Fostering
The first item of business this morning is a debate on motion S2M-1984, in the name of Peter Peacock, on fostering.
I remind members that the debate will be paused at 11 o'clock to allow Parliament to observe a minute's silence.
I call Euan Robertson to speak to and move the motion.
Mr Robertson is not here, Presiding Officer, but Mr Robson is.
I very much welcome this chance to debate a topic that is of national significance and that I have come to understand in my time as Deputy Minister for Education and Young People as being of profound importance to many children and young people and to those who care for them. Fostering is a vital service carried out by dedicated people across the country—people with what I think are extraordinary skills and abilities. I want to place on record my thanks for all their efforts, and I am sure that members will want to join me in those sentiments.
Times have moved on considerably for fostering. The challenges that foster carers face are in some ways greater and they are certainly more complex than hitherto. Foster carers care for some of our most vulnerable and troubled young people and we must ensure that the preparatory training and support that they need is readily available and appropriate. The Executive has been taking a thorough look at the current state of fostering in Scotland, and in particular at the nature of the support that foster carers might need to enable them to do their job. We have funded the Fostering Network to undertake an audit of fostering, and I shall speak more about the network's initial findings in a moment.
Part of the purpose of today's debate is to hear the views of members in this chamber. I recognise that a number of MSPs have expertise to bring to the Parliament from their past professional experience and from their constituency experience. We all have a keen interest in improving outcomes for looked-after children and in improving the services they receive. I look forward to everyone's contribution to the debate.
The most recent children's social work statistics, which were published on 26 October, illustrate some important points. Of the 11,675 young people looked after at the end of March 2004, 3,461 were with foster carers. That is an increase of 5 per cent since last year and 13 per cent since 2000. I know that, for some young people, foster care will not be an appropriate option. However, that increase in the use of foster care, where young people are, of course, very much part of the local community, is something that I am keen to encourage.
However, the statistics also tell a story of underachievement and bleak futures for a large number of looked-after young people. Of 16 and 17-year-old care leavers, six out of 10 did not achieve any qualifications at Scottish credit and qualifications framework level 3 or above, compared with less than 10 per cent for Scotland as a whole. Around 60 per cent of young people leaving care were not in education, employment or training, compared with 14 per cent of all 16 to 19-year-olds in Scotland. There has been little change in those proportions compared with previous years. Those young people deserve the same chances in life as other young people. We need to ask more of our local authorities in what they are achieving for looked-after young people. That is why we have recently announced additional funding of £6 million to support improved outcomes for looked-after children.
Can the minister explain the reasons for that underachievement? Tackling those reasons will mean that we can tackle the problem.
We have some idea, but not a full idea, of the reasons for underachievement. That is why we have put funding into some innovative projects to see whether we can change the levels of underachievement. In some local authority areas, there are examples of the trend being reversed. We want to find out the reasons for that reversal and we are taking active steps to see whether we can find an answer. As Andrew Welsh will appreciate, there may not be a single answer. Rather, a cluster of questions and problems may require a number of answers.
I recognise the challenges that local authorities face in ensuring adequate provision of foster care. I wish to encourage the use of high-quality foster placements, where those are the best way of securing improved outcomes for children. I want to reduce the need for young people to be in residential care. To do that, I recognise that there must be enough foster carers, with the right skills, to provide proper support to those young people. To enable us to get to that point, and for local authorities to make that transition in service delivery, I recognise that we need to invest in recruiting and training new foster carers. At present, there is a shortage of suitable foster placements, and foster carers are paid allowances that vary significantly across the country. We need to ensure that all foster carers are paid allowances that recognise the work that they do, and that needs to be far more consistent across Scotland. I therefore recognise the need to invest in fostering in the short term, to recruit and train new foster carers, and to ensure that all foster carers are paid a fair and consistent allowance.
Has the minister considered the situation of grandparents who are looking after children, perhaps because the parents are deceased, but who cannot get the sort of payments that foster carers get? Does he recognise that that needs to be addressed?
I am grateful to Maureen Macmillan for her intervention. In June, I wrote to local authorities informing them of their duties with regard to paying allowances for what might be described as kinship care. I am happy to share that information with Maureen Macmillan after the debate.
In the longer term, the availability of high-quality foster placements should reduce the need for so many children to be looked after in what is often very expensive residential care. The resultant saving should offset some of the annual cost of fostering and provide for additional investment.
In the statement on the spending review, the then Minister for Finance and Public Services said that we would increase allowances for foster carers who look after young people over 15 years old. Today I can say that we will not only fulfil that commitment but go further. I am therefore announcing that we will provide local authorities with a total of £12 million over two years from 1 April 2005, to allow them to invest in improving allowances for foster carers. The funding will allow them to make investments that will improve allowances, and that in turn should help to attract more foster carers, which in turn will permit more young people to move from residential care to foster care. Our funding package is therefore geared to support local authorities in making the transition from residential care to foster care for more of our young people. As I said a moment or two ago, that will allow councils over time to deploy savings in residential care costs into better foster care. I will announce detailed allocations to individual local authorities in the near future, after further consultation.
Let me make it clear that money alone is not the answer to all those problems. I have recognised the need for investment and made clear our commitment, but that is only one part of the better future that we want for our looked-after children.
Will the minister go a wee bit further and explain how the money is going to be divided among the 32 local authorities? Will it be divided according to the number of children in foster care, or will it simply be divided on a population basis?
We shall conduct discussions with local authorities, because there are different problems for different local authorities, and different local authorities are paying different rates at present. I will announce further details after those discussions with the local authorities have been concluded.
As I said, we are talking not only about money, but about the attitude, commitment and recognition that we take to the young people in foster care. We must have the attitude that sees those young people as people who have the right to achieve and the professionals who work with those young people must ensure that that right is exercised. We must have a commitment to helping a young person to see a future for themselves as a happy, integrated member of society. We must recognise that young people have aspirations and that their aspirations need to be encouraged.
On the subject of the £12 million, given that Glasgow City Council pays £60 more than the City of Edinburgh Council does for a child who is over 16 years old, how will the money be distributed? Are you saying that Glasgow is paying enough and that other councils should uprate their payments to that level?
We want to achieve fair and consistent allowances. As I will go on to say, we also want investment in such things as support services and training for foster carers. We will ask the local authorities, where they are paying allowances, to use the additional resources to ensure that additional training and other opportunities are made available to foster carers and that they provide support services to foster carers.
