Good morning, everybody. Welcome to the eighth meeting of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee in 2021. I ask all members to ensure that the mobile phones are on silent. Apologies have been received from Natalie Dawn and Evelyn Tweed attending as Natalie's substitute. This morning, we are considering two SSIs. As outlined in the agenda, we will start with the disability assistance for children and young people's Scotland amendment regulations first before moving to consideration of the winter heating assistance regulations. There will be the opportunity for a change of officials between agenda items 2 and 3. I welcome to the meeting Ben Macpherson, Minister for Social Security and Local Government, and Jennifer Sinkler, Social Security Policy Manager. Online, we are also joined by David Hilber, team leader of case transfer policy and Kirsten Simonette Lefavre, who is the principal legal officer at the Scottish Government. I would like to invite the minister to make an opening statement on the disability assistance for children and young people amendment regulations, and then I will turn to questions for members. The disability assistance for children and young people Scotland amendment regulations 2021, before us today, are required to support the introduction of child disability payment. For context, we started taking applications for child disability payment on 26 July as part of a pilot. It is the first regularly recurring disability benefit to be delivered by Social Security Scotland. It will make a significant contribution to the lives of disabled children and young people in Scotland, their families and carers. Feedback on the pilot has been positive so far. Systems and processes are working well, and we remain on track to roll out child disability payment nationally from 22 November 2021. Moreover, as I have set out in my recent letter to the committee on 11 October, I marked the beginning of our ambitious case transfer process. The first disability living allowance for children awards has now been selected for transfer to child disability payment, and those individuals will continue to get the right payment at the right time and will not have to apply or be reassessed as part of the transfer process. Turning to the regulations before us today, the amendments that we are proposing are largely technical in nature. Those were identified as necessary after the principal regulations were passed. There is significant complexity in the principal regulations, the case transfer process and interactions with the reserved system. The changes that we are seeking to make now reflect that, leading up to the national delivery of the benefit, we are continuously learning lessons and identifying areas where we can improve arrangements. The amendments will allow for young people to remain on the CDP after the age of 18 in specific circumstances. They will clarify the period that Social Security Scotland has to complete a redetermination and extend the scenarios where short-term assistance is payable. Those changes will introduce further flexibility, bring more fairness to decision making and will help to improve outcomes for disabled children and young people. Those amendments also introduce the ability to backdate child disability payment awards for case transfer clients where they meet one or more of the exceptions set out in the regulations. Those exceptions describe situations where child disability payment awards resulting from the transfer process can be higher than the disability allowance for children award they replace due to differences in eligibility rules between the two benefits. The backdating provisions ensure those whose awards are selected later in the transfer process are not disadvantaged when compared to those whose awards were chosen earlier where one of those exceptions applies. Those rules were not included in the principal provisions as discussions with the department for work and pensions as to the effects of backdating on reserve systems were at that point on-going. Though we expect those exceptions to apply to only a very small number of individuals, if any, it is important that no one whose award transfers is worse off than they would have been had they made a new application and that consistency is important. Just before I conclude, I want to emphasise that I remain extremely grateful to Dr Sally Witcher and the Scottish Commission on Social Security for their scrutiny of those regulations and their general work in their leadership and scrutiny through SCOS. Though I note that the case transfer provisions fall out with their remit, that is an important point. I welcome this opportunity to assist the committee in its consideration of the regulations and look forward to any questions that members may have. Thank you very much indeed minister, that is very helpful. I will now take questions from colleagues. Some colleagues have indicated in advance that they would like to ask some questions in certain areas and if others would like to come in if they could indicate to be in the normal way either in person or online, that would be very helpful. Thank you. The first turn to Pam Duncan-Glancy, please. Thank you, convener, and good morning minister and others. Thanks very much for joining us. I thank you for setting that out. It is really helpful. I want to start from the point that you have just discussed around SCOS's role. I also want to put on record my thanks to the work that they do in getting through some quite complex material, so it is really helpful to do that. What worries me slightly is that we are in a circumstance again where SCOS has felt that they have not had the time that they need to have in order to properly scrutinise the regulations. In fact, they have said that that has meant that there has not been significant stakeholder engagement in it, which I think is of concern. I have also written to the Government in the past asking for detail the timetable for delivery, because since I came here to Parliament in May, everything that we have looked at particularly for this committee has been done in a way where we are told that there is not much time to do something. I am just seeking some reassurances, minister, that you are going to plan for this, that you do know what stages things are going to be done, and that you will try to seek time to give the appropriate amount of time for scrutiny rather than rush things through. We have had control of those benefits since 2018, and I feel like always being told that there is not much time to scrutinise things is unhelpful. If you could confirm that there is a plan, go on for the further roll-out and that there will be time for scrutiny. First of all, I would emphasise that we are in one of the most significant periods in the devolution of social security with the on-going pilot of the national roll-out from 22 November as we go into the roll-out of ADP next year. First of all, in terms of scos and support for scos and making sure that scos is able to undertake its role effectively and properly, we recognise that scos does an invaluable job, as we have both emphasised, and we are committed to providing both the time and the resources to allow them to do it properly. Ministers meet with the chair and will meet with the board soon and will regularly engage with them on an on-going basis. We acknowledge that they have been under pressure, and we will always work as flexibly as we can with scos to make sure that we are working considering the demands on their workload as part of our considerations, and we are always mindful of that. We work as flexibly as we can, for example in sharing drafts and providing additional information, but for both the Government and scos, social security legislation is complex and fast moving at this time. We aim to provide two months for scrutiny regulations, but, as you have noted, that is not always possible to do so. To help to provide additional support, it would be helpful for the committee to be reminded and emphasised today and to be told that we are recruiting an additional two members of staff to support scos. When people are in post, the total secretariat resource will have more than doubled since the election, so that will go up to five people. We are also recruiting an additional board member, which you may already be aware of, at present. I turn to the points around the elements of the regulations before us that were not able to be scrutinised by scos, so the provisions on case transfer from the DLA to the CDP. The provisions relating to case transfer were made under section 95 of the 2018 act, and there is no requirement under the 2018 act to refer provisions made under section 95 to scos, especially considering the incredibly busy programme of work that the commission is undertaking at present on a variety of different regulations. We did not wish to request scrutiny of provisions that fall out with their remit, so that is why we did not refer those regulations. Some of the provisions were shared for information and context, however, to keep them cited. I hope that that gives you the reassurance of the importance that we place on scos's work, the evaluation that they provide, the stakeholder engagement that they are part of and that we are determined to work collaboratively with them to make sure that they are resourced suitably going forward. It absolutely does in terms of the work around scos, not so much about the planning for future regulations and trying to ensure that there is enough scrutiny and timing that we do not have to continually rush them. We have had control of the benefits since 2018, and it feels like we are now in a situation where we just get a lot of regulation or a piece of legislation, of course, the primary legislation that, again, we were told to have to be done quickly. Whilst I want to do as much as possible, as fast as possible, because we need to get money in people's pockets, can you reassure us that the Government has a plan to make sure that everything is on schedule, that we know at what point things are going to have to come to committee so that we do not face the continued rushing? The point about the primary legislation that we passed before the recess is almost a separate area of consideration, although I note and appreciate the accelerated time of which we were all engaged in to deliver that to make sure that it was an additional December payment of the Scottish CARES assistance supplement. However, with regard to regulations more generally going forward, of course, the pandemic has had an effect on the delivery timetable going looking historically, and then we are now in a process of the very important delivery timeframes with regard to both CDP and ADP. The amendments before us today are about improving the regulations after the experience of the pilot and consideration from both the agency and the Government on how we do the right thing and make improvements in advance of the national roll-out on 22 November. That is a fast-moving situation, but that is because we are all determined to deliver and deliver well when it comes to social security