Funeral Expense Assistance regulations: consultation analysis

Discussion

Main Points

The consultation attracted a good level of response from a broad range of contributors. The majority of the proposals received good support, with most concerns relating to lack of clarity around the draft regulations, rather than the substantive content.

While the majority of respondents indicated that the regulations were likely to meet the policy intentions as set out, some felt that the specified flat rate payment amount was inadequate and that there would still be a gap between FEA and the actual costs incurred, meaning that funeral poverty would not be eradicated. That being said, there was support for the decision to protect the value of the payment over time.

The main areas suggested for further consideration were linked to some minority groups and those on low or no incomes but who were not eligible for or did not claim other qualifying benefits. This included the homeless, prisoners, refugees, migrants, some disabled adults, students and older adults, in particular. A flexible system which builds in provisions for exceptional circumstances, while not being open to misuse, was urged. Care must also be taken to consider ethnic and religious diversity and its impact on funeral arrangements and associated costs.

There was also some concern that the complexity of UC and wider misunderstanding of that system may impact negatively on the understanding of FEA among potential claimants and may impact on take up rates. A clear communication strategy was needed to reach as many people as possible and make even clearer the qualifying benefit criteria. This should be undertaken collaboratively with the wider support community and funeral industry partners. It also needs to be accessible and reach those for whom English is not their first language.

Everyone who provided a response agreed with proposals not to make deductions from the payment award where there are assets in the name of the child who has died. Widening and clarifying responsible person rules was also welcomed. The principle of continuing to make payments directly to funeral directors was also strongly supported, although there was some disagreement about whether this should/should not require client consent and also if persons other than funeral directors, but performing similar roles, would be covered by the existing rules.

Habitual and ordinary residence proposals were largely supported, although these terms caused some confusion among a number of respondents, and a need to accommodate exceptional circumstances was again stressed. Proposed timescales for requests and decisions around re-determinations were also broadly welcomed, with just some suggestions that more flexibility could be built in.

The impact assessments were seen as relatively comprehensive with the main areas for further consideration perhaps being to again consider particularly vulnerable groups, e.g. refugees, migrants, prisoners, disabled, older adults and the homeless.

Next Steps

The consultation findings, along with other evidence, will feed into onward policy decisions. The regulations will be revised as appropriate and laid in the Scottish Parliament for approval. They will then need to complete the parliamentary process before FEA payments can begin to be made by Social Security Scotland. The Scottish Government will use the findings from the consultation to ensure that the processes put in place to implement and administer FEA are user-friendly and meet the wider aspirations of treating all individuals with dignity, fairness and respect.

Conclusions

The majority of proposals were welcomed and were seen as a marked improvement on the existing financial support arrangements in place to help bereaved families. There seems to be a genuine desire from those working in the industry to continue to work closely with the Scottish Government to ensure efficient and effective implementation and delivery of FEA. Communication arose as a strong theme across the consultation with the need for all new changes to be clearly communicated on an ongoing basis to all those who may be supported by FEA, ensuring accessibility for all. The introduction of FEA was seen as a welcomed first step but ongoing monitoring and flexibility to test and revise the draft regulations over time to ensure that the assistance is user-led and informed by experience seems key.