With demographic trends as they are, we need to ensure that all our young people have the support that they need in order to reach their full potential. We should do that not only because every individual has their own unique worth, but because our vision of a smart, successful Scotland depends on all our young people developing their talents to the full and then putting those talents to best use. There is evidence that young people in foster care achieve more than those in residential care and that they go on to lead successful, independent lives. Although there are a variety of reasons for that, the main lesson to draw is that, when given the support, looked-after young people will shine.
The Who Cares? Scotland report that we published recently showed that only 29 per cent of the young people in residential care whose responses were included in the report achieved standard grades. For young people in foster care, the figure was 67 per cent. The report ends on a poignant note:
"Looked after young people sit in classrooms around the country, in schools the length and breadth of Scotland, yet for all intents and purposes they are in a different class."
That situation must end.
I want to make it clear that I am not saying that foster care is the only answer to the many issues that need to be tackled before looked-after children get the same chances as other children. I am saying, however, that foster care has a proven track record of success. If we want to build on that, and make it available to young people with more complex needs, we need a modern fostering service.
As I said earlier, we have commissioned the Fostering Network to undertake an audit of fostering across Scotland. The network will complete its work in April next year, but we have some initial findings that I would like to share with the chamber. The survey found that the morale of foster carers is high, with 92 per cent of foster carers reporting that they are proud of their role—as they rightly should be. We need to keep sight of that fact and build on it. The survey also found that children are being placed in foster care at a younger age and the initial findings note that their needs are at least as complex as those in the older age group.
It also appears that sibling groups are increasingly coming into care. The expectation was noted that such groups would be kept together, which can lead to foster carers caring for a large number of children at one time—yet another challenge for carers. The survey also found that 80 per cent of children had contact with their birth parents, which often involved the foster carer in working with the child's parents—yet another set of skills that foster carers need.
An important part of the audit will be the recommendations on what preparatory training a foster carer needs to be able to meet those challenges. We are not due to receive that section of the audit until next year. However, the findings that we have received so far show that only 11 per cent of respondents have gained further qualifications since becoming foster carers. A number of factors seem to be involved, including lack of child care cover, distance of travel to learning base and timing.
The findings give us food for thought. That is why, in addition to the £12 million already announced, I am considering a further investment in the provision of training and support for foster carers. Our thinking and what is made available will be informed by the Fostering Network's audit, which, as I said, I hope will be available in the early part of next year.
I believe that I am well beyond my time, Presiding Officer. I will therefore conclude with one or two final remarks. Looked-after children are our children: we all need to work together in partnership to ensure that they get the same chances in life as their non-care peers. A vitally important part of the service that will deliver this success is fostering. That is why we have made £12 million available to improve fostering and ensure a fostering service fit for the 21st century.
We require, and young people rightly demand, a service that meets their needs. To do that, we must shape a modern fostering service. In the course of this morning's debate I look forward to hearing views on the shape of the future services.
I move,
That the Parliament, in acknowledging that children thrive best in strong families, recognises the important role that foster carers play in providing a supportive and loving family environment for many of our most vulnerable children and welcomes the Scottish Executive's intention to invest in the future of the fostering service to increase the number of high quality placements and give local authorities resources to establish a fair and consistent system of allowances for foster carers.
The Scottish National Party welcomes the commitment that is expressed in the Executive motion to boost the fostering service in this country.
I listened carefully to what the minister said and welcome his intentions. That said, as the minister appreciates, the devil is often in the detail of a proposal and good intentions do not guarantee the outcomes that all might desire. Scottish National Party members would therefore like to study any proposals in some depth before we reach a final, considered judgment.
There is no doubt, however, that significant investment in the fostering service is long overdue. I refer members to the concerns expressed by the child care charity, the Fostering Network, which claims that Scotland is short of some 700 foster carers. That is a crippling shortage, when one considers that more than 3,000 children are living with just over 2,000 foster families. Too many children's lives are being badly disrupted by having to make frequent moves and by having to go to foster homes a long way from family, friends and school.
The statistics show that in Scotland one in four children who live away from home in public care were placed in three or more homes in the last year, whereas the equivalent figure for England is one in seven children. What is more, the problem of recruitment and retention is not a new phenomenon. Back in 1999, the then Minister for Children and Education, Sam Galbraith, announced a review of the payment structures in fostering. He did so in recognition that the under-resourcing of foster carers was a major disincentive. Although it has taken a long time for the Executive to fulfil that pledge, let us hope that this is a case of better late than never.
There is no doubt that the allowances that are paid to foster carers do not meet the true costs of looking after a child. Indeed, research that was commissioned by the Scottish Executive said so, as did the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities report on foster care, both of which were published in 2000.
The Fostering Network's broad estimate is that each child in Scotland is being under-resourced by approximately £50 per week. That figure is based on university research on the true costs of caring. Either children's needs are not being fully met, or carers are subsidising the needs out of their own pocket. Whatever the reason, the net effect is indisputable: more carers are quitting. The figures show that 5 to 10 per cent are doing so every year. Fewer carers are being recruited, which also limits placement choice. That result increases the likelihood of a mismatch between the child and his or her foster family, which leads to disruption and further moves. These children are among the most vulnerable and damaged in our society and they deserve better from our public services. Foster care is not just about offering a place of safety; it should offer the opportunity for the child to experience stability and an environment that gives them the chance to recover and develop.
The Association of Directors of Social Work is wholly supportive of the Fostering Network's call for better support for foster carers. The association acknowledges that there is inconsistency in the basic allowances and fees across the country. In some areas, independent fostering agencies that offer better remuneration to foster carers are springing up. Given the dearth of foster carers, the local authorities are being forced into using those agencies, which adds significant pressure to already stretched budgets.
The ADSW argues that local government cannot handle the situation without a substantial hike in the funding of children's services from the Executive. The £12 million that the minister announced this morning, while welcome, will not make inroads into the estimated £150 million shortfall in funding for children's services as reported by the ADSW, which has led to a situation where local authorities need to spend a third more on those services than they get from the Executive. The minister will be well aware of the representations that local government has made in that regard. The reaction of local government to the detail of the proposals will be indicative of how well the Executive has measured up to the challenge.
The Executive needs to demonstrate that it appreciates that we need to make a step change in the provision of foster care services. As institutional care is phased out, the demand for foster care can only grow, and the service will continue to be the major provider of care for the most damaged, vulnerable and demanding of Scotland's children.
