Official Report 280KB pdf
::The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-20786, in the name of Roz McCall, on improved childcare support for parents. The debate will be concluded without any questions being put. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak button. I remind members that we will resume business at 2 pm and that we must allow sufficient time for staff to come and clear the chamber. Therefore, I expect members to stick to the speaking time that they have signed up to.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament believes that providing childcare support to parents not only supports the family unit but also helps to grow Scotland’s economy by encouraging more parents back into the workforce; understands that families in Mid Scotland and Fife, and across the country, still struggle to find affordable, flexible and accessible childcare; praises the work of organisations such as Pregnant Then Screwed, which have campaigned to improve childcare provision across the UK; notes that its 2024 State of the Nation Survey concluded that around four in five parents (83.7%) found that childcare costs are the same as or more than their income, and that 71% of mothers and 50% of fathers say that it does not make financial sense for them to work; understands that its 2026 survey is due to conclude, with findings to be published in due course; further understands that the Scottish Government’s Early Learning and Childcare expansion programme evaluation strategy has assessed the impact of the expansion of provision covering the period 2018–25, and that it expects to publish its findings in early 2026, and notes the view that the Parliament should have the opportunity to scrutinise this important review before the end of the current parliamentary session.
12:56
::I thank members from across the chamber for supporting my motion to allow this debate to take place. It is on a really important issue, and I am delighted that we have a chance to debate it in the final few weeks of the parliamentary session.
The motion speaks to two connected truths with which we can all agree: childcare strengthens families, which strengthens Scotland’s economy. Providing childcare is not simply a social policy; it is an economic lever. When parents are able to access affordable, flexible and accessible childcare, they are better able to return to work, increase their hours or pursue training and career progression, which supports household income, reduces financial pressures and contributes to national productivity.
Every parent who is able to re-enter employment because childcare is available represents greater economic participation and greater financial stability for their family, but families in Mid Scotland and Fife and across the country continue to tell us that affordable and flexible childcare can be difficult to find. Availability does not always align with working patterns, provision does not always match demand and costs remain a significant barrier.
That is why the work of organisations such as Pregnant Then Screwed deserves our recognition. Through campaigning and evidence gathering, Pregnant Then Screwed has ensured that the lived experience of parents is heard in policy debates across the UK. Its 2026 state-of-the-nation survey produced sobering findings. Two thirds of mothers said that childcare costs are the same as or more than their income, and more than half of mothers stated that, after paying for childcare, it does not make financial sense for them to work. Those are shocking statistics.
Too many families need both parents working to ensure that they have a roof over their head, heat in their homes and food on their table. Working simply to afford the childcare that allows them to return to work does not provide that security. When the majority of mothers say that employment does not pay once childcare is factored in, we must ask ourselves whether the system is truly delivering for families. With 50 per cent of fathers expressing the same concern, we see that it is a widespread societal issue and not a gender-based one.
It is in that context that I will be clear about where we stand. The Scottish Conservatives are committed to building a country that supports working families from the very start. We believe that no parent should be forced to choose between financial stability and staying at home simply because affordable childcare is out of reach. When parents tell us that it does not make financial sense for them to work, that is a signal that the system is not functioning as it should. Work should provide security, independence and opportunity, not place families under greater strain.
That is why we have proposed the introduction of means-tested childcare from the age of nine months. The purpose is straightforward: to support parents, to ensure that every child has the best possible start in life and to unlock workforce potential in order to reduce poverty. Many young children respond and develop well when nurtured at home by their parents, but whether to do that is a choice that families should be able to make if they can afford to do so. Too many families are forced into a different position and put under financial pressure, because it is not possible for them to balance the cost of childcare with returning to work. By targeting support to those who need it most, we can ease the financial pressures on families, support parents who wish to return to employment and strengthen Scotland’s economy at the same time.
Another issue lies in the inflexibility of the system. It is pointless to offer state-paid childcare if parents cannot access it at the hours that work for them. Being told by the local authority that the hours offered are, to all intents and purposes, a take-it-or-leave-it situation makes it completely unmanageable. That is why we propose to change the payment delivery system to ensure that money actually follows the child. Our system would ensure that parents can directly select the childcare offering in their area that best suits their needs, timings and availability. That might be a private nursery or a childminder but, in many cases, it could still be the local authority nursery. That would allow real choice for parents.