benefits in Scotland. I am happy to take that point away, convener, if that would be helpful to also just set out any further information that we can give on timetable going forward. That would be helpful. Thank you, convener. Thank you very much. That is indeed helpful. I am hoping that the committee can liaise, obviously, with the Minister for Parliamentary Business in terms of that timetabling and the timescales going forward, but also in terms of the points that Mr Duncan Glancy raised around SCOS, the resource that has been provided that you are outlining, I think will be very helpful and be welcomed, but we will continue to liaise with SCOS to ensure that they have the capacity to be able to carry out the scrutiny work that they have to do. Next set of questions come from Jeremy Balfour. Thank you, convener, and good morning, minister and your team. I think that I would just pick up the same point as my colleague Ray McGartney. Maybe it would be helpful if you could write to us with a timetable of where things were likely to come. Can I just check as well according to what we have, that those regulations were not seen by any stakeholders, so there was no consultation with stakeholders? Is that correct? I appreciate that they are quite technical, but I just want to check whether that was the case in the situation. David, can I bring you in at this point because you have been leading on the development of, I presume you mean the case transfer aspects of the regulations, Mr Balfour? David, are you able to come in on that briefly? Yes, that's fine. Thank you, Mr Balfour. That's right. Those are very technical amendments. Most of them are relating to how the case transfer process relates to the reserve system and making sure that, especially when the introduction of backdating, which is something that's not typically that's not typical of disability benefits generally, we needed to make sure that how those interactions worked were correct. We did not do a range of stakeholder activity with regard to those provisions, but we are confident that they are correct. We've worked closely with the Department for Compensions to make sure that they work well and we're more confident that they're going to work as intended. If I can move on to two more technical areas. The first one is in regard to one of the recommendations that you haven't accepted, and that is should people from CDP be eligible for STA, if they're moving on to ADP. I think you've said no to that. I'm just wondering if you could maybe explain further why you have done that, because rightly so we have said that we want to do with dignity, fairness and respect. Should CDClaimants not be treated as a transfer on to ADP and not as a new claimant, if they're already in the system and must prove them that we need that assistance. So why are we making them go back and do that whole technical re-applying? It seems to me not treating people with that kind of respect that we were hoping for. Mr Balfour, I've taken the point that you want me to talk about short-term assistance, but would you like me to talk about just the question of can you transfer from CDP to ADP more generally as well? Well, I think it's more in regard to this if we're moving on to ADP, so I think it's why do people have to re-apply if they're already on the system and have already been identified as having a need that would identify them for benefit? Thanks for that, Clartyn. I thought you were coming at both points. I'm going to be touched on short-term assistance as well briefly at the end, if I may. First of all, to set out clearly that CDP and ADP are different forms of assistance with different eligibility criteria, and that's the initial position that we have to consider this matter. So when a person applies for CDP, they know that they can only be on it until they reach 18, but can make an application for ADP from 16. I should say that they can only be on it until they reach 18, apart from in certain circumstances, if those regulations are passed for which we want to continue payment for a good reason, and I can go into that in more detail if that's helpful for the committee shortly. In the context of them being different forms of assistance with different eligibility criteria, if we were to treat the process as a transfer from one form of disability assistance to another, the information that is held by Social Security Scotland in relation to a CDP award would not likely be sufficient to make a decision on entitlement to ADP for many clients. Therefore, we would need to ask the clients to provide further supporting information and, if they were making an application to ADP, hence why we have a situation where a new claim will need to be made in our system, but there will be two years in which to make that new claim. The transition from DLA to PIP is also done by application for the same reasons. On the basis that it is in the best interest for all CDP clients, individuals on CDP will be required to make a new application to ADP with extensive support and advice, and that's obviously really important, available to young people and their families on an on-going basis as they're undertaking the process. Just for clarity and emphasis, we intend to make the process as smooth as possible, with no gap in payment, which is obviously very important, to ensure that it will be less disruptive than the current system. I should also be noted that SCOS have welcomed the additional flexibility in the system and have commented that it is likely to strengthen the rights of clients undergoing the process. Therefore, we consider that the process and approach represent the best client journey for all clients. With regard to short-term assistance in that context, when we sat together around the table in doing the 2018 act, short-term assistance was a new initiative that we introduced for good reason. It is available to people who experience a loss or reduction in award as a result of a redetermination or an appeal, and therefore it is not available to those who are moving between forms of assistance. If we were to extend the scope of short-term assistance to cover a transition between CDP and ADP, then that would represent a fundamental departure from the policy intent of short-term assistance. The transition from ADP to ADP has been designed, as I said, to be as easy as possible for clients and their families. We do not envisage that short-term assistance would be a significant consideration in that process, but we will monitor the process to understand if and how further support to clients can be provided and we will consider that on an ongoing basis. I am grateful for my explanation, minister. I wonder whether I hold them committed back too long, because I understand that this is quite technical stuff, but I am slightly unclear in regard to—I understand that there is a different criteria for deciding someone's benefit between DLA and PIP. My understanding—this may be mine and could help me with some more information later—is that the ADP is actually the same criteria. I did not appreciate the different criteria for getting an award. I wonder whether, perhaps, in a letter, you could maybe just explain that a bit further to me. I do not want to delay the committee, because, obviously, we are going to agree these today, but I would just be interested in my own information if that would be possible. My final question is—I welcome this—I am just wondering why it happened in the first place. I managed to throw out the night forward, because I think that I raised this when we came forward originally. You have changed it back to what it is in the regulations that they were. Was that done because of consultation? Was it done because it was a simple error that was made by drafting, or was it because of a great intervention by backbench MSPs? First of all, on the point with regard to your last questions, where you asked for clarification, I am happy to take that away. As I said, the situation is that the information in relation to a CDP award would not be likely to be sufficient to make a decision on entitlement to ADP for many clients, so for some it could be, but for many it wouldn't be. I do not know if you want to touch on that at all, Jennifer. I am just building on what the minister has said. I think that it was just recognition that there would be different eligibility right area and just to ensure that people don't lose out in their full entitlement, that the safest and secure method would be to make the application for ADP, but I appreciate that the ADP regulations will become before the committee and be able to discuss them in more detail. In relation to the short-term assistance, looking back to the policy intent, which I think was there to support people challenging decisions for the same type of assistance and not for transitioning to a new type of assistance, I think that that is where we are focused on for the policy intent and why we will not be bringing forward the short-term assistance for the transition. Further information, Mr Belfer, to you and the committee, then we will be forthcoming in that. With regard to your second question and why the Scottish Government has changed its mind about the phrase throughout the night, and just to say that this was, as you may recall, discussed at committee in March and it was agreed by the then cabinet secretary that we would monitor the issue closely to ensure that our intent is what is carried out. The term was initially used to be consistent with throughout the day, but we have changed it as the sector is now more comfortable with at night. We have changed the wording for nighttime care needs from throughout the night to at night in response to answer your question directly, to feedback on concerns that are different criteria on the level of care that will be applied under CDP from what is currently applied under DLAAC. Scots welcomed the amendment in the regulations before us today to the wording from throughout the night to at night and said that the changes in the wording will put beyond doubt what the requirements are and will reduce scope for uncertainty about how much care is required to constitute throughout the night. Can I thank the minister again for that answer and can I thank the change? I think it really is. Although it may seem quite technical in terminology, I think it will make a very big difference to many people who are applying for this. I welcome that. I also just put on record my thanks to your team for all the work that they've done around these regulations. They are technical, but they are actually going to be very important for people applying, so I thank your team for that and thank you for the changes that you have made. I reiterate those thanks on behalf of the committee. I would like to bring in now briefly Marie McNair and then with a short supplementary, Pam Duncan Glancy, please. I just wanted to mention that I share the same concerns that were raised by Pam Duncan Glancy about the capacity that is available to Scoste to properly scrutinise, so I just wanted to put that on record. Mr Balvers, can I kind of ask my