We need to reflect on the words of the COSLA report:
"Foster care is a difficult and demanding task. It is also a very isolated one in comparison with other child care placements. This needs to be taken into consideration in the support of carers to ensure that children are given the quality and type of care that they need and deserve and carers are given the information and help to develop the skills that they need to care for foster children without prejudicing their own family relationship."
Yet we know that less than 1 per cent of carers had any form of specific accredited child care training. We are in danger of creating a two-tier system, where children and young people in foster care will be cared for by people, but where there is no agreed national minimum in terms of training, background or experience. The very opposite applies to children in residential care.
Does the Executive intend to establish a national vehicle to deliver skills training to the foster care service? Alternatively, how are fostering support services at local level going to be developed to equip carers with the necessary preparation and continued training and support on a regular and consistent basis? The minister has yet to develop those proposals.
The time has come to stop thinking of foster carers as unsung heroes, as the Executive is fond of labelling them, and instead think of them as professional carers who need to be suitably trained, fairly remunerated and given the back-up that they need for the challenges that they will undoubtedly face. That is the view of the social work directors who are calling for a clear national strategy from the Executive, backed by the requisite resources. Such a need is ever more pressing, given the imperative to establish national standards and an inspection regime, as found in all other child care services.
Finally, reference has been made to kinship carers—the grandparents or other relatives who look after children who would otherwise be the responsibility of the foster care service. Often, those carers get little support from local authorities, yet they provide an invaluable service to the children in their care and to their local communities. Any national strategy for the foster care service must recognise and assist that under-appreciated group of people.
I begin by echoing the words of the minister in paying tribute to those who foster. We have to consider ourselves fortunate indeed that so many people in Scotland are willing to act as foster-parents and give children—many of whom are damaged psychologically and sometimes physically—the opportunity to live in a loving family environment. We are very fortunate indeed.
While foster care affects only 1 per cent of children under the age of 18, we agree that the implications of the Executive's existing policy fall across the board of children who are in need. We rely on the undoubted altruism of those who understand that a stable and secure childhood is a prerequisite for a well-adjusted and successful adulthood, but we cannot be complacent. Foster homes should provide a large number of facilities—a caring, loving environment and an opportunity for intellectual and psychological growth. However, foster homes can only be successful as long as they are not overcrowded or underfunded, and only as long as they are run by those who, in taking in the most vulnerable of youngsters, recognise what has to be done. If that happens, Scotland will be a better place.
The Executive's policy on foster homes has not been entirely successful. One voluntary organisation—the Fostering Network—has reported that Scotland is, as I speak, in need of more than 700 supplemental foster homes. We call on the Executive to follow through on its motion and "invest in the future" to ensure that the shortfall is overcome. Only when the Executive gets serious—and I know that it is serious about the shortage of foster care—will we see the full result and only then will all young people be able to achieve their full potential.
We must consider ourselves lucky that so many citizens are willing to co-operate in such a magnificent manner. However, we must remember that the shortfall in the number of foster homes is dangerous, because it means that many youngsters who are at risk may not get the care that they need, and may resort to antisocial behaviour.
Statistics show that the educational achievement gap between children who live at home and children who are put into foster care is widening. Such a gap can be explained in many ways. Understandably, children who find themselves in foster care need stability in order to thrive. Unfortunately, stability, by definition, is hard to come by when children come from mixed-up and seriously damaged backgrounds. That is not the Executive's fault, but it must ensure that sufficient places are available to provide that stability, because enabling a child to establish roots at a single school facilitates the forming of relationships with teachers and other youngsters, and means they are less likely to resort to antisocial behaviour. We must provide stability, otherwise children in foster care will continue to feel disengaged in school and, worst of all, begin to doubt themselves.
Frankly, the academic achievement gap is also sometimes the result of low teacher expectation. Studies have shown that teachers and social workers too often defer to incorrect preconceptions that looked-after children will not be able to function in the classroom. While the achievement gap shows that looked-after children are having problems in school, in many instances we must make it clear to our social workers and educators that foster-children deserve—and, if anything, require—more attention than the regular student. We must believe in those children, for if we do not, no one else will.
The problems will not be solved simply by throwing money at them, although I welcome the increased funding announced by the minister. The Executive has in the past increased funds for school supplies for foster-children, yet studies have shown that the policy is not being implemented effectively because, in many cases, children and their foster-parents do not have a say in how the money is used and allocated.
I call on the minister to think carefully about how he will deal with the fostering crisis overall. Offering more money to potential foster-parents is not the only answer. Indeed, if that policy is adopted without proper screening systems, we could witness a serious decrease in the quality of foster homes. Yes, of course more money must be spent, but more important, we must strike a delicate balance between expenditure on homes and the proper education of looked-after children and those who care for them. We must ensure that foster-children are safe and secure wherever they live. That must be one of the pre-eminent thoughts in our minds. However, in giving foster-children and foster-parents decisions on how money is allocated, we can only improve matters.
Finally, I turn to an old hobby-horse about adoption. In many cases, fostering is only a short-term solution. Where a child seeks a permanent home, we must ensure that our adoption procedures are sufficiently flexible to allow for that. To much politically correct thinking surrounds this issue. If the parents are good enough, competent enough and big-hearted enough to look after children, considerations such as age and race should be secondary. Children's safety must always be paramount, but some of the bureaucracy attached to the system is a positive disincentive to people adopting. We should be encouraging people to adopt, not putting unnecessary barriers in their way.
We have not felt it necessary to seek to amend the Executive's motion. We acknowledge that its intentions in this matter are good, although we question whether some of the approaches that it has adopted are the best way forward. Only when we consider matters carefully and cogently and acknowledge that some of the sacred cows of social work thinking in this respect have to be slaughtered can we move forward and achieve what I know we all seek—better provision and a more positive future for Scotland's looked-after children.
Bill Aitken seemed to turn to me when he was talking about slaughtering sacred cows of social work thinking. I do not know whether the comment was aimed at me deliberately or whether I am showing undue paranoia this morning. I take on board one of the points that he made towards the end of his speech about the fact that there are no amendments to the Executive's motion. That suggests that there is consensus that the subject is important and that we should be seeking better ways of dealing with the issues that the three previous speakers raised—I am sure that all the following speakers will do so, too—in relation to difficulties and possible solutions.