The motion notes that Pregnant Then Screwed’s 2026 survey has just concluded, with its findings to be published. Those findings are important. They will provide updated evidence on whether families think that progress has been made or whether pressures persist. At the same time, the Scottish Government’s early learning and childcare expansion programme evaluation strategy has been assessing the impact of expanded provision, covering the period from 2018 to 2025. We are still waiting for the findings from that—I believe that they are coming out in early 2026, but we are rapidly running out of time.
That evaluation represents a significant opportunity. The expansion of early learning and childcare has been one of the most substantial public policy commitments in recent years, and it is right that we examine the outcome carefully. Has it reduced the cost burden on families? Has it improved flexibility? Has it supported workforce participation as intended? Has it delivered consistency across the regions and communities? I would say that it has not.
The Parliament should have the opportunity to scrutinise that important review before the end of the current parliamentary session. That is not about scoring points; it is about accountability and improvement. If childcare support is to fulfil its dual role to support the family unit and strengthen Scotland’s economy, we must ensure that policy is grounded in evidence and open to examination.
Families in Mid Scotland and Fife, and across Scotland, deserve a childcare system that works for modern working lives. They deserve transparency about the impact of public investment and a Parliament that is willing to engage seriously with the data. The motion asks simply that we recognise both the economic and social importance of childcare, acknowledge the concerns raised by parents and commit to doing something about it.
15:03
::I thank Roz McCall for securing this debate. It is important to see how the ELC system is working and how it can be improved.
It is worth remarking in passing that, in Scotland, ELC is free to all parents and carers of three to four-year-olds, whereas in England it is means tested. The basic test is whether parents and carers take up the extra hours of funded ELC—I know that there are some practical difficulties; I do not have time to get into them, but I agree that there are some, across various councils—and what improvement that contributes to the wellbeing and development of the children, to the family and to the economy. The policy also saves parents and carers about £6,000 per child annually.
The 2022 ELC parents survey found that 74 per cent of parents of three to five-year-olds mentioned that it had enabled them to work or look for work, and 71 per cent said that they were able
“to think about what they may do in the future”.
Overall, take-up of funded ELC among three and four-year-olds was 97 per cent in 2023. I understand from the Scottish Parliament information centre that, to date, it is about 100,000 per cent—I do not mean 100,000 per cent; I mean 100 per cent. What was I thinking?
However, in 2025, the estimated uptake for two-year-olds was 55 per cent, which represented a small decrease on previous years. The 2022 ELC parents survey found that two-year-olds were less likely to access the full 1,140 hours than older children. Access for two-year-olds is means tested—parents require to receive certain benefits, such as income support or universal credit. There appears to be an issue with parents’ awareness of the availability of that provision, which I hope that the minister will address when she sums up the debate. Currently, the Scottish Government provides about £1 billion per year in funding for ELC.
The Covid-19 pandemic had a profound impact on the lives of families in Scotland, and there is growing evidence from a range of research studies that suggests—unsurprisingly—that many young children and their families have been negatively affected. The benefits that are provided by ELC are extra; they do not come on their own. We cannot assess the benefits of ELC on their own. There are other interventions, such as the Scottish child payment, which helps low-income families with children under 16. Each child under 16 gets £27.15 per week, which will rise to £28.20 from 1 April. There is no limit on the number of children in a family who can get that payment. The Scottish child payment also helps families and carers. In fact, it supports 5,785 children in the Borders and 6,320 children in Midlothian.
::I recognise what the member is saying, but that is not helping parents right now. How can we support parents to access that childcare?
::The point that I am making is that three and four-year-olds do not benefit only from free nursery education. There are lots of other supports for children, especially for those of families that face economic pressures. In this short debate, I do not have time to address the practicalities that I have encountered, such as Edinburgh nurseries charging people from Midlothian. The member was quite right to raise that issue, and the First Minister addressed that.
We have other new funding. There is the national breakfast club provision and the expansion of after-school clubs. There is also the best start funding. In the Borders, 6,130 families have received best start grants and food payments. That is worth more than £3.4 million.
