Subordinate Legislation
Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 (Principal Teachers) Order 2003<br />(SSI 2003/607)
I welcome everyone to this meeting of the Education Committee. I urge people to switch off their mobile phones, buzzers and things like that, so that we do not have interruptions.
The first item on the agenda is subordinate legislation. We had a preliminary canter around this order last week, taking views from union representatives to see whether there is a big issue in all this. We are pleased to welcome Donald Henderson, the head of the teachers division of the Scottish Executive Education Department, and Stephanie Walsh, a team leader in the same division. You might want to explain to us what the Executive's objective is in introducing the order.
Donald Henderson (Scottish Executive Education Department):
I will make a fairly brief opening statement to give you some background. Section 50 of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 suspended a requirement on education authorities to advertise principal teacher posts Scotland-wide. That suspension was for only one year at the time, and it expires in the middle of next month. The suspension was instrumental in facilitating the move to the new career structures that are contained in the agreement "A Teaching Profession for the 21st Century". It was originally designed to ensure the smooth transition of the former assistant principal teacher and senior teacher grades back into the main classroom teacher grades, but also to recognise that some of the teachers had had management duties and that some would find themselves promoted to principal teacher grades.
Since the suspension came into force, many local authorities have seen benefits not only for the group for which it was originally designed, but more broadly. Indeed, looking into the future at issues arising from declining school rolls and school amalgamations, many authorities have pressed the Executive to introduce legislation to repeal the requirement entirely rather than just suspend it.
As you heard last week, the largest teachers unions also support the measure, although for slightly different reasons. The order extends the suspension period by three years, to February 2007. We hope that that will be sufficient to address the short to medium-term issues in schools. There can be further consideration of whether permanent repeal is the right answer.
So, the Executive intends to look further at the longer-term position.
Yes. There is no legislative vehicle for that at the moment. Given the fact that secondary legislation can suspend the requirement, we have not looked at the longer term in detail. However, both trade unions and local authorities have pressed us to consider the advantages of permanent repeal. The requirement to advertise nationally dates back 10 to 12 years and much has changed in the surrounding firmament, making the requirement a bit anomalous. The Executive will consider that and decide whether it is persuaded and whether a legislative vehicle is available.
The other point that was raised last week concerned the management restructuring that some local authorities are undertaking in amalgamating different departments, and so forth, and the difficulties that that causes for teachers. That is not affected by the order one way or the other, although I take it that it is an on-going theme and that there are discussions with local authorities about it. Is that right?
Yes, that is right. Most local authorities are looking at their management structures more broadly, not just in relation to APTs and senior teachers, although a first look at management structures was forced on them through this change. However, this technical change does not have a direct bearing on that issue, as it does not create a need to look more broadly at management structures. That comes from other dynamics in the process.
As members have no further questions, I thank you for your time this morning.
We have to decide whether to do anything further with the statutory instrument, which is subject to the negative procedure. Unless we have any objections to the proposals, we must agree that we do not wish to make any representations to Parliament on it. Is that agreed?
Members indicated agreement.
Support and Assistance of Young People Leaving Care Regulations 2003<br />(SSI 2003/608)
Item 2 is another statutory instrument. We welcome Gerald Byrne, the head of the looked-after children and adoption branch of the Scottish Executive Education Department. He is going to tell us something of the thinking behind this particular proposal.
Gerald Byrne (Scottish Executive Education Department):
The committee should have the Executive note that we prepared when the regulations were introduced, which lays out the policy objectives and describes the structure of the regulations. I do not know whether you want me to take you through the note or just bring out a couple of highlights.
It would be helpful if you would take us through the note.
The purpose of the regulations is to implement changes to the system for supporting young people who are leaving care. The underlying statutory provisions are in the Regulation of Care (Scotland) Act 2001. That act adds to local authorities' existing duties to provide assistance and support to young people who have been in their care up to school-leaving age the duty to assess those young people's needs and provide a procedure for considering representations and complaints.
An important feature of the policy change that is being made is that local authorities will take on more responsibility for providing financial support to young people once they leave care. At the moment many of those young people—I emphasise that they are 16 and 17-year-olds—are eligible to claim benefit from the Department for Work and Pensions. That right was withdrawn in England and Wales in 2001 and, under regulations to be made by the United Kingdom Government under the Children (Leaving Care) Act 2000, it will be withdrawn from 16 and 17-year-old care leavers in Scotland from April this year. Thereafter, local authorities will take on the duty of providing financial support to 16 and 17-year-olds who are leaving care.
The aim is to provide a one-stop shop for young people so that they do not have to go to the local authority for their housing, the DWP for their financial support, Careers Scotland for their careers advice and a training agency for their training. The aim is to have the local authority act as a one-stop shop where young people can have all their needs assessed and can access services. We hope that that will encourage local authorities to keep in contact with young people who leave care for longer than they have until now. That is the policy framework.