When I asked a former colleague of mine who heads up the family placement team in Fife what issues should be raised this morning, she said that a general recognition of the invaluable role that foster carers play would be incredibly helpful, so I will turn later to the important issues of fees and foster carers' tasks. Foster carers are unsung heroes; other members of society do not acknowledge the invaluable job that they do, but such recognition would go a long way towards addressing their grievances. As the minister said in his opening remarks, the fact that 92 per cent of foster carers think that they do a valuable job, which they enjoy, shows a remarkable level of satisfaction. I am not sure that that is replicated among other members of society, who give fostering little thought—they would not think of doing it unless we pushed them to it.
Although I do not agree with the United Kingdom honours system, I was pleased to write a letter of support for one of the people's nominees—a foster carer in Fife who had fostered more than 200 children, a large proportion of whom were pre-adoption babies. I was disappointed that she was not recognised in the new year honours list, because that would have gone a long way towards giving foster carers the recognition that they deserve.
On pre-adoption babies, we have to break down the categories of foster carers, because they do not carry out just one task; fostering is a multitask effort. the fostering of a pre-adoption baby is one of the most difficult tasks because the foster carer knows that they will be giving up a new-born child in six to eight weeks. That is a difficult job to do because of the bonding that should have occurred between the birth mother and the baby, but did not, and the artificial bonding that will take place between the baby and its substitute carer before it goes to its adoptive parents. Foster carers do not just have to play that relinquishing role with pre-adoption babies; it occurs with younger children who might be placed with a family on an emergency temporary basis and who might remain with the family for months if not years before moving on to permanent care with someone else or returning to their birth family. It is difficult for carers to invest in such young people and give them everything that they want to give them, but to have then to give them up.
The issue that Bill Aitken raised about political correctness in adoption needs to be explored further, although I would call it not political correctness but good practice. Perhaps Bill Aitken's problem is not with political correctness in adoption itself; we have to consider what not just the Labour Government at Westminster and the Scottish Executive, but previous Tory Governments have done in legislation on the matter. The Boarding-out of Children (Foster Placement) Regulations 1988 (SI 1988/2184), which we still use, and the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, were introduced under the Conservatives. Those are major pieces of legislation that determine the facts that have to be taken into account when children are being placed. They state clearly that we must acknowledge a child's religious and ethnic background when placing them with substitute carers. We have to take on board the fact that that is the legislation with which we are working. It is unfair that we criticise social workers for doing what the law tells them to do, rather than consider what the law says.
Members have mentioned the importance of the fostering task, but we should acknowledge the hard work that is involved in a person's becoming a foster carer in the first place. Once potential foster carers intimate their interest, we expect them to attend a large number of preparation group meetings so that they know what sort of issues they will face. They also have to undergo police checks, as does their extended family. In normal family situations we rely on the extended family to offer care—such as babysitting or looking after a child for a weekend—so foster carers need the same respite to be built in. We expect the potential foster carers and their families to be assessed, to have extensive reports written on them and to have medical and police investigations carried out. They then have to appear before the fostering panel of the local authority, which might or might not approve them. As someone who chaired a panel in Fife, I know that it is not easy to appear before panels. As much as I thought that I made the situation relatively informal, having someone sit in judgment—whether in that setting or in a more legalistic sense—can be a traumatic experience for people who have many skills to offer. It is difficult to become a foster carer.
I welcome the money that has been announced for training and on-going support for foster carers, because much investment has too often in the past gone into the preparation of foster carers; we have not invested in their retention but have almost just left them to get on with it once they have been approved.
The issue of fees is important. As Adam Ingram indicated, independent agencies that offer fostering services have not sprung up only recently. The major voluntary societies in Scotland have always offered such services; Barnardo's special families project is perhaps the most extensive and most talked about. Independent agencies have always paid foster carers far greater rates than have local authorities and there has always been an internal market in which good, experienced local authority foster carers have been able to move on to get greater financial rewards and greater support from independent agencies. We need a level playing field for our local authorities and the voluntary agencies.
Under the previous system of local government, the larger authorities such as the then Lothian Regional Council and Strathclyde Regional Council were always able to augment the supply of foster carers with what was available in other parts of the local authority area. With a much more fragmented system of local government that has 32 local authorities, the pool of foster carers that is available to some authorities has become much more limited, so they have had to place children at considerable distances from their families. One of the greatest impediments to reintegrating children with their birth family is their being placed in substitute care great distances away.
It is not surprising that at times plans go awry. With the best of intentions, people make plans to return a child to its home after a short period of fostering, but find that they cannot because of barriers that have resulted from the geographical location in which the child was placed; they may have made new friends, will have to go to a new school and so on. Such matters must be considered if we are serious about addressing the situation.
I want to talk about what has been said about poor outcomes for looked-after children. From what the minister said this morning, we know that children away from home do significantly worse in terms of their educational and social operation than do those who remain in the family home. However, such children do considerably worse if they are in residential care as opposed to foster care. Fifteen years ago, statistics on that caused some local authorities, such as Fife Regional Council, to consider closing down their residential provision and moving to a more foster care oriented way of providing substitute care. Other local authorities have been slower in doing that and the legacy of that tardiness has still to be seen. That is particularly true in the west of Scotland, where the then Strathclyde Regional Council relied unduly on residential care for adolescents, rather than on substitute family care. We need to take that issue on board, which is why today's debate is opportune. We need to help local authorities to address the needs of young people and to ensure that we have a properly trained and rewarded foster care network in Scotland.
One mark of a civilised society is the way in which it treats its children and young people in relation to providing them with the upbringing that will allow them to achieve their full potential in adulthood. I pay tribute to Scott Barrie's obvious expertise in this subject, which has added value to the debate. If that is our goal, fostering and adoption systems will inevitably involve a wide range of policy issues, such as educational achievement, public support for foster carers, developing integrated services, developing quality standards and ensuring that those who leave the care system do so positively and are capable of facing whatever the future brings to them. People who were brought up in ordinary families take it for granted that they will be equipped to deal with such things.
The six principles of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 still stand good, especially with regard to safeguarding and promoting children's welfare, promoting the family as the medium for care of children and ensuring that any action through public authorities is properly justified in terms of the needs and the rights of the children and supported by services from all relevant authorities. It is a complex problem that requires input from a range of relevant agencies.
Throughout the process, the welfare of the child must be paramount and the child's views must be taken into account. Note must also be taken of the importance of cultural and linguistic backgrounds. No child should be robbed of their racial or linguistic inheritance in any fostering or adoption decisions. Those are difficult matters, but proper care and concern can be integral to building a safe and secure psychological and physical future for children who, in many cases, start life with other disadvantages.