I say to Roz McCall that it is right that we assess the benefits of ELC, but it is difficult to disaggregate the benefits of ELC from those of the other support that is available to families. I would like to know how we might do that. There are pressures on how ELC is delivered—that is a separate issue, which relates to competing pressures in councils. It is difficult to disaggregate the wellbeing benefits of ELC from the benefits of other support. In this short debate, I have been able only to take a glance at the issue.
13:07
::I declare an interest: I sit on the advisory board of Pregnant Then Screwed.
I come to this debate not as a member of the Parliament but as a parent. Last year, my daughter began her 1,140 hours of funded childcare. Like many parents, I was grateful for that support. If it works, it makes a difference. It can ease the burden, and it may allow families to breathe a little bit easier when it comes to their finances.
However, I have also experienced the first-hand reality behind the policy headline, which comes down to the fact that, every month, parents face the dreaded calculation about whether they can afford to have children and be in employment at the same time. I have done my own sums for my daughter. If she happened to be at nursery full time, the costs would be just short of £1,000 per month. That is nearly £12,000 a year for just one child. That is not a small household bill; it is the equivalent of a second mortgage payment every month.
Even once the 1,140 hours are available, the challenge for parents does not disappear, because, on its own, the availability of funded hours does not guarantee flexibility or choice, as my colleague Roz McCall rightly highlighted. Like many parents, my husband and I have sat round the kitchen table researching nurseries and childminders and asking the same questions. Does it open early enough? Does it cover school holidays? What happens if our work meetings run late? What happens if we do not finish work until after 6 o’clock at night? Can we juggle more than one care setting? Who will fill in for the drop-offs and the pick-ups?
That is the practical reality of modern life for working parents. Across Scotland, parents are juggling shift patterns, commuting times and the part-time roles that have been stitched together just to make ends meet. They are also making complex spreadsheets to work out whether, financially, they can stay in employment. That is why we are seeing many parents reducing their hours—it is not because they want to; it is because childcare structures leave them with no alternative.
The work of Pregnant Then Screwed has consistently shown that childcare costs are pushing parents, particularly women, out of the labour market. Some are delaying having children, and others are deciding against growing their family entirely because the numbers simply do not stack up. There is too much month left at the end of the money.
::I am trying to be helpful. Does the member think that remote working, which is not available to everybody, has helped to build in some flexibility for parents?
::I remember that, during the gender recognition reform debate, I broke my maternity leave because it was important to me to vote on the issue. I had Charlotte in one arm and I was trying to vote with the other hand. It can work, but not in all circumstances, although I take Christine Grahame’s point.
Pregnant Then Screwed has announced its latest state-of-the-nation report, which is important to what comes next in terms of our childcare settings. It says that 66.1 per cent of childcare costs are the same or more than the parents’ income, and 34.5 per cent of those who responded found themselves agreeing with the statement “I often find myself choosing between paying for childcare and household essentials”. That shows that something is broken in the system.
We need to reflect on the policies that we have spoken about in this chamber. In 2023, the Scottish National Party made a commitment to expand funded childcare from nine months onwards. That never materialised and we do not know what happened to the pilot programmes. That lack of ambition has prevented us from pushing forward.
We need to be honest about delivery. My experience shows that choice and flexibility matter for parents. That is why we need to look at the private, voluntary and independent sector and at what is not working right now.
Presiding Officer, I know that I need to finish, but this is not a niche policy area for me. Parents sit at the kitchen table, working out affordability, every single week. They tour nurseries, asking about hours and flexibility. They worry about job stability and providing for their children. We owe it to them to do better than broken promises, better than half-hearted ambition and better than a system in which going to work leaves families barely breaking even.
Childcare will be an election priority for parents in May—
::Ms Gallacher, you are over your time. I move on to Davy Russell. I indicated to members that we are under time constraints today. Please speak to your allotted time.
13:12
::I thank Roz McCall for bringing the debate to the chamber.
Childcare is a matter dear to my heart. I am a grandpa, and my grandson is lucky that, as well as mum and dad, he has grannies and grandpas—and great-grannies and great-grandpas—to fill the gap from time to time. It is also a matter that comes up regularly in our caseloads.