question regarding the short-term assistance, but how different is the criteria between CDP and ADP? Thanks to Marie McNair for that question. I would simply refer to my previous answers and the extra information that Jennifer provided in that supplementary. As I have stated, there is a difference between when there are considerations around people who experience a loss or reduction in award as a result of a determination and have requested a redetermination on an appeal and a situation of transfer. However, we will monitor the process to understand if and how further support to clients can be provided. However, I would just emphasise as well the support and advice that there will be for people in that two-year window in most cases where they are on CDP and over 16 heading towards 18 and all that support that will be provided to help them in their journey to apply for adult disability payment. On access to short-term assistance payments, the Scottish Commission on Social Security suggested that the CDP recipient that applies for ADP might be protected by non-discriminary provision in the European Convention of Human Rights. What is your view on that and has the legal advice been sought about it? With regard to—could you just be more specific on that question? There was obviously a reference from the Scottish Security Commission on Social Security suggesting that the recipient then applies for ADP, but it might be protected by the non-discriminary provision of the European Convention on Human Rights. I am just asking what your view on that is and has legal advice been sought. If you don't have the information to hand, we can—if you certainly could pass it on to the committee or even write to me later. I would like to take that away unless, Jennifer, you have anything you want to add on that. I think that it's one of the more technical ones that there is the legal risk that we need to be explored on. That sort of is something that we'd be happy for the committee to write back to. I welcome some feedback on that. Thank you very much, colleagues. I have a short supplementary from Pamdington Glancy. Thank you very much. My point was going to be on human rights but also on the short-term assistance just to say that it's a really welcome inclusion and I'm pleased to say that it will make a material difference to people's lives. I understand that the criteria are different for the two payments but I just wondered that offering someone a short-term assistance at a really difficult time in their life during a transition period isn't giving them a guarantee to the next benefit that has different eligibility criteria. It's merely easing that process in what I think is a relatively sensible way because the two benefits may not be called the same thing but they are the same type of benefit. So I wondered if you would reconsider again on the basis of that. I thank Pamdington Glancy for the points on this important aspect with regard to the short-term assistance. I'll bring Jennifer in in a minute but I think that the important point to recognise is that, as individuals make their journey from CDP to ADP in that period between being 16 and 18 in most circumstances, their CDP payment will continue as and when until either they move to ADP or they become 18 and ineligible. The question of short-term assistance, therefore, is less of a material consideration but there are, of course, we have considered it in the round and as I've stated several times now, that we will continue to keep it under review for good reason as to if there's further support that can and should be provided but I don't know if you want to say anything more on that, Jennifer. I think just to re-emphasise, the CDP broadly replicates the eligibility criteria for the disability living allowance and the adult disability payment mirrors the personal independence payment eligibility requirements. While they're the same, the CDP to ADP don't mirror each other essentially for the eligibility criteria so we have to really carefully consider those things. I think what the minister said in terms of we are in built, you know, the ability to pay people beyond the age of 18 to remain on CDP whilst waiting their determination for ADP will provide that added you know, the flexibility and that security to make sure that nobody, there isn't that break of entitlement and that people do, you know, they are getting the same money. Yes, it may not be the same amount that they're awarded on CDP as to ADP but there won't be any breaks of entitlement during that period and that's really what we're trying to go for as best possible. That situation where the continued payment until a determination is made is something that's in these regulations today so that will be important and welcome change I'm sure. Thank you very much indeed colleagues. If there are no further questions, we'll move on to agenda item 2 which is the formal debate on the motion. I remind the committee that only members and the minister may take part in the formal debate. I invite the minister to move the motion s6M-01183 that the Social Justice and Social Security Committee recommends that the disability assistance for children and young people's Scotland amendment regulations 2021 be approved. Thank you minister. Do any members wish to speak on the debate on the motion? Good. As no member wishes to speak on the debate, I'll put the question on the motion. The question is that motion s6M-01183 in the name of Ben Macpherson be approved. Are we all agreed? Thank you. We are agreed. The motion is therefore approved. In light of timing, I invite colleagues to agree that the clerks and I will produce a short factual report of the committee's decision and arrange to have it published. Are colleagues content? Excellent, thank you very much. I would like to thank colleagues who have joined us both in person and virtually for their time this morning and will allow a short time to transfer over of officials. Thank you very much. Briefly, I suspend. Thank you very much indeed. At agenda item 3, we move to consideration of the winter heating assistance for children and young people's Scotland amendment regulations 2021. Minister is now joined by Ianna Isill, the disability benefits policy manager and, online, we have Stephanie Varlogiu, senior principal legal officer and furlough legal representative from the Government, Natalie Barton. Again, I ask the minister to make an opening statement, please. Thank you, convener. Our intention behind the child winter heating assistance has always been to mitigate the increased heating costs incurred by families of the most severely disabled children and young people. As a result of having to sustain a higher temperature at home during winter due to their disability or long-term condition and having to heat their home throughout the night due to night-time care needs. When launching the payment last year, we decided to base eligibility on entitlement to the highest rate of care component of DLA. To receive this rate and individuals' needs must be throughout the day and night. At the time, we considered this an appropriate proxy for identifying individuals with the most severe needs who are likely to have increased heating costs. Earlier this year, two individuals raised appeals in the first-tier tribunal after being determined ineligible for child winter heating assistance. Both had previously been entitled to the higher rate of the DLA care component. However, as a result of UK Government policy, upon turning 16, it had to transfer to PIP. The appellants argued that it was unfair that they were not eligible for child winter heating assistance simply because of that required transfer. Those appeals and stakeholder feedback prompted us to reconsider the regulations and the extent to which they meet the policy objective. That resulted in the amending regulations before us today extending eligibility for child winter heating assistance to individuals aged 16 to 18 on the enhanced rate of PIP daily living component. The proposed regulations will allow child winter heating assistance to be paid to those who lost out last year. They will also remedy the situation going forward until the case transfer to CDP is completed. Moreover, the regulations will ensure that we provide the payment to all those most severely disabled 16 to 18-year-olds in Scotland. If those regulations are passed, this year's payment will reach approximately an additional 5,000 clients, taking the total number to over 19,000. With energy prices currently rising substantially, this is an important step in our efforts collectively to support some of society's most vulnerable people. I am grateful again to Dr Witcher and the Scottish Commission on Social Security for their assistance, and I am also grateful to the individuals and stakeholders who have engaged constructively with us. I welcome the opportunity again to assist the committee in its consideration of the proposed regulations and look forward to any questions that members may have. Thank you very much indeed. Once again, Minister, I will take questions from colleagues who have submitted in advance and those who have indicated in the usual way if they would like to do so either online or in person. The first question is from Jeremy Balfour to be followed by Pam Duncan-Glancy. I suppose that I would have a policy differentiate, minister, in that the way to resolve this for me would have been to give any child who was on DRA or PIP the winter-winter allowance. You would not have to be on the highest rate. I think that I made that point previously in committee in my last Parliament. If we are looking at heating your house, it is often during the day, and it is not often at night when you are in bed, you can have less heating on. We are still excluding children who are on the DLA at the lower rate or not on the higher rate of PIP from getting mispayment. If we are trying to help people who have higher heating costs, those are vulnerable individuals as well. I wonder what the policy intent was behind that. As I set out in my opening statement, our priority in this situation is to provide financial help to households with the most severely disabled children and young people. As I said, that is to mitigate increased costs as a result of having to potentially heat their homes to a higher temperature during winter and to heating their homes throughout the day and night. It is important to recognise that we are the only part of the UK to do that. We consider that the highest rate of the care component of DLA and CDP, as well as the enhanced rate of the daily living component of PIP, is a reasonable proxy for identifying those with the highest care needs who may incur increased heating costs over winter. We therefore decided to extend entitlement to child winter heating assistance to all the young people entitled to the enhanced rate of the PIP daily living component only. We appreciate that there are on-going considerations around that more generally in terms of energy costs and considerations around heating. In the report to the draft amendment regulations, the committee will