It is important to stabilise unstable situations and to give such young people a more solid and confident base on which to build their lives. That is—to put it mildly—never a simple task, but it must always be the goal of fostering and adoption procedures.
There are problems aplenty that bar the way of willing public authorities and their staff. Human chemistry—personality, likes, dislikes and prejudices—is the most difficult commodity in the universe with which to deal; as MSPs, we are well equipped to testify to the truth of that. Children bring their own particular baggage, personal experiences and history, so they must always be treated as individuals whose lives and futures are at stake and who can be harmed if the wrong decisions are made.
Fostering is a complex issue. It involves neither a homogeneous group nor a static group. Children's care might be short, medium or long-term and they are involved emotionally and personally with their original families and their foster families. In other words, local authorities are being called on to deal fairly and positively with a multiplicity of problems under what can be trying situations for everyone involved. The difficulty and complexity of their decision making should never be underestimated.
Because foster care is the preferred type of accommodation for looked-after children under 12 years of age in both short and long-term placements, the responsibility on local decision makers is heavy in terms of children's services planning and detailed decision making, and in relation to choosing suitable foster homes and carers, deciding payment levels and checking the delivery of services. This morning, the minister said that the Government intends to reduce residential care and increase fostering. It is important that the increased responsibilities for Scotland's local authorities—which will inevitably follow—must be matched by appropriate extra resources. In detailed discussions with the minister, I will be asking what can be done to assist local authorities to deliver the goal that we all seek.
I want central Government to provide adequate funding, staff training and logistical back-up to assist local authorities. Resources for fostering services go beyond the social work department to affect almost every other local authority department in terms of meeting the needs of fostered young people from childhood until they leave the care and fostering system. As ever in life, matters such as those that we are discussing are never simple and are never easily solved.
A survey of foster-children—albeit a United Kingdom one—showed that they were 10 times more likely to be excluded from school or to attend a special school, four times less likely to go on to further education and 12 times more likely to leave school with no qualifications. The survey also touched on unemployment, young homelessness, prison, drug abuse and mental health problems. While such problems do not apply uniformly to foster-children, the survey shows the range of difficulties that those young people face and which must be overcome by the collective effort of the authorities involved.
The Government must state clearly how it will add further resources to assist local authorities in relation to inclusion policies at schools, access to educational resources for foster carers and the ways in which foster-children can go on to take part in further and higher education. The detail of how the funds that have been included in this morning's announcements will be distributed will be put to the test by the size and the complexity of the problems involved.
It is clear that fostering involves integrating various services at local and national levels as well as easing the burdens of local authorities and foster carers. When the minister sums up, I would like him to give a positive response in respect of provision of resources and assistance that will allow our local authorities to perform those functions.
All members are united in what we want for these vulnerable young children. I pay tribute to all foster-parents and families who open their homes to provide youngsters with a stable environment that will enable them to leave behind the past and build a better future. There can be few greater tasks, challenges and rewards for those children or our society. The smart, successful Scotland that we all seek must also be a caring Scotland.
As it has been in the past, the consensus in favour of fostering is remarkably strong today. Fostering is not one of those acrimonious political issues, although there are arguments about how best to deliver the service. It is important that, somehow, we convey to foster-parents and other carers how much we support them. I do not know whether it would be practical for the minister to write them all a letter on our behalf, but I think that that would be a good idea.
Furthermore, as Scott Barrie and others have said, we have continually to publicise the importance of caring and foster caring; we have to get the issue into the media in the best possible way. The fact that there is consensus makes that difficult, because more publicity is given to rows. Obviously, today, this consensual debate about caring will not be able to compete in the media with exciting news about Tommy Sheridan. Whatever might happen in the future, Mr Sheridan has made a very important—I am choosing my words carefully—contribution to Scottish public life, and he deserves credit for what he has achieved.
However, today we are trying to excite people about a very important issue. Perhaps we could consider handing out certificates at local or national level. In many voluntary organisations, when a volunteer has done something for five, 10 or 20 years, they get a nice piece of mock parchment to hang on the wall. It would help a bit if we had more of that sort of thing, or something like a fostering day or a caring day when provosts, ministers and local MSPs could do their stuff. When a person is a volunteer, it is very important that they feel that they are appreciated.
We must develop a national policy that can be delivered locally. That is a problem in many cases; some councils find it hard to provide the allowances that are necessary to attract people, or they might not have a good catchment area for foster carers. We need to take advice—I have no doubt that the minister does that—from the children who are looked after and from the carers and foster carers, as well as from the voluntary organisations and social work departments that are involved. We need then to develop a national policy that will deliver on fostering, adoption and caring in general.
On that, I would sign up very strongly for involving grandparents. They might not technically be doing the fostering, but they get a raw deal. Like many other members, I have heard very strong representations on this subject for many years. Grandparents get a raw deal and could contribute much more if the rules were helpful to them.
On investing money, although it is not the only answer, without it there is no answer so we have to have more money for fostering. In connection with that, the very tight local government settlement in the budget is unfortunate, but it might be that that cannot be altered. In that case, we have to find other ways of funding fostering in addition to what the local councils already have. The Executive has to accept that developing fostering is part of its educational and antisocial behaviour agendas and its aim to build up communities. Some of the money from the budgets for those matters should go into helping fostering. Figures show that if children are well fostered, they do not get into as much trouble as they might otherwise do and they do not have so many problems at school. That would be a good investment—the minister has to be clever enough to tap into other budgets to pay for fostering.
We need training and allowances to keep foster-parents going and to provide continuity. In discussions that I have had with foster-parents, lack of continuity comes up as one of the chief problems. Because councils are very tight with money for foster-parents, they have to shuffle the children around to keep the system going. If there were more foster-parents who were all trained to deal with the various problems, the children would not have to be moved about in that way. Continuity is of great importance when young people face such problems.
On the point about children having to move around, does the member accept that one of the difficulties that we have with a shortage of suitable foster carers in some areas is that youngsters have to double up? A placement that is approved for two children might actually have three or four children. That can have a disruptive effect on other foster-children—let alone on the birth children of the foster family. The problem is not just that the children might have to move around; it is also about the effect that that has on the placements.
That is a very good point. Scott Barrie's experience in this matter strengthens my argument.
We can also try to improve the system by ensuring that there is more support for foster-parents from social work departments, other parts of the council and voluntary organisations. It is one thing to carry a burden alone, but it is another to carry the same burden with some help. Whether it be respite care or clubs for young carers or foster-children, there could be more support for the people who are doing this very important job.
