Education Committee, 27 Oct 2004

Meeting date: Wednesday, October 27, 2004

Official Report 187KB pdf

---

Children's Hearings

We come now to an update on the progress of the Executive's review of children's hearings. A number of issues were highlighted in the first phase of the consultation, and they are laid out in the paper that members have before them. The second phase of the review is to start around the beginning of next year and will concentrate on the required procedural changes to the children's hearings system. We have agreed that, after the Easter recess next year, we will return to the recommendations in "It's everyone's job to make sure I'm alright".

The question is whether we wish to do anything further on the matter now. Do members have any comments to make on the summary report on the responses to the phase 1 consultation, which is entitled "getting it right for every child", and on the initial information coming out of the review? Quite a lot of interesting points have been made. Do members have any observations?

One of the central things that will need to be tied down is how children's hearings relate to family issues. The interesting suggestion of family group hearings is touched on at the bottom of the section headed "Issues for Phase 2 of the Review". That might be one approach. There is also the issue of the extent to which children's hearings' focus on the child should be changed, if at all.

The message that I would take from the phase 1 responses is that most respondents indicated that they did not want a change to the child-centred approach.

I think that that is right.

The needs of the individual child are viewed as paramount. However, there are differing views with regard to whether hearings should have more influence over parents. It is difficult to make a judgment at this stage of the review, given that the second phase is still to run.

A number of key issues were flagged up in the first phase of the review. There is the lack of resources for children's hearings and, perhaps more important, there is the implementation of the plans that will stem from the outcomes of the review. The biggest issue is about dealing with children and ensuring that their needs are met. That came through from the responses loud and clear.

There is also a strong issue around how to deliver and measure effective outcomes. We need to consider what works and what does not work and how children's hearings can become more involved in monitoring progress.

I refer to the section headed "Relationship with Parents and Families". I would like to find out more about how "more resources" can be

"allocated to family support projects and initiatives."

It is important that we push for that. I agree with what Adam Ingram said and I do not think that the current level of support to parents and families is adequate. That is one of the weaknesses of the system. Panel members have become frustrated because they are not able to access the type of support for families that they would wish to access. I would like to find out a bit more about that area, which we should emphasise.

That is coming in phase 2, I think. I have difficulty in getting a handle on what exactly is provided in different areas. Provision seems patchy. I wonder if any kind of scoping study has been done to identify what exists in different local authority areas and different parts of the voluntary sector. The Scottish Parliament information centre might be able to help us with that. We might want to take the matter up with the Executive. It would be useful if we could gain more of an understanding of what there is at the moment and if we could get a better feel of some of the issues.

May I make a suggestion? There is concern about the effectiveness of disposals used by children's hearings, given the problems with social work departments. I understand that the Executive is employing more social workers, but there remains a problem. We are identifying a need for yet another form of disposal, but we are also questioning whether there would be sufficient resources to support such a measure. The committee agreed previously that when we consider the budget we might home in on some themes from our current inquiries. In that context it might be useful if the committee could ensure that the budget contains elements that could fund increased parental support, should phase 2 identify a need for such support.

There might also be issues about how resources are focused. We heard evidence that a large number of young people did not have contact with services, even when there was a supervision order. Moreover, even when there was contact, it was sometimes just one meeting in 12 months. There might be an argument for abolishing that one meeting and involving a more limited number of people, whose input would be more effective. Given the inevitable background of strained resources—whatever improvements are made—it might be relevant to consider how resources are focused.

If members have no further observations on the matter, we will move on. We will return to the issue and, as Fiona Hyslop suggested, we will bear it in mind in the context of our consideration of the budget.