note that Scots recommended that following the completion of the transition from DLA to PIP to CDP and ADP, the Scottish Government should review passport arrangements to CWHA to ensure consistency and equitable treatment for people with the same relevant needs, including specifically with regard to night-time care needs. We accepted that recommendation and we have a firm commitment to the formal evaluation of our social security payments, as you know, based on the findings. The evaluation of child winter heating assistance will report next year and, of course, we will consider its findings carefully. I think that it is a missed opportunity. Just on a technical question, you have removed the requirement to make the payment by 31 December. I wonder why not putting either a later deadline or actually just meet the 31 December. Why is there delay in regard to that payment being made? That is something that we thought about carefully. It is important to emphasise that we still intend to pay eligible children's winter heating assistance clients as quickly as possible and expect to have the vast majority of the now over 19,000 eligible children and young people paid by the end of the year. However, this year, making payment safely to everyone will require additional time and care because we are, if the regulations are passed, extending eligibility to around 5,000 young people in receipt of PIP. In addition to the increased client volumes, that will have a consequence of also meaning that we have client data coming from a brand new source. We need to just consider the practicalities around that. In the event that payments are not made by 31 December, we expect fewer than 10 per cent to be impacted. However, our intention is that the vast majority will be paid before 31 December. It is also important to emphasise that it makes sense to provide support when it is needed most. That is something that we have thought about carefully. The coldest months in Scotland tend to be January and February, as we know together. We have user research that suggests that some clients would prefer to receive their winter heating benefits in those months. Moving forward, removing the deadline may help us to meet the needs of clients by paying benefits at a time that suits them best. That will be a consideration for us next year once we are able to evaluate the process this year and the feedback that we will receive. It is also important to appreciate that, with the launch of the CDP and the start of case transfer from DLA for children to CDP, Social Security Scotland is entering a crucial and complex phase in its work this winter. The flexibility in making determinations on child winter heating assistance cases gained through removing the 31 December deadline will ensure that Social Security Scotland can introduce and deliver all its benefits to a high standard and on time, ultimately benefiting all our clients. We are determined to deliver as many clients as possible by the 31 December. We are confident that the vast majority of people will get their payment before the 31 December. Going forward, removing the deadline will give us that flexibility to consider next year and in years after, if a different period in the winter would be more advantageous for more clients. Pam Duncan-Glancy, please. Briefly on the question that you just had from Jeremy about the deadline, I take the point that people may prefer it in January or February. It would be good to see that research. Maybe that just means that you could move the deadline to those dates. I just feel like having a deadline gives people certainty. It is also consistent with what you require people applying for benefits to do. They have a number of stringent deadlines, so it would be much more congruent to say that we too have deadlines and you have deadlines, rather than you have deadlines and we have none. That would probably be a way forward. My question is also about eligibility. As we know, more than half of people who are living in poverty have a disabled person in their household. That is a disabled person of any severity. If we are looking to reduce levels of poverty in Scotland and, in fact, child poverty, 34 per cent of children live in households with a disabled person in them, 34 per cent in poverty, it is really important that we look at those criteria. I think that there are significant levels of poverty in Scotland just now. There is an opportunity for us to say that, regardless of age or severity of your impairment, disabled people have higher costs of living. They are more likely to live in poverty, and there is an opportunity here for us to do something in Scotland that will significantly address that and make that winter payment. I am just asking—I am making a policy point and I am asking if you recognise that this is one way that you could begin to reduce the poverty that all disabled people experience, not just people with the most severe conditions. I think that I have spoken somewhat already about eligibility, so I do not want to, in consideration of time, repeat that. However, I emphasise that the policy intent is being met by what we have done in introducing regulations in 2020 and seeking to improve them today. Of course, Pam Duncan Glancy rightly emphasises that there are wider considerations around support for families in the most need and considerations around winter benefits. The committee will be aware that we are also preparing to introduce two additional new benefits to support households with their heating costs during this winter. Pension age winter heating assistance will replace winter fuel payments, and during the winter, I should have said, not this winter. We are preparing to introduce two additional new benefits to support households with their heating costs during the winter. Pension age winter heating assistance will be replacing winter fuel payments and low income winter heating assistance will be supporting around 400,000 households on low incomes in due course. We also recognise the need to consider further targeted support for disabled adults of working in age and an acknowledgement of the fact that households with a disabled person irrespective of age are more likely to be in financial difficulties, as Pam Duncan Glancy rightly emphasised. We will therefore continue to consider whether and if so, how we can better support disabled adults over the winter months. However, at the moment, the focus of our efforts is prioritising support for the most vulnerable children and young people. That is what this benefit and improvement regulations are all about. Thank you, convener. Good morning, minister, and to your team as well. It was just carrying on from that line of questioning. I wondered in terms of identifying those with the highest need, what work could have been undertaken with the third sector to help to identify that unmet need and specifically, for example, working with charities such as Chaz to see whether we can encourage people to come forward and understand what the minister has said in terms of early days of the benefit, but is that something that the Government is actively looking at? Of course. Thank you, Mr Briggs, for that good question. The Government continues, on an on-going basis, to engage the third sector on our considerations around social security generally and, of course, our engagement with both Scolos and Dacbeg, as well as the third sector organisations, are part of our core work. I did talk about the evaluation that we are undertaking, and, of course, that will be internally, but we will receive considerations from third sector organisations on an on-going basis, both through official engagement and ministerial engagement with different third sector organisations. I will bring in a minute to talk about any official engagement that may have been or may be on-going, but it is important that we also emphasise that we have the formal process of engagement through Scolos, which provides that stakeholder input. I do not know whether you want to say anything further on that. I just wanted to add that the technical and heating assistance was also part of the consultation that we undertook. As it is an automated payment, as the minister has pointed out, we use the highest rate care component of DLA and CDP, and if the amendments pass the enhanced rate of the daily living component of PIP as a proxy to understand which children and young people need the payment most. Thank you for that. I think that my question, or line of questioning, was more about those who are maybe not currently in receipt of benefits, but who would benefit from this. I think that that unmet need question and those organisations that actively raise this with MSPs across the parties is something that, going forward, it would be useful to look at maybe scoping how reaching out to the third sector might help to increase and extend that potential uptake. I take that point and, of course, we collectively, in terms of the benefit take-up strategy, which we will be discussing in the period ahead together, collegially, on how we work, not just through the Government but through all channels available to raise awareness of what is available and encourage take-up. That is an incredibly important point, and one that the Government is engaged in very seriously and proactively. I would just say to Mr Briggs that, of course, I am happy to give an undertaking to whether it is from CHAS or others to continue to receive stakeholder feedback, and we have formal processes with regard to that. I also note that the changes that are before us today are partly based on stakeholder feedback, so I hope that that is reassuring to him and the committee and those listening that the fact that we are here today seeking approval of those regulations has somewhat been based on stakeholder feedback. Thank you very much indeed, minister. I have no further questions. I will move on to the formal debate on the motion. Once again, I remind the committee that only members of the committee and the minister may take part in the formal debate. I invite the minister to move the motion S6M-01319 that the Social Justice and Social Security Committee recommends that the winter heating assistance for children and young people Scotland amendment regulations 2021 be approved. Thank you very much. Do any members wish to speak in the debate on the motion? Excellent. As no member wishes to speak in the debate, I will put the question on the motion. The question is that motion S6M-01319 in the name of Ben Macpherson be approved. Are we all agreed? Thank you. We are all agreed that motion is there for approval. Once again, I would like to invite colleagues in the interests of time to agree that Clarkson and I will produce a short factual report on the committee's decisions and arrange to have it published. We are all content. Thank you very much to officials who have attended today and to the minister. That concludes the public part of this morning's meeting. I suspend the meeting and move to private sessions. Anyone that is appearing online, if they could now move to the Microsoft Teams link, please.