There are a lot of good ideas around. The quality of the debate—until I started to speak—has been very good, and I hope that the minister will take on board some of the ideas to improve the service. That the Executive, the minister and the local authorities have good intentions is fine, but we have to deliver the means to achieve what we want.
I start with my involvement in fostering, which took place during my short period as a member of a children's panel. As has been pointed out, all our decisions were centred on the needs of the child; not only that, but separation from parents and fostering were the very last and most difficult of the decisions that a children's panel had to take. Everything should be done to try to prevent that from having to happen. I will return to that theme in a minute.
I am glad to hear from Euan Robson of a consensus on the advantages of fostering as compared with the care provided in care homes, which, as a teacher, I have also experienced. He mentioned educational achievements among looked-after children who are leaving care. There might be something to be learned from the fact that in the children's services performance indicators of 2002-03, five local authorities did significantly better than others in terms of the educational achievement of looked-after children. Those authorities also did significantly better than they had done the year before. Therefore, there must be something to learn from those authorities. If members will bear with me, I will list the statistics.
Aberdeen City Council went from 50 per cent to 54 per cent of looked-after children gaining standard grade English and maths; East Lothian Council went from 46.2 per cent to 66 per cent; Fife Council went from 37 per cent to 61 per cent; Midlothian Council doubled from 33 per cent to 66 per cent; and South Lanarkshire Council went from 27 per cent to 66.7 per cent—all within one year. If just one or two authorities were involved, I would say that, given the small numbers of children in care in all Scottish local authorities, the statistics might not be significant. However, given that looked-after children in five local authorities are doing significantly better, it would be wise of the Executive to take note.
Robin Harper's statistics are correct, and I assure him that the Executive is very interested to know whether there are factors, procedures or policies common to those authorities that have helped to turn the level of attainment around. I also assure him that we will be considering the statistics very closely to see whether there are any lessons to be learned. In Scotland, we need to spread best practice around the country and he has given a good example.
I thank the minister.
I cheer Donald Gorrie for his suggestions on celebrating fostering and Scott Barrie for his proposal for a medal for someone in Fife who has fostered 200 people. We have at least one similar person in Edinburgh and perhaps I should be making the same proposal, although I do not know whether he would agree to it—that would have to be ascertained in advance.
I have always been exercised about panel disposals. It is and has always been the case, both 20 years ago and today, that children's panels cannot make the decisions that they would like to make about children of all ages because of a lack of services and because services are sometimes not available. I realise that the situation is a running sore, but I must draw the Executive's attention to the need for some holistic thinking, as the issue affects not just fostering but social work in general. More must be done, especially for very young children.
Having talked to Children 1st recently, I would like to draw to members' attention—I am sure that the Executive's attention has already been drawn to this—the fact that Children 1st is developing family group conference services. Although Children 1st is not directly involved in fostering, it believes that family group conferences will have an impact on fostering. It recognises that there will always be a need for fostering, but it believes that the use of family group conferences will reduce the number of children in need of foster care placements and thereby reduce the demand for, and alleviate pressure on, fostering services.
Like Donald Gorrie's suggestion about the role of grandparents, the idea behind family group conferences is that the child should be looked after within the wider family. Demand on children's services might be reduced if the strengths of the wider family were drawn on in deciding how best to care for the child. The family group conference brings together aunts, uncles, grandparents, other concerned family members and sometimes close friends so that they can decide on, and take responsibility for, a family plan for the care and protection of the child or young person.
Although child care professionals have an important role in agreeing the family plan, the decision making lies with the family. The role of the FGC co-ordinator—I hate acronyms, so I will just say family group conference co-ordinator—is to find family members who want to be involved with the child. The co-ordinator will help such family members to push aside the barriers or personal feelings that they might have against one another—such issues always need to be faced—and come together to focus on the child. The co-ordinator will help the child and each family member to work out their views on how the child should best be looked after and to express those views at a family meeting. The process can be difficult and emotional, but a successful family plan will ensure that a child can depend on his or her family rather than on a statutory service to look after them safely.
Children 1st is pioneering that approach with half a dozen councils. It appreciates that statutory services often offer vulnerable children the best option of care, but it wants to work on the alternatives that might exist before that option is chosen. It wants to ensure that every viable option for the child remaining safely with the family has been considered. That is an important point. I hope that it does not sound as if I think that fostering is a bad idea. I add my contribution to the plaudits that other members have given fosterers.
I echo Adam Ingram's call for national standards and national inspections—I think that he also mentioned the role of grandparents—because I think that those can only provide greater support for foster carers.
I do not know whether Scott Barrie was suggesting that the process for becoming a foster carer was too complicated, but it sounded to me as if potential carers must jump through an awful lot of hoops. Perhaps the Executive might want to consider whether the process can be simplified.
If I may clarify my point, I did not say that the process was too complicated; I simply wanted to indicate how difficult the process is. It perhaps must be unduly complicated because of the need to ensure that those who offer substitute care are of the best quality. However, it is not an easy process to go through.
Mr Harper, we have time in hand, but I will not be able to give everyone the nine minutes that you have had.
I am sorry, Presiding Officer. You did not remind me of the time and I was not looking at the clock.
I finish by saying that I welcome today's debate and I hope that the issue is debated again in the chamber when we receive the report that is due in February.
I am afraid that consensus makes for repetition. Much of what I planned to say has already been said.
I welcome today's debate, which provides us all with an opportunity to pay tribute to Scotland's many excellent foster carers, who have opened up their homes to some of our most vulnerable children and who offer such children the love and support of a stable family life for as long as they need to be cared for.
Children need to be looked after outwith their parental home for a variety of reasons. The periods of care that such children require can vary, but they may require only a short period before they return, as the majority do, to their own families. Some children may move between residential and foster care, but there are now, thankfully, fewer and decreasing numbers of children in residential care. Others are fostered with a view to adoption in the longer term. As we have heard, today more of those children are younger and increasingly more of them have complex needs.
Whatever the reason that children require care outwith their families, foster care is nowadays the preferred type of accommodation for children under 12 for both long-term and short-term placements. Some 75 per cent of the children who are looked after in accommodation away from home are now in foster care. Given that significant growth in foster care in recent years, the Fostering Network has become an extremely important source of care and support for children and young people who need to find a stable home and the family support that will allow them to thrive and to have a chance to achieve their potential within the community.
As the minister and others have said, the poor educational achievement of looked-after children has been a concern in recent years. Many such children leave school at 16 or 17 with no qualifications and some of them are excluded from school. Others are not in education, employment or training when they leave care. Good foster carers will give the children in their care the support and love that they need to help them to overcome their difficulties and to leave care as more successful and more confident young adults.