I turn to the regulations' structure. The regulations are in three parts. The first part provides for the assessment of need, which is a new duty that will be placed on local authorities from 1 April. The regulations provide a system for undertaking the duty to assess need. They put at the centre seeking the views of the young people and they provide for an assessment to be undertaken and a pathway plan—a way of meeting the needs that are identified in the assessment process—to be developed for the young person. In conjunction with the regulations, we have had materials prepared under a contract with the Scottish throughcare and aftercare forum and Barnardo's, which will allow local authorities to pick up properly the needs that are identified. Those materials are currently being finalised and will be launched and provided to local authorities along with training over the next month.
The second part of the regulations is on the manner of providing assistance, particularly financial assistance. As I described earlier, it lays out the conditions for local authorities to take on the responsibility for providing financial assistance. There are limits relating to the amount of time for which young people have been looked after—essentially assistance will be provided only to those who have been looked after away from home for a period of 13 weeks since the age of 14. Those who do not fall into that category may still be eligible to claim DWP benefit. Under the regulations, only those who are eligible for support from the local authority will be excluded automatically from claiming DWP benefit. The part of the regulations on the manner of providing assistance also introduces regulation of the provision of accommodation, particularly for those who are in full-time further or higher education.
The final part of the regulations concerns appeals against decisions. Given that young people will be relying on their local authority to provide financial support, it was recognised that it will be necessary to have a quick and, we hope, simple way of appealing against any decisions with which they are unhappy.
There was an extensive consultation on the whole idea of transferring those responsibilities to local authorities and improving the provision of aftercare services. There was also consultation specifically on the guidelines and regulations and on the materials that were prepared by Bernardo's and the throughcare and aftercare forum, which carried out their own extensive process of consulting interested groups and young people themselves in designing those materials.
The financial implications for local authorities are twofold: first, there is the cost of the new system of assessment; secondly, there is the burden of taking on the payment of certain DWP benefits. In November, ministers announced a total of £10 million in this year and the next two years for carrying out new duties and to meet the costs of those DWP benefits that will now be replaced by financial support from local authorities.
I see from the Executive note that £10 million is being made available over three financial years for local authorities, to help them to prepare. With regard to the financial support that was the responsibility of the DWP, has funding been transferred to the Scottish Executive from the DWP to support those young people?
Yes. There has been a transfer from the DWP to the Scottish block to cover that change.
In past years, there has been a problem with young persons leaving care becoming either homeless or, in a number of cases, roofless, with nowhere appropriate to go. Have the regulations been drafted with a view to ensuring that that kind of eventuality does not happen?
The regulations and the materials that accompany them provide for an assessment of the housing needs of young people. Aside from that, there is an underlying drive to have the whole local authority—not just the social work department—regard itself as the corporate parents of those children. There is a lot in the guidance about cross-cutting working within a local authority to break down those barriers.
That is not the only work that is being done to reduce homelessness and rooflessness among young people leaving care. The needs of those young people also form a central part of homelessness legislation and the homelessness strategies that local authorities are supposed to provide. Between them, a fair amount of policy activity has been directed to that programme.
You may not have this information, but I would like to know how many young people qualify for discretionary payments and how many qualify for statutory payments.
I do not know that off the top of my head. I know that there are roughly 1,200 young people, aged 16 and 17, who leave care in Scotland every year, of whom about 600 will qualify for financial assistance because they have been looked after away from home. Beyond that, I am not sure how many are being provided with the discretionary payments at the moment. That population will soon move through as people age, but we can expect roughly 1,200 in that category each year.
I would like to make an observation and ask a couple of questions. Some of the phraseology about pathway assessment seems to me to invent new forms of bureaucratic expression for no good effect. I wonder just how understandable it is to practitioners.
My first question concerns regulation 8. I know that the pathway assessment refers to various people who have to be consulted and included—parents and teachers, for example—but it does not make any reference to colleges or to the receiving people, if I can put it that way. Why is that?
I am hesitating because I see what you mean about the assessment looking as if it refers only to people who are already involved with the young person. However, in the planning phase—perhaps this is in the guidance—the outlets available and the provision of services in the area should certainly also be considered by the pathway co-ordinator, to use the new bureaucratic language, when he or she is putting together the pathway plan, as opposed to the assessment. It is true that the regulations themselves do not say that providers should be consulted on whether a young person would be suitable for a course, but I think that how the pathway plan—on how the person's needs will be met—should be put together is probably set out in the guidance, although I would have to look that up.
I wonder whether you would come back to us with a reassurance on that point. One of the issues that we picked up in our scrutiny of the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Bill was what can be called the dysfunction between the end of school education and what happens after that. The issue is important and it needs to be addressed.
I have a question on paragraph 16 of the Executive note, on financial implications, which Elaine Murray asked about. I think that you gave us an assurance that the UK Government will compensate us. I take it that the £10 million that has been identified is a guesstimate at this stage. Will the amount of money involved be kept under review vis-à-vis the requirements of local authorities in respect of appeals?
We will encourage councils to report to us their actual expenditure. Although we cannot make a commitment, we expect to get a fairly clear message from the councils as to how much is involved.
Thank you very much indeed.
The regulations are subject to the negative procedure. If no member has a strong objection, we must agree that we do not wish to make representations to the Parliament on the regulations. If, however, members have queries, we could continue the item until next week. We have another week in which to deal with the regulations should we wish more time. Are members happy that we do not make representations to the Parliament?
Members indicated agreement.