In this video, I'm going to talk about some vocabulary. The three vocabulary words that I'm going to talk about are deductive reasoning, deductive reasoning, law of detachment, and law of syllogism. So first off, I'm going to talk about deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is your basic ability of trying to draw a conclusion based on some predetermined properties or definitions or facts. So let's write that out. Deductive reasoning is drawing a conclusion based on facts, definitions, and properties. So these would be examples of if you knew a certain law, if you knew a certain definition or a property, you're able to draw a conclusion based on one of those definitions or properties. You're able to make a conclusion based on that. Next off, we have the law of detachment. Next, we have the law of detachment. This is, you're going to have to understand a little bit of notation that we've used previously. We'll go over the definition first. If p, then q. So this little notation is what I was just talking about. This here is a conditional statement. If you have a hypothesis and a conclusion, if you have a hypothesis and conclusion, if you have what's called a conditional statement, if this conditional statement is true, then the hypothesis p is true. And q, the conclusion, is true. If the hypothesis, if the conditional statement is in fact a true statement, then the pieces also have to be true. Then p is true, p is true, and also q is true. So if the entire statement is true, that also means the pieces of that statement are going to be true. So here's a quick example. Here's a quick example of, get that out the way. There we go. Here's a quick example of what a law of detachment might use. So here we go. So if p, then q. So if I have a conditional statement, if that conditional statement is true. So here we go. If I finish my chores, then I can go to the movies with my friends. That is a conditional statement. If, then statement. So if both of those parts are true, say, if I finish my chores, my parents say that I can go to the movies with my friends. If those hold true, then the individual pieces will also hold true. So if I did finish my chores, then I now go to the movies with my friends. Both of those are going to be true. The individual pieces are going to be true. So that's an example of a law of detachment. Law of syllogism, law of syllogism, kind of a fun word to say, syllogism, in fact, uses some of the same notation, but it's a little bit lengthier. If p, then q. If p, then q. So again, I have a conditional statement where I have if p, then q. And if q, then r. So I'm bringing in another conditional statement, and I notice the piece is here. The first conditional statement, my conclusion, is the first part of my next statement. So that actually is the hypothesis here. So if p, then q. And if q, then r. That's what the beginning of the law of syllogism is. Then, then, then. Oh, you know what? One thing that I forgot. One thing that I forgot. I'm always forgetting a few things here and there. One thing that I forgot is that we're talking about how true these statements are. If parts of these statements are true or false. So if p, then q, and q, then r are true statements, are true statements, then if p, then r is also true. So if I have two conditional statements where the conclusion of my first and the hypothesis of my second, if they're the same thing, and if they're both true statements, then I can say if p, then r is also a true statement. Now, this is kind of confusing, since we're just using definitions and we're using notation here. So let's see an actual example of this. Let's see an actual example of this. So here's a very quick, very simple example. Bears are wild animals. So that's my first statement. Bears are wild animals. So if an animal is a bear, then it is a wild animal. There's a conditional statement. And we have a second one. If wild animals are dangerous, so if an animal is wild, then it is dangerous. There's my second conditional statement. Both of these are true statements. Bears are wild animals, and wild animals are dangerous. We assume that all wild animals are dangerous for diseases or rabies or just in general. Animals are meant to survive out into the wild, and so they're not cuddly little creatures like we seem to think they are. Anyway, so if bears are wild animals, there's my first conditional. Wild animals are dangerous. There's my second conditional. They're both true statements. Then I can also say that, therefore, bears are dangerous. If bears are wild animals and wild animals are dangerous, then bears can also be said to be dangerous. See how we use the first part, very first bears, and then the very last part that are dangerous. We brought that together saying bears are dangerous. So there's a very simple example of the law of syllogism. OK, that was a vocabulary review over deductive reasoning, law of detachment, and the law of syllogism.


What's happening? So today we are shooting a what's happening guys? So today. I'm actually shooting my very first music video I'm here with the boy aria the star baby. We got Bridget and Zane and some homies on set We're about to shoot our very first scene so All right, so we just wrapped up our first location now we're heading to our second location The shoe has been going really well shout out to Bridget for my behind-the-scenes film Took all the times to tell you by the time and here Do you want to tell them why we're filming? Yeah, so I was yeah, so this is actually a music video that we're doing My appreciation to having logic so it was kind enough to bring out the gear and do his thing with it I'm very excited to see how this all turns out, but he's got the quote unquote This is just the throwaway stuck in our back of the back of the back of the back of the back of this isn't a quality What's up? It's up Robert It's one fluid emotion as I'm flipping my right arm would go right okay, so I Okay, look follow me on SoundCloud That's where your true talent is They say that they went in but to me it's just a blowout every week put in numbers on the boy show out Hey, all it took was just a bit of patience with the grind. Hey, you can never hold a bet Watching me kept in the numbers Winning by 60 skill is too iffy. She called me. She text me. I'm doing it. If you come you Much love to this guy the talent to be amazing. I still can't put a jacket on y'all Everyone else can please help me with that. Thank you. Thank you. Shout out to the team for everyone Watching me kept in the numbers keeping the captain you under Keeping the score in the running in this game already for this fame already


Hello and welcome to the session. My name is Asha and I am going to help you with the following question that says, Suppose three bugs are selected at random from a lot. Each bulb is tested and classified as defective or non-defective. Write the sample space of this experiment. So let's start with the solution and suppose these three bugs are selected from the lot. A bug when tested can turn up the defective or non-defective. Here these three bugs are tested. So the first possible outcome is all the three bulbs are defective D D D. The second possible outcome is first two bulbs are defective and the third one is non-defective. The third possible outcome is first and third bulb are defective and the second is non-defective. The fourth possible outcome can be first bulb is non-defective. The last two bulbs are defective. The fifth possible outcome is first bulb is defective and the last two are non-defective. Sixth outcome is first and third bulbs are non-defective and the second bulb is defective. Seventh outcome is first two are non-defective. Third one is defective and the last possible outcome when the three bulbs are selected at random from a lot is all the three bulbs are non-defective that is N, N and N. Hence the required sample space for the given experiment have eight sample points. First is D D D. All the three bulbs are defective. Second is D D N. Third is D N D. Fourth is N D D. Third is D N N. N D N. Seventh is N N D. And the last one is N N N. So this completes the session. Bye and take care.