The significant shortfall in foster carers that we face in Scotland makes it difficult to find suitable homes for children who need them. Every week that goes by without such a home can make a great difference to a child's prospects for a stable and rewarding childhood, so it is important that placements are made as soon as possible.
As members know, the Fostering Network has estimated that Scotland requires 700 more foster carers. That huge shortfall means that many children need either to move household several times during their time in care or to double up—as Scott Barrie reminded us. That cannot be in their best interests. Therefore, it is good news that the Executive has responded to the call to invest more resources in the fostering service, to increase the number of high-quality placements and to consider the training needs of foster carers.
It is important to recruit only good foster carers, so the assessment process is crucial in judging a person's suitability for fostering a child or particular categories of children. Assessment must be speedy, but it must also be rigorous.
Current financial support for foster carers is less than ideal and many families have ended up out of pocket under the present system. If people are to be attracted into providing foster care, it is important that they receive adequate allowances to cover their costs. Obviously, cash rewards should not become a reason for people to offer themselves as foster carers.
Major variations and inconsistencies exist in the allowances that Scotland's 32 local authorities provide for foster carers. Campaigners have demanded consistency of funding for all foster families. Therefore, the Executive's pledge to provide local authorities with the resources to set up a fair and consistent system of allowances for carers is a welcome step forward that I hope will assist in recruiting and retaining suitable people.
Government incentives are also a welcome step forward. For example, foster carers welcomed last year's introduction of tax relief on fostering income. Relief is now available on allowances and on up to, I think, £10,000 of income. They also welcomed the introduction of home responsibility protection, which ensures that carers will not get a lower basic retirement pension because they stayed at home to look after children and were not able to pay national insurance contributions.
Let me say a brief word about kinship carers. Today, a significant number of children in Scotland are cared for by family members—often grandparents. Although most of them undertake their caring role for love and not for reward, it is important that they receive appropriate and consistent support in carrying out that role. As they are significant players in caring for their young relatives, a more rigorous approach needs to be taken in assessing, supporting and rewarding family carers throughout the country.
As fostering has become such an important part of caring for vulnerable youngsters away from home, the Executive's proposals are timely, welcome and necessary. It is important for our society that the best people come forward to provide the security and stability that looked-after children and young people need if they are to be happy and secure and achieve their potential. I commend the Executive's commitment to investing in the future of the fostering service and I look forward to hearing the detail of the proposals.
I begin by picking up where Scott Barrie finished, by looking at the optimum place for children—the place where they have the best possible chance of positive outcomes such as achieving good grades in examinations, for example, and going on to further or higher education. That place is within the natural family unit, which is why, to the incomprehension of outside observers, children are often kept with parents whose skills are less than adequate or less than perfect, with work done to support the family. It is significant that 153 of the 560 children in Fife who are currently the subject of care orders still live at home with their parents and receive that support. It is worth making that point, as that should always be where we start in addressing the needs of children.
I pay tribute to the organisations and people whom I have known over the years since 1988, when I was first elected, who work with children and support families. I am thinking of Barnardo's, the Aberlour Child Care Trust, the Victoria Community Project in Kirkcaldy, Children 1st and the many social workers, youth workers, teachers, police officers, community officers and others who have done what they can to support children and families with complex needs. Often, those professionals become the focus of the anger and frustration of parents, relatives and young people themselves for matters that are not their fault and to which they have no perfect solutions.
The issue of grandparent carers—kinship carers—has been mentioned by Nanette Milne, among others. John Swinburne—who is, unfortunately, no longer in the chamber—and I secured a members' business debate on the issue earlier this year. In Fife, 103 children who do not live with their natural parents and who are on the register live with friends or relatives. It is an area of great contention and I am pleased that the minister is looking at it. It requires some strategic analysis and thinking around the needs of those carers, although I suggest that they can never be supported to the level demanded by professional foster carers. We need them because they allow scarce resources to be targeted at the areas of greatest need in fostering and other care services. However, the campaigns around grandparents and their rights are getting slightly muddled, as rights of access are being brought in. I would welcome a focused campaign on kinship care as a separate issue.
I turn to foster carers themselves. Unlike the two groups that I have mentioned—natural parents and kinship carers—foster carers are involved in what is essentially a professional area of work. They do what they do as a job, often in tandem with their other professional job: they go out to work, as do other parents. However, as other members have said, foster carers have, in the past, received little support because there has been little strategic analysis of what is required and what training is needed. They have also been paid widely different rates, by way of allowances, for what they do. Like Robin Harper, I pay tribute to the education and social work staff in Fife who have done so much to raise the attainment rates of looked-after children in Fife by supporting foster carers and helping teachers and social workers. That has not been a universally popular or easy thing to do. For example, it has involved fewer exclusions, which has raised issues—largely among the parents of other children—because of the disruption that can be caused in classes.
Since the demise of the large children's homes, about two thirds of looked-after children in Scotland have been in foster care, and foster care is now the main plank of our child care services. Fife Council has just reviewed its scheme of payment to foster carers in line with Scottish Executive and national guidelines, and it has taken into account such matters as changing holiday patterns. It now pays an additional week's holiday pay so that foster parents are not prevented from taking two holidays a year, as other parents do. Although their holidays are perhaps of a shorter duration, they may, like the rest of us, choose to go abroad if they wish.
In a conversation that I had this morning with the head of social work in Fife Council, I learned that there are currently 230 children in foster care in Fife. In Scotland, 700 children are waiting for foster care placements; in Fife, the figure has risen to 30. As Adam Ingram said, those are the most damaged and challenging children, and we have to make complex arrangements to meet their needs. Other members have spoken about the fees and the costs, but I leave that issue to one side in order to speak about some of the other problematic issues facing foster carers, local authorities and, perhaps, ministers in considering how we might have a national scheme.
One of the biggest problems is the need for support from other agencies, such as psychological services and health services. Addiction is the single biggest cause of the need for fostering, with more than half of children in foster care having parents with drug or alcohol addiction problems. More than half those children are under five and cannot, in the main, say what has happened to them; therefore, their support needs are much more complex.