The question at the heart of the motion is whether funded childcare can be a net contributor to the Scottish economy. Nobody questions whether free public education for all is a valuable or necessary step for our economy, and if that level of provision was adopted in early years childcare policy, perhaps we would not question that either. The career benefit to parents is hard to calculate, but, depending on the number of children that someone chooses to have, the lack of childcare provision in Scotland could cost them four, five or six years of their salary over their career, not to mention the detrimental effect on promotions and pension contributions.
We must be cognisant that the burden falls primarily on women now and in later life. There are long-term impacts of having a parent leave work. It is harder to save on one income, and as has been said people have to make conscious decisions when they are paying for kids. There is a strong correlation between someone, as a child, having a parent who was not in work and that person growing up and not being at work.
Expanding funded childcare—
::Mr Russell, I am sorry to interrupt you, but could you please move your microphone up? Thank you.
::I am sorry. Where were we?
There is a long-term impact when a parent has to leave work. It is harder to save on one income and non-working parents pay rent or mortgage interest for far longer than they would have done if they were working.
Childcare makes a big difference to ending generational poverty. I have a few cases from new mums in my inbox at present. Some can choose to go back to work, but if someone does not earn enough, they do not have a choice, because they just cannot afford childcare. They feel that the Government is playing a game of chicken with them. Sometimes they blink and pay the childcare costs themselves; sometimes they do not blink and leave their jobs for three, four or five years, which means that the Government loses the income tax that they would otherwise have paid during that time. According to Pregnant Then Screwed, the Scottish economy loses out 71 per cent of the time for mums and 51 per cent of the time for dads.
There is much more to say on the matter, including about the cognitive development of toddlers, who benefit from professional enrichment and from mixing with others. It is obvious that the most common response from parents is not to swallow the cost of childcare themselves or to decide not to work, but to choose not to have children. Scotland’s fertility rate should be 2.1, but it is 1.2 at the moment, which does not bode well for the future. We are stacking up problems and will be looking to fewer people to sustain an ever more costly welfare system in the future.
Many Governments are choosing to act on the issue, but Scotland is not one of them, which is an unfortunate and sad state of affairs.
13:16
::I thank Roz McCall for her motion and for this debate.
We have heard from parents up and down the country not only about how expensive childcare is but about how difficult it is to find a place and how inflexible the hours are. At the heart of the issue must be a recognition that the world has changed since those of us here were little. The days of being able to survive, let alone thrive, on one income are gone and parents must go to work to provide. We also often live further from family members and the so-called village feels distant from many young families. The constant pull between providing for wee ones and being there and present for them is exhausting.
We have heard much from families about how difficult it can be to find a place. We recently experienced with our son Callan how much of a rush there is to find any childcare, let alone the right childcare. We are extremely lucky to have a wonderful childminder lined up to look after him, but trying to find a place was pretty wild. As first-time parents living outside a major city, we thought, perhaps naively, that getting a place would be relatively easy, but several nurseries had no spaces and childminders had long waiting lists.
We must ensure that the mix of childcare across the sector meets the demands of parents and children across Scotland and that places are of high quality and deliver learning opportunities that allow children to flourish. There must be high-quality jobs that value the expertise of those who work in the sector, and we must provide further development opportunities as we look to expand funded hours.
Childcare is an investment in the next generation, but it also supports women back into the workplace. I have friends who have two small children and have spaced them in age so that they will have some funded hours for their older child by the time their second maternity leave ends. Despite that, they will still pay the best part of £2,000 in childcare. No one should be paying so much and funded hours should not be serving as a family planning mechanism.
Scottish Greens want to establish a simple, universal and free childcare guarantee so that all children in Scotland have access to funded childcare hours from the age of six months and until they start school. We want to extend the 1,140 hours of funded childcare to all two-year-olds in Scotland as soon as possible, with provision starting from the Monday after their second birthday. That should be a priority during the first half of the next session of Parliament. Following that, we want to expand funded childcare for all children aged six months to two years, with the aim of providing a universal 570 hours of funded childcare by the end of the next session of Parliament. That will be accompanied by capital funding to expand the number of places available to meet that increased demand, and there will be significant investment in the workforce to ensure that we have well-trained staff.
We will also ensure that the increase in funded hours enables greater flexibility in childcare provision so that parents can access the childcare that they are entitled to. That includes delivering more wraparound care to suit existing work and school patterns, increasing flexibility in council-run nurseries—in particular, to accommodate shift workers—and reviewing and expanding childcare models. [Interruption.]