Everybody forced here ripping a box of 2122 top strome UA foot champions league hobby for Morgan L. Thank you Morgan. Best of luck. Let's pull a super fracter Yeah, it's like eight. It's like 9 p.m. And uh, California right now. Yeah, I know The language hanging out with them out of Pico today Play for the Bengals for a while play from other teams to Charles to Kettel our future stars Stanis, it's future stars kundae Pedri Eli moreeba rookie aqua lava decent lava even back they Virgil van dyke bass refractor chasing Laurie Andre Silva short t-re Hakan Chat challenge challenge challenge Lu cut Colin. Oh, I don't know how to I Don't know how to say that one. I'm sorry Turkish stuff. Yeah, we got a speckle Ryan Graven birch Gold mini diamonds. It looks like yeah Isaac Lahaji rookie Eight of fifty good stuff there rookie gold mini diamond Isaac Lahaji. Let's pick it up here. Let's pick it up here Go Lazo, Erling Holland Batu refractor Luca Modric refractor Georgia Kealini a Blue lava max on the quaw and then an aqua lava Felix the matcha rookie 51 of 199 I've never seen a top-strom soccer pack of out of this product anyway There was two or two parallels in one and one a pack Solid the matcha there Good player Got aqua auto Bernardo Silva nice Silva Bernardo 157 of 199. I just said his name backwards for some reason nice auto there See a big numbered card now It's him way a refractor. Yeah, Zachary. That's pretty cool refractor of Alfonso Davies Speckle central tonali got more packs here night vision rookie Sydney Ravenger number 211 of 225 Solid numbered Ravenger They're pretty good box overall Pretty good tonality future stars on the back that we'll do it. Thanks again Morgan for the order. We'll get these out to you


Hello and welcome to NewsClick. This is a program which we called Present, Past and the Future and I am Nilanjan Mukhopadhyaya, the host for this program. Today we are going to talk about Ayodhya, an issue for which we have been talking about for decades in India and it's actually you know dictated the flow of politics in India for at least since the 1980s. In the last few weeks Ayodhya issue has rode back to life primarily on because two Supreme Court verdicts. One was actually to say that an observation made in the two decade old judgment that a mosque is not integral to Islam on that there was a verdict. And then again a four minute hearing of the Supreme Court when the Chief Justice of India said that Ayodhya issue the title suit which is pending is not their priority and in January they shall decide that whether it is going to be heard on a daily basis which bench is going to hear it. Those various issues are going to be decided in January. It is not a priority matter. Now this has led to a backlash from the Sangh Parivar. The RSS Chief Mohan Bhagwad has already said that the temple is absolutely essential at this stage. There is a lot of exasperation being expressed right from the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath to various other people saying that the Supreme Court is not being correct by delaying the thing that it is actually a great priority matter. Now so we are actually moving towards some kind of thing what I call a end game as far as Ayodhya issue is concerned and to discuss this I am joined today by Venkatesh Ramakrishnan who has been a fellow journalist for almost more than three decades. In fact Venkatesh I say that collectively I have the eye and you have 64 years of Ayodhya reporting right from 1986 onwards. We have spent many an afternoon in very languid atmosphere in Ayodhya and seen it through a lot of turbulence. There is something which has been bothering me in the last few days that in 92 much before December 6th 1992 we knew that the mosque is going to be demolished you know even before you know you actually confirmed and did stories speaking on the basis of your conversations with Vinay Katya who actually shared that how engineering analysis had been done of the Babri Merchant to know exactly which spots had to be hammered to bring it down very fast. At that time it was certain there was a kind of a pre-order in destiny that it is going to be demolished. I am not able to put my finger on as to what is happening now. There is no doubt that the Ayodhya temple is going to be built I mean and I think if it is possible they would build it before the term of this government is over the only problem will build it or they will begin building it. They will begin building it. Unlike the demolition the mosque cannot be built in a day that the temple cannot be built in a day. The prefabrication see there are various claims about prefabrication. Right. So I have been I have gone to Karsavakpuram repeatedly in the last 10 years and I have spoken to a lot of people who are in charge of incidentally the man who is in charge of demolition is now in charge of the prefabrication. Right. Who is this man? Mr. Rai. Champak Rai is in charge of the. He has been a long VHP. Yeah. He is now in charge of the prefabrication. Okay. And so under his supervision everything has been done all they have to do is actually go and put it together and tighten the screws. There are various claims about it. They are saying that they can put it up in one week. They can put it up in 10 days, 15 days. I tend to kind of take all that the pinch of salt as like many of their arguments. But what I think is going to happen that the issue of Ram temple is going to come up and along with that the issue of the other two temples. In fact if you remember this. This is Jhaki, Mathura, Kashi and Baki. So I think we are going to see a big focus on Kashi and there are lot of things happening in Varanasi at this point of time. Like? Like for example there is this construction of what is called Ganga Pathway. Ganga corridor is under construction. And they have identified about 300 structures around the Kashi Vishnu temple which includes both Hindu structures, neutral structures and Muslim structures. And I think work is progressing on that. And my own gut feeling is that you know that you will have a very explosive situation in Varanasi in the next few months. So and parallely and this whole game plan in Ayodhya will also move forward. And I think you know collectively we are going to have a huge massive revival of the Hindu plan. I have a question that in Ayodhya you also have this huge Ram statue also coming up. In Varanasi they are also building a Ganga Pathway as you kind of said. So these alternate constructions which is it not kind of a fallback something that if this does not if the temple does not work out at least people let them have a big statue of Ram in Ayodhya. No I see it in different thing. I mean the point is you know that there may still be people who say that why is the temple not built even after you got five years you got major huge majority at the center, huge majority in the states. And I think lot of Hindu supporters are going to ask that question. So this this statue is a fallback option for that. But I think what is going what is happening in Varanasi is more substantive. It is almost as decisive as what happened in Ayodhya 1992. Okay. So they are actually going about identifying structures which could be targeted in the next few months. How it is going to happen? It is not yet very clear very clear. Now obviously it means that there is a huge amount of you know a very serious attempt to create a platform which we can call as the Hindutva plus platform you know which is not just the Hindutva as we used to know earlier that not just the Ram temple issue but many other issues Ram temple or the other temple issues. But there are various other issues also being linked up. Whether it is in regard to beef eating cow protection or whether it is love jihad or even now what has happened is a recent spate of renaming of cities and towns you know Ayodhya district Fezabad district being renamed as Ayodhya. These are all various kind of small low hanging fruit which is being done. There is also of course this long pending demand of theirs that even at some point you know once we have complete control the name India should also be changed. You know in fact Jai Duvashi had written an article in the organizer called saying that we should rename it Hindudesh because then our nationality is going to be Hindu. So whether the Muslim man likes it or not when he goes for Hajj his passport is stamped that he is a Hindu. So everybody is a Hindu so there is no majority or minority. Now the question is that is this being done because the development plank which was put up front in 2013-2014 has not really worked this government has really not delivered on its promises and does it also mean that it is they really think that there is no other way that they can win an election. Now I am hearing this from many people in the recent past but if you really look at the 2014 I mean 2013-14 campaign plank it was not entirely just development. Of course not. Yeah it was it had. He kept on calling Rahul Gandhi as Shehzadeh he kept on calling Delhi. No no in fact if you remember 2013 September exactly 10 months before the elections right you had this massive riots in western Uttar Pradesh which killed so many people and the kind of reverberations. Had riots not happened BJP would not have won 73 seats along with allies. So you know I don't know why we are saying that development plank has failed. The thing is you know that there was this communal angle the Hindutva politics was always part and parcel of the BJP's you know election plank whether it is thematic or practical.  