The type of foster care need that is most likely to leave children on a waiting list is respite fostering for children with profound disabilities. Such care involves a greater range of issues than the ones to which I have referred. The children may have really complex medical and physical needs and may require a continuing regime of drugs—often involving 10 to 12 separate drugs for which prescriptions have to be issued—while respite care is carried out. The children also present exceptionally challenging behaviour. Some children with complex physical disabilities are very strong; therefore, foster carers require specialist training in lifting and handling techniques. In addition, it is not that the foster carer has just a child to stay for a short time; there are the other carers who come along with that individual, such as nursing staff and care assistants, and specialist school arrangements may have to be made. There is, therefore, a real need for training, support and, perhaps, helplines and emergency contacts, as that area of foster caring is frequently one of the most difficult.
Disclosure Scotland checks are required for foster carers. I ask the minister to liaise closely with the Minister for Justice, as there are issues to do with delays in Disclosure Scotland checks. Although the service has got better—we all know that it has got better—there are still problems.
In concluding, I remind the minister of two events in Fife that he attended. We spent an evening with young people who had been in the looked-after service. They had produced a wonderful DVD of their experiences, perceptions and hopes. Last week, he attended the launch of the Fife youth work assembly. Again, that is an area in which priority is being given—I hope—to children with the most complex needs.
Before I talk about fostering, I want to thank Donald Gorrie for what he said about Tommy Sheridan and his resignation. We in the Scottish Socialist Party believe that Tommy has played an outstanding role at the forefront of Scottish and United Kingdom politics and is one of the best-known politicians in the country. However, we also understand the pressure that he has been under and the reasons why he has made this decision. As he will make a statement today, which will obviously be in the public domain, I do not want to say anything more apart from thanking him for his contribution to our party.
Anyone who watched the BBC programme that followed families who foster or adopt would have been moved and upset by it but would also have been—as I was—utterly inspired by the people who are prepared to provide that kind of home for the children involved. When I told people that I was speaking in this debate, two of my friends told me that they would like to foster. It would be interesting to see how many people would be inspired to say the same thing by a programme such as the one on BBC Scotland. However, if the review does anything at all, it must examine the gap that exists between people expressing their desire to help and how they reach the stage of becoming foster carers or foster-parents. After all, we are short of 700 places.
I have a real problem with the way Bill Aitken used the phrases "looked-after children" and "antisocial behaviour" in the same sentence. Children end up being looked after for all sorts of reasons, such as their need for respite care or the fact that their parents have been hospitalised. Some people assume that fostering will always be difficult and that it will always involve looking after children who have complex needs. Those children need to be fostered, but we need to challenge that assumption in the campaign if we are to encourage more people to become foster carers or foster parents.
I was interested in many of the points that Christine May made in her excellent speech. I agree that the review cannot simply be more of the same and, although allowances are a problem, it cannot focus on money. I realise that that is an unusual thing for a socialist to say.
Christine May used the term "professional" foster-parents. I wonder how many of us understand what is meant by that. The children who cannot be placed and who wait the longest are those who have complex needs. One category of foster carer is the special foster carer—people with special qualifications to assist with and look after children in such situations. Instead of considering professional, qualified people for those positions, should we salary foster carers in that special category to give them the time to train and to take responsibility for those children? Are we prepared to introduce and fund higher national certificate or higher national diploma courses and qualifications for foster-parents or foster carers? If that does not form part of the review, we will be asking an awful lot of those people.
We have to think differently. No one disagrees with the motion, but the question is: what different steps are we going to take to ensure that these children have the best possible care when their parents cannot look after them? Local authorities, the Scottish Parliament and society as a whole all have a responsibility in that respect. The review must acknowledge that the issue comes down not only to providing money but to making a psychological shift about the role of foster parents.
At the moment, we face a vicious circle that will be resolved only by recruiting more foster carers. I should also point out that the BBC Scotland programme helped to dispel the traditional view that a foster family is an ideal unit made up of two parents and a couple of children. We have to get the message across that all sorts of people in all sorts of family units can foster. For example, single women and men can foster. There is a lack of understanding about that and if we can get the message across and encourage people to come forward, we will increase the number of foster carers.
Another huge problem is linked to the shortage of social workers. Some foster carers are seeping out the other end because of the pressure that they have been put under. They have been given the child's case work notes and background and, because of problems in social work services, they are being emotionally blackmailed to take on children for whom they are perhaps not prepared or whose needs go beyond the level of care that they can provide. That is not a long-term problem; it is an emergency. What do we about it? The issue raises more questions than answers.
Although much of the review quite rightly focuses on carers, we must also think about the kind of intensive therapy that we should invest in these children, particularly those with complex needs who are the hardest to please and the hardest to provide a stable environment for outside the family or foster-caring unit. Unless we give the children who have specific therapy, intervention and counselling needs that help as an independent right outside the family unit, some of the current difficulties will remain.
I welcome the review and like the ideas that Christine May has proposed. We should consider the question whether being a foster carer should be a salaried, professional position. I hope that when the review comes out in February, it contains some blue-sky thinking that allows us to move forward.
I call Alex Fergusson, whose speech will be interrupted by one minute's silence.
I am sure that I speak for everyone in the chamber when I say that I was disappointed in Frances Curran's speech. I hasten to add that I was disappointed not by its content but by the fact that she was unable to enlighten us on whether she will be a contender for the leadership of her party. Perhaps we will find out more about that matter later.
I am very pleased to contribute to today's debate and particularly welcome the acknowledgement in the motion that there is no substitute for a strong family background as the best medium for an upbringing in which a child can thrive. Some people in today's society would question that claim, and I welcome the Executive's commitment to the immeasurable benefits of a traditional strong family upbringing. However, in doing so, I recognise with sadness that, perhaps all too often, for some people a life that starts out with the very best intentions can end in collapse. Hope can become despair and dreams too often are shattered. That can happen for such a wide variety of reasons that I see no point in trying to cover all of them. For whatever reason, in May 2004, 11,500 children in Scotland either had to be removed from their original surroundings and taken into care or became looked after in some other regulated and supervised way.
I dare say that, for some of those children, such a move must come as a relief. However, for others, it must be deeply traumatic. For some, it would mean separation from siblings and, for others, separation from trusted and loved friends. For all those children, being removed by the authorities, the state, the social services or the courts—whatever people want to call them—must be deeply disturbing and could lead to emotional and psychological damage. The fact that that child is in care or in a foster home instantly means that they have a tag or a label that differentiates them from their peers. That alone must have distinct individual consequences. Every child is bound to react differently to that label, which is where the incalculable value of the carer or foster-parent comes in.
At that point, Presiding Officer, I will pause in my speech to allow for the minute's silence.