::The member will shortly conclude her speech.
::Other things that we need to resolve include the issue that I raised at First Minister’s question time on cross-boundary placements. It is not an easy picture, but I hope that, given the consensus across the chamber, we can make progress on the issue in the next session. I again thank Roz McCall for securing the debate.
13:21
::I, too, congratulate Roz McCall on securing the debate. It is interesting to hear, from across the chamber, about situations that I found myself in years ago. I am lucky in having three children, the youngest of whom is now 10, so the immediate, early years of childcare have gone; I am now just a waiter to my youngest, who, as he watches TV in the morning, looks at me and asks what sort of continental breakfast I will provide. [Laughter.] That is what he wants. However, I remember those early days.
I do not think that my wife and I really thought about it. We decided to have children, looked out a pram, a cot and everything else, then suddenly thought, “Hang on a minute, what do we do with this child when we go to work?” That child needed us. They do not need me so much any more, but they were following me to the toilet every day—to wherever I went. Suddenly, we needed to know, “Where am I going with this child?” I had not thought about it.
It might have been naivety on the part of my wife and me, but not until that point did we realise—suddenly—the importance of childcare. That is why I agree with a lot of the points that were made by Gillian Mackay, Meghan Gallacher and Davy Russell. Childcare is so important. We no longer live in an age in which one parent can stay at home all the time. By the way, it is important that, if a family wants to do that, the Government should try to facilitate it, because looking after children is incredibly important. However, childcare is incredibly important, too.
I was privileged to chair the children and young people’s services committee in Moray Council when the early learning and childcare extension came in. I give credit to the Government for that, because it was a really good thing to do. We in Moray Council tried our best to make sure that local authority providers as well as private providers had the capacity to deliver across the area.
Unfortunately, however, it did not work. Although great stuff is now going on in Moray, there are pockets across most of our communities—particularly in the most remote rural patches—where provision is not happening. That causes complexities and leads to significant financial difficulties, on which Meghan Gallacher touched at length.
I remember that one of my first conversations with Roz McCall was on this subject, and we have had several conversations since then. I am not an expert. I have been to events that were organised by Pregnant Then Screwed, which is doing fantastic work. If I am lucky enough to come back after the election, I will continue to support everything that it does, everything that Roz McCall does and everything that anybody else does on this.
All that I wanted to say today, and the reason that I wanted to speak, is that I have lived and breathed the subject myself. We still live and breathe it, even though my children are older. My wife and I are still battling with part-time and full-time hours to work out who is at home when the children get home from school, for example.
The subject should be absolutely at the forefront of the mind of the next Government, whoever its members are.
::I call the Minister for Children, Young People and The Promise, Natalie Don-Innes, to respond to the debate for up to seven minutes.
13:23
::Seven minutes is not enough time in which to deal with all the points that have been raised, but I am more than happy to follow up with members after the debate. I thank members from across parties for taking part in it and Roz McCall for bringing it to the chamber.
I, too, recognise the hard work and dedication of our partners in delivering high-quality childcare across Scotland. The Government remains absolutely committed to developing an accessible and affordable childcare system that meets families’ needs and supports our mission to eradicate child poverty.
We have already come a long way. Our commitment to supporting children and families is evident in our continued investment of £1 billion per year to deliver 1,140 funded hours of high-quality ELC for all three and four-year-olds, eligible two-year-olds and five-year-olds who have deferred. We remain the only part of the UK to provide that offer regardless of the working status of parents.
That offer is saving parents £6,000 a year, so for Meghan Gallacher to say that it is a half-hearted ambition does not do justice to the system that we have at the moment. However, I do not overlook the fact that the system does not work for everyone, and I want to get to a place where it does.
::To clarify, my point was not about the funding that the Government has put in. In 2023, the Government promised to expand childcare from the age of nine months, but nothing has materialised. That is the half-hearted ambition.
::I will come on to that point, but it is not the case that nothing has materialised; a lot has materialised.
I know that families are still facing challenges. Last year, I met Pregnant Then Screwed to discuss the impacts that a lack of childcare can have on parents, who want the flexibility that increased childcare can offer. The Government is sensitive to those challenges.