Let's let's put it this way that in 2013-14 development was put on the table first. Hindutva was there always in the background. But now it is the Hindutva plus whether it's Ram whether it is the Varanasi issue Love Jihad renaming of cities this is being put up front that we are doing it. Stop it if you can and development is the issue is back is at the back of the of the carrier and we are going to talk about what this government has achieved in the last five years various schemes which has been done. We have provided you know bank accounts to everybody. We have provided health insurance etc etc. You know I'll tell you something I'll tell you something which I had heard in the first year of governance. The first year of the government you know there were people who were talking about the kind of big things that Modi was planning to do in terms of not only in terms of development but in terms of changing the basic governance mechanism of this country. So what I was told by some people who are named to be very close to Modi and who whom I know are some of them are pretty close to the prime minister. They were saying that you know that in the first year of government the prime minister will make sure that 50 politicians senior politicians are in the jail for corruption in corruption cases convicted in corruption cases cutting across party lines. So said that you know that there will be congress fellows there will be BJP people there will be. But it has not happened. It has not happened. So is it going to be in the last year? No no I don't see there's any kind of point is in if you have to take something to conviction there is some groundwork that's to be done. So that groundwork has not been done. It has not been done by any investigating agencies and you know what the situation in our premier investigating agency is. So I don't get busy investigating one another. Yeah yeah central bureau of intrigue. So that's a nice way to call the CVI. Yeah so what I'm saying is that you know all these big promises were there.  You know their own estimation they they they say that you know that we have not been able to do what had to be done. So it is very very evident for every one of them including you know the Kari Karthas and the Karsevaks the potential Karsevaks that they have only this plank. How it is going to put the Hindus against Muslims and only that way consolidate the Hindu water. So but exactly how it is going to roll out. Would this be enough to get the 10 percent extra that it would require from what it had in 2013 or 14 31 percent is what that's a question I that's a question I would not want to answer at this point of time because I I think you know because the situation on the ground is very fluid. There are two factors which I've been seeing in the last one year consistently. There is colossal dissolutionment about the government right there is colossal dissolutionment about the BJP as a political organization. There is marginal dissolutionment on Modi as the prime minister in spite of his huge failures colossal failures. There are these arguments which are being raised in his favor by the BJP organizational Sankarivar organization structure which you know very well is a very powerful missionary and it that has some traction it is not as to it does not have traction. I'll give you a small example. One of my friends was doing a kind of survey for a corporate house in Rajasthan. So he came up with this interesting thing. Vasundhra Rajesh's popularity was down to 17 percent. Ashok Gailot had a chief minister real approval rating of 57 percent. Sachin Pilat had an approval rating of 23 percent. But Modi's approval rating as prime minister as prime minister was close to 70 which is a fact that you know that it was then it was it was it was it was in the range of 85 to 90 in 2014. Does it mean then we are in a situation where the past trend of whoever performs well in Madhya Pradesh Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh as we have seen in the past three elections has also tended to win the majority of seats in the subsequent parliamentary elections that this may not be the trend this time that it is quite possible that the BJP may end up losing Rajasthan maybe even one or two other states you know Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh yet do very well in the Lok Sabha elections when they held in a few months. It is possible. The central question is how they are going to do in Uttar Pradesh. I think you know beyond I mean this is a this is a factor which we talk that you know that people who have won Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh have won the central election. But I think more importantly in the election the 2019 Lok Sabha elections are going to be decided in. So, we are back to whoever wins UP, wins India. It is also we are now also in the 25th year of the 93 assembly elections in UP and first time ever the most unlikely political alliance Kanshi Ram and Mulayam Singh Yadav none of them are actually players now it is the Mayavati and Akhilesh now are players they got together. After Babri Masjid BJP learned very bitterly that great ideas do not convert electorally always that mathematics can always be against you.  How is it building up there if there is an alliance even if the Congress and the RLD do not come. If there is a SP-BSP alliance and if they are able to manage the cast equations in the constituencies properly in terms of candidates I would not be surprised if the BJP comes down to single digits. If it really works out very well. But if that really happens then it is a huge thing. No, no, that is where that is where that is where this revival this massive revival and aggressive revival of the Hindutva party. The most dangerous aspect of this aggressive revival the way the BJP is plotting the narrative is that they are challenging the judiciary. They are trying to create a situation you understand Kerala also very well not just because you're you're from that state but also because you've had very keenly followed events there. Shabri Mala I think you know has been created a situation where a court verdict has been allowed to be challenged by people's court. So has a precedent been set you can very well say that the people's court reject whatever Supreme Court is saying on Ayodhya. They don't want to hear do a hearing we don't bother about the hearing we are going to start construction. If tomorrow 10,000 people you know suddenly very sneak up into Ayodhya and with the prefabricated structures land up one morning. We wake up and see that through the night. They can create a scene. See if you remember in 1992 also they violated the the assurance in 19. Shilanias was permitted by the Rajiv Gandhi government even though it was within the disputatory they deliberately said you know no it is outside they used a map which was not at least there was a slate of hand there. Here they gave an assurance to Supreme Court saying that we will do only Bhajan and Kirtan as part of Karseva and they came and demolished it and on the day before the demolition Vajpayee says Bhajan Kirtan can also mean that you know you can't just you know there will be there will be boulders which will have to be cleared. So giving enough indication as to what they are going to do. So this violation of Supreme Court orders or violation of the constitution is nothing new to the Hindutva Brigade. They have done it repeatedly. They are doing it in Kerala what has happened is they have got a new icon in the form of Ayapa who is actually not even a Hindu god. So they have they have they have now constructed this narrative around Lord Ayapa in Kerala just as they created this narrative around Lord Ram in Ayodhya in the 1980s and 90s. It's a very well structured plan. It's a plan which is being repeatedly you know practiced and advanced and what they did in Ayodhya was also similar to what they are doing in Ayodhya in when Varanasi at this point of time. You know we have also seen in the last three and a half decades since the Ayodhya agitation has been on right from 1984, 83 onwards when it was started. There have been occasions when there have been divisions within the Sangh Pariva. You have had various petty personality clashes in the last few years. The VHP was completely out of sync both during Ashok Singhal's time also it had a different kind of vision. How do you see the internal dynamics of within the Sangh Pariva? If I ask you that according to me that possibly the unity level the index of unity within the Sangh Pariva is among the most highest that we have ever seen. Would you agree with it? I think I would agree with that though I think the top brass the divisions within the top brass are much more palpable and sharp now than it was earlier. See if you look at the the the outfits the the the index of opposition or index of unity within the Sangh Pariva outfits it is much higher but not necessarily among the individuals in the top brass. So which means that collectively as far as the cadre is concerned that there is a certain amount of unanimity that we must do what is being pursued by this government that this greater push to Hindutva is something for which we must come together even if it means forsaking or sacrificing some of our other issues. Absolutely. You know for instance you know the BMS has hardly been aggressive in the trade union front. It has been losing in support to the other trade unions so is the case with the Kisan Sabha. So there are challenges. No no in fact I think the kind of subjugation to authority or central authority among the Sangh Pariva outfits is is near total complete. So finally as we get into the conclusive part of this discussion that between now and the next elections you actually see some real construction work beginning something some symbolic something like that we really do not know they are capable of coming off with very unique. No no it can happen what I am apprehensive or I am actually fearful of is of large scale mayhem and violence across the Ganga Brahmaputra belt. Not just Ganga but the Brahmaputra. Even Brahmaputra which means that northeast also gets affected. I would put it that way I mean construction and all that will be a minor episode in this large scale mayhem that may have. How can the opposition at this stage you know do something to prevent what is being planned? Is it capable of? The point is you know we we we do not know real politics that well or to give an advice but then I have been trying to warn people but then that's all what we can do at this point of time there is no way we can say that you know that this is a solution to prevent it. Vinkatesh thank very much it's been you know we are ending on a rather depressive note because there is this fear of major communal buildup as we get closer to the elections. We have had a short conversation as to how the agitation actually moving towards an end game we really do not know to what extent this is going to have an impact on the elections. Thank you.


