed to play 295 games for the same club these days. Just how important has he been for you? Yeah, really important on the pitch obviously plays right and left back so we We were short at left back for a while So to have the luxury of having someone in your squad that can play both sides He's played it equally as many off in cat left back as he has right back in the Premier League And then around the place as well. He's trained at 100% every single day So yeah, he's a great lad. Yeah, love Adam. Delighted that he's here. Delighted that he's had such a successful spell at the club Yeah, and long way it continues. Let's see if we can keep pushing the 295 upwards And just one about Ilya he spoke very openly and movingly about the situation back home in in Ukraine What's it gonna be like for him? Do you think coming over here? It's the first time he's ever played in England as well He's always played exclusively in Ukraine and he's always gonna have that at the back of his mind What's going on in the country? Yeah, so spoken to Ilya about Yeah, his situation and how tough it has been over there So he'll have our full support obviously Yeah, and we'll look to settle him and make sure he's okay and After that once we we understand exactly where he is from How he's feeling personally and then we can hopefully try and get him up to speed as well to play an important part in that in the football team so yeah, obviously a Sort of a unique situation, but One that yeah as you say Ilya is happy to speak openly about and I have discussed it with him And yeah, we we try and help it with helping with it the best we can