Alongside our funded 1,140 offer, we are exploring ways to expand the provision of childcare through our early adopter communities programme. We are also delivering wraparound school-age childcare services to families who are most at risk of living in poverty.
We recognise that one of the most effective ways of tackling poverty is to enable parents and carers to enter sustainable work. Through our no one left behind approach, parents receive parental employability support from a dedicated key worker, which includes one-to-one tailored support to help to reduce barriers to employment. Since April 2020, more than 99,000 people have started to receive that support, of whom more than 30,000 were parents.
In addition, our investments to deliver funded wraparound school-age childcare in some of Scotland’s most deprived communities demonstrate the ability of expanded access to childcare to support the Government’s priorities of tackling child poverty and achieving economic growth.
More than 7,000 children and families who are most at risk of living in poverty are benefiting from funded or subsidised school-age childcare activities and related services through our investment in the early adopter communities programme, the extra time programme and the access to childcare fund. We are seeing positive outcomes from those programmes.
Improved outcomes for children are also being reported from people being able to access a range of activities that support physical and mental health. In 2026-27, we will continue to invest more than £5.5 million in our extra time programme. We will also invest an extra £2.5 million to test the delivery of a wider after-school activities offer for primary school children.
::I whole-heartedly accept all the points that the minister is making about where the Government has spent money. However, will she accept that, if that spending was working, two thirds of parents would not be questioning why they are working just to earn enough to put their children through childcare?
::I understand that things are not working for everybody, but the point of the investment is to improve things. As I have laid out, increased investment year on year is leading to improvements for parents, although I appreciate that we have further to go.
Several issues came up in the debate, and I will try to address them in turn. I whole-heartedly understand the point that Gillian Mackay raised about early start dates. I will set out a bit of information and then give members an indication of where I think that we should go next.
Arrangements for when children become eligible for funded ELC are set out in the Provision of Early Learning and Childcare (Specified Children) (Scotland) Order 2014. Those arrangements are intended to enable small groups of children to start at phased points, which makes the system more manageable, and many local authorities are going above and beyond that. However, it is extremely disappointing that decisions are being made to reduce local flexibility, and the Government will need to consider that in the next parliamentary session.
That sits alongside some of the issues that were raised earlier about cross-boundary provision. Statutory guidance sets out that, where possible, children who receive their funded hours in a setting that is outside the local authority in which they reside should be treated on the same basis as those who access provision in their own local authority area. However, there is not a specific statutory duty to make ELC available to children who reside in different authority areas.
I want all families across Scotland to benefit from the ambition that we have jointly set out with our local government partners in guidance on the funding follows the child approach. As I said, it is extremely concerning to hear of local decisions that are reported to reduce flexibility, choice and provider sustainability, and that will need to be considered in the next parliamentary session.
I hear what members are saying about affordability and, again, I hope that what I have set out today shows that the Government is trying to improve that. One issue around affordability that concerns me greatly is that, as we know, many families find it incredibly difficult to access the childcare benefit support that they need and to which they are currently entitled. We know, for example, that the uptake of universal childcare benefit in Scotland is very low, which means that many families who could have up to 85 per cent of their childcare costs covered are not currently accessing that support. Statistics show that those benefits are being taken up in only around 11 per cent of universal credit households. The same goes for tax-free childcare; it looks as if that is taken up by around 21 per cent of the total population requiring childcare. There is money available that is not being utilised, and I encourage members on all sides of the chamber to encourage local parents to take up those benefits.
I am sorry, Deputy Presiding Officer—I am aware that I am over time, so I will bring my remarks to a close.
As I set out at the beginning of my speech, I am happy to discuss further with members individually the points that they have raised. The Government is clear that we will go further in supporting families and children. I mentioned the fact that we are delivering more funded after-school and holiday activities, which, together with our free new national breakfast club offer, takes us closer to providing families with the wraparound school-age childcare that they need. We are currently focusing our efforts on the families who need it the most, recognising the importance of accessible, flexible, free childcare.
Once again, I thank all members for their contributions and for their commitment to improving childcare for all families across Scotland.
13:31
Meeting suspended.
14:00
On resuming—
Previous
First Minister’s Question Time