When Yemen does it its terrorism, when the U.S. does it, it's the rules-based order. The Biden administration has officially re-designated Ansara La, the dominant force in Yemen, also known as the Houthis, as especially designated global terrorist entity. The White House claims the designation is an appropriate response to the group's attacks on U.S. military vessels and commercial ships in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. Saying those attacks fit the textbook definition of terrorism. Ansara La claims its actions adhere to the provisions of article one of the Convention of the Prevention and Punishment for the Crime of Genocide, since it is only enforcing a blockade geared towards ceasing the ongoing Israeli destruction of Gaza. One of the most heinous acts committed by the Trump administration was its designation of Ansara La as a foreign terrorist organization, FTO, and specially designated global terrorists, both of which imposed sanctions, which critics warned would plunge Yemen's aid-dependent population into even greater levels of starvation than they were already experiencing by restricting the aid that would be allowed in. One of the Biden administration's only decent foreign policy decisions has been the reversal of that sadistic move, and now that reversal is being partially rolled back, though thankfully only with the SDGT listing, and not the far more deadly and consequential FTO designation. In a new article for anti-war about this latest development, Dave DeKamp explains that as much as the White House goes to great lengths insisting that it's going to issue exemptions to ensure that its sanctions don't harm the already struggling Yemeni people, history has shown that sanctions scare away international companies and banks from doing business with the targeted nations or entities and cause shortages of medicine, food, and other basic goods. DeKamp also notes that US and British airstrikes on Yemen have already forced some aid groups to suspend services to the country. So the US Empire is going to be imposing sanctions on a nation that's still trying to recover from the devastation caused by the US-backed Saudi blockade, which contributed to hundreds of thousands of deaths between 2015 and 2022. All in response to the de facto government of that very same country imposing its own blockade with the goal of preventing a genocide. That's right kids. When Yemen sets up a blockade to try and stop an act of genocide, that's terrorism. But when the US Empire imposes a blockade to secure its geostrategic interests in the Middle East, why that's just the rules-based international order in action. It just says so much about how the US Empire sees itself that it can impose blockades and starvation sanctions at will upon nations like Yemen, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, Syria, and North Korea for refusing to bow to its dictates. But when Yemen imposes a blockade for infinitely more worthy and noble reasons, it gets branded an act of terrorism. The managers of the globe-spanning Empire, loosely centralized around Washington, literally believe the world is theirs to rule as they will and that anyone who opposes its rulings is an outlaw. What this shows us is that the rules-based international order, the US and its allies claim to uphold, is not based on rules at all. It's based on power, which is the ability to control and impose your will on other people. The rules apply only to the enemies of the Empire, because they are not rules at all. They are narratives used to justify efforts to bend the global population to the will of the Empire.  Our world can never know health as long as these monsters remain in charge.


Going on everyone Sam here late in sports car driven 22-23 penny flux basketball hobby 4 box break number 13 random team style Look again at your random results as always you can find these on the website under the results tab as well as the link in chat Good luck flux time Ravia silver Christian wood and rookie influx of Max Christie Oh champ Deandre E in and Christian Coloco Silver is Valen Suggs and Kendall Brown Palo rookie silver and for the Simons and rookie influx silver is AJ Griffin Red Walker Kessler rookie for the Jazz Yes Silver rookie McGowan's and Jalen Brunson Silver Miles Turner and incoming shade on sharp Christian Brown Isaac Acoro to at 75 Caps and rookie influx of Jaden Hardy Blue to 99 Marcus smart Celtics and Luca Stephen Adams Larry Johnson to for 49 for the Hornets nice one there Charlotte That's pretty cool Wendell Carter, Jr. And Seth Curry on your inserts. Thank you there. Mr. Mark picking up a couple of Random team spots motto What's up? I love breaking all night long. Yes. I'm not How many points does he have nine nine four of 18? Geez, dude Jalen Durin congrats on that one Pistons on the hot stock signatures Silver shade on and Walker Kessler influx David Roddy and rookie influx of Christian Brown legos out there Okay, Brandon Emmanuel quickly 275. Oh, yeah, that was that was in quintuple. That was 30 cases, dude That's 30 cases of Bowman draft. Why it's been in base. It wasn't I mean it was a lot But it wasn't that bad Silver KPJ and green Blake Wesley to five five of five nice one spurs. Dude, we can't even hit that like Oh my goodness red and yuck all Kong whoo big double L Benedict Matherin Silver Lucanard and fluid Jane and Ivy Silver Jane and Ivy rookie orange dame and Jane Ivy flow motion Silver Chris Middleton and Norman Powell Blue Silver Trey Murphy and Jeremy Sohan Influx box race Haha, what's up? What's up thermo? Geez, man Hopefully get your power back. That'd be huge Let's go thermo. Sorry about that. Yeah, geez man. Are we knocked your power out? We're in the same thing to talk most back in let's get a freaking mic up Down forward See what moe has to say Redemption is AJ Griffin hotstock signature steal the draft going to the Hawks Silver at Miles Turner S. O. D. Griff getting zero minutes of playing time against the magic total of zero minutes Nemhardt silver trade Jones and Josh Menats silver engine nemhardt Silver ties Jones and triumph of Jalen Brown Jalen did a triumph last night He did No tatum at like 36 Shea blue to 99 Jovic All right, it is steal the draft griff Kobe white, Benedict Matherin. Take those laughing emojis away. Please shite Please please rescind those Even Chenzo Still a draft kill Houston right now, bro. Red, Dyson, Daniels kind of Probably now at this point Piston spurs this tomorrow night my god, dude. Oh god Deontay Murray to 25 for the Hawks Deontre Reach of the draft correct. Get mods get this guy out. I was wondering what this guy out, man That would be a lot more on 60 cases. Oh god Silver at JV and fluid of Anthony Edwards. All right, match only down 22 now 8.1 Okay, that's doable That means I don't know if the freaking timbre was a score in like 10 minutes because all I see is us breaking more than 8 point runs That's possible then They must be breaking hard Honestly, though Pure hustle sugs ph sugs ph sugs. I might on that silver Seth Curry and Jimmy Butler magic magic guys are all gonna need names too I hate to say it Don't call it a comeback Silver loot or 600 case in a bowman draft I'm right now. I would take like multiple days chris. Yeah, that would be a minute. We'd have people like filtering in and out, bro Red and leek monk for the kings I'm hoping until 2024. What are we joking about though?  What's joke? What's mo joking about? Down 22 bro. Come on Serious up here. Oh, we're at we're at Atlanta on January 17th. Yeah, that's that's that's gonna be Deontay Murray revenge game right there No, he's it'd be still on the team He's probably be playing against the hawks at night. It's just 25 to klaxon by that time Are you playing against the hawks? Got it. Don't they'd even chance that we're on a 12-oh run. Let's go Far easier 12-oh run in us four minutes. What are you doing tea wolves? Uh, matherin silver and base Yeah, it would be fun to watch Yeah, it'd be fun to do fun to watch Patrick Baldwin and incoming pala I'm in on watching it too Watch reminds me of ripping through those off-colored starbursts Got bogged in big donovish the serbian sniper going to the hawks. Let's go, baby Bogged in big donovish silver yokich and fluid of palo. Supposedly his brother's not playing very good defense Now no according to Bonnie's not David roddy chris middleton 299 for the bucks and donovan mitchell All right quick recap here. Everybody bogged on big donovish on the autos uh, aj griffin uh, is jalen durin and larry johnson to 49 right yeah 49 doing for the break everybody. Thanks again for the fill 10 bucks basketball coming up