Official Report 190KB pdf
The next item of business is a debate on motion S7M-00128, in the name of Màiri McAllan, on expanding childcare. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons now. I call Màiri McAllan to speak to and move the motion—13 minutes, please.
14:36
I am delighted to open the debate for the Government on the important topic of early learning and childcare and the Government’s plans to transform provision in Scotland. The early emphasis that we are placing on the topic, and its centrality in our manifesto, will, I hope, underline to members the importance that the Government places both on the precious early years of a child’s life and on the need for high-quality childcare as a means of growing our economy.
Before we begin the debate and delve into the detail of what is an exciting expansion project, I have a few acknowledgments to make. First, I personally thank the highly qualified, professional and—I have to say—loving childminders who support me to be here today and to lead this work for the Government. I am sure that my wee Somhairle is out in the sun just now, learning through play and spending time with his pals.
I also extend that personal thanks to all the early learning and childcare professionals who are doing that very job the length and breadth of Scotland. I saw some of that at first hand this morning when I visited Clovenstone primary school’s breakfast club, before attending the Hailesland early years centre. I sincerely thank them and reiterate how much the Minister for Children, Young People and the Promise, who is also a working mammy, and I look forward to working with them.
I echo that appreciation for the work that those early learning and childcare professionals do. However, if the cabinet secretary believes that, will she finally tackle the difference in the pay rates between the private, voluntary and independent sector and the council sector? Staff are paid massively different amounts for doing exactly the same job, so will the Government finally get a grip on that problem?
When it comes to pay, I am proud that Scotland is the only part of the United Kingdom that, through its funding for early learning and childcare, creates the circumstances in which the real living wage can be paid. However, I understand the call for parity. All those aspects will be taken into account as we take on what is a massive expansion project, and I will work with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the sector on that.
Did I understand correctly that the cabinet secretary said that the lack of parity that Willie Rennie identified, which she has acknowledged, will be addressed as part of the revised approach to this policy?
We are in the early days of a significant expansion project. I say to the chamber that I am open minded about learning with regard to the delivery of 1,140 hours as we work to expand the provision. Pay, rates and flexibility, among many other issues, will be taken into account.
The difficulty is that the cabinet secretary’s predecessors have been open minded for years about the issue and we have not made any progress. We need more than open-mindedness and open doors; we need a solution.
I do not think that it is realistic to say that progress has not been made. In my first response to Willie Rennie, I noted that Scotland is the only place in the UK that funds the real living wage, because we have put fair work at the centre of our expansion to 1,140. I say to members across the chamber that I understand that there are a number of areas that we need to learn from with regard to 1,140 and that I will discuss those with them. That is a broad commitment.
I want to acknowledge parents and carers who are wrestling every day with the joys and challenges of raising children. They do that with varying support networks and in a cost of living crisis, but they always do it to the best of their ability. I saw that this morning and I thank them for that.
That allows me to say, in my first debate as Cabinet Secretary for Education, Culture and Gaelic, that I am proud to take over this area, which has been prioritised by the Scottish Government: from the baby box, which provides the essentials for the first six months of life, to our transformational 1,140 childcare offer; and from our breakfast and after-school club investment to free school meal provision, investment in health visiting, family nurse partnerships, supporting women with breastfeeding and, of course, the groundbreaking Scottish child payment. I am very proud of the fact that we are putting in place the building blocks of success for children in Scotland.
On that note, my colleague Shirley-Anne Somerville, who spoke in the chamber before me, published “Bringing Hope, Building Futures” prior to the dissolution of the Parliament. It sets out the concrete action that we will take in pursuit of our goal of eradicating child poverty in Scotland, which we estimate will keep 100,000 children out of relative poverty this year. Surely that is a goal that we can all get behind.
In its aim of eradicating child poverty, the plan is absolutely clear that supporting parents and carers who are currently locked out of the labour market to work is an important part of our work. We know that those barriers exist particularly for women, who are more likely to take on caring responsibilities, reduce their working hours, or feel that they cannot work at all because it does not make financial sense. That is fine if that is what families choose to do, but it is not fine if it is not a choice. I have that at the forefront of my mind. We will take action to remove those barriers, not only because it is the right thing for families but because it is the right thing for our economy.
I will look for a moment at the Government’s record in childcare and what we have been delivering to date: the universal early learning and childcare offer for every three and four-year-old, as well as around a quarter of two-year-olds. They are often referred to as “eligible two-year-olds”, but I prefer what the City of Edinburgh Council calls them, which I was told today is “terrific twos”. We are delivering that through an investment of around £1 billion a year, which is worth about £6,400 per family per eligible child. I think that we would all agree that that is a sizeable contribution to family budgets. It has to be said that going from the around 600 hours that we inherited when we came into government to delivering the 1,140 hours that parents have been benefiting from since 2021 is a massive achievement. We are also clear that now is the time to move on to the next transformational change in provision.
The Scottish Government announced in 2023 that it would expand funded childcare from nine months onwards. What progress has been made since that promise?
I was going to come to that later, but I will address it now. I will talk about some of the work that we have been doing in our priority communities. We have been working with our six priority families and testing the roll-out of childcare as it is needed in different circumstances, whether that is communities that are affected by poverty or children who have disabilities. We have been taking forward that work and it will inform the expansion of childcare.
To give members the details, although I am sure that they are acquainted with them, I should say that we want, by the end of this parliamentary session, to provide the choice of childcare support for every child in the country from nine months old to the end of primary school. Importantly, the support is to be provided for 52 weeks a year and will be designed to fit around families, rather than families being expected to fit around the system. I must say that it is a substantial project that will take a team Scotland approach.
On the note of working together, I was really pleased to see that the importance of early learning and childcare featured in most of the parties’ election manifestos. I hear the concerns from Green colleagues about cross-border placements and the variation in funded ELC eligibility dates when a child turns three. I commit to working on those issues as we develop the expanded offer.
As my colleagues have stated, and as I maintain, the statutory guidance is clear that, whenever possible, families who access cross-border placements should be treated on the same basis as families who access local provision. I am sympathetic to the issue of when a three-year-old begins to receive the childcare, although we must take into account practical issues. For example, how manageable would it be for staff to have an intake every week or every day? Those are practical considerations, and I will work with the Greens and COSLA on such issues. On that basis, we will support the Green amendment.
We will also support Labour’s amendment, and I look forward to hearing Labour members’ contributions.
I note the Liberal Democrats’ desire for a focus on support for working families only. I understand the reasons behind that, and I want to work with them to better understand what they are looking to achieve. However, first, we cannot fail to understand the importance of childcare to finding and sustaining work. Secondly, it is important that we do not have a system that denies children whose parents are not working the important early learning opportunities that are provided, particularly if those might be the children who could benefit most from them. I say that as an early point of principle, but I look forward to working with the Lib Dems on such issues.
As I have said to a number of members, as we develop the provision, we will draw on the successes of the 1,140 hours policy and be clear on the opportunities for improvement.
The previous expansion to 1,140 hours, which the cabinet secretary has mentioned a few times, required an additional 4,000 full-time equivalent staff. If the proposals are not tied specifically to a skills training pathway for our domestic workforce, will the Government not simply be legislating a skills shortage into existence?
The member is absolutely right to point out the importance of the workforce. The workforce, which consists mainly of women, is the single most important factor in whether good, high-quality early learning and childcare is provided. The roll-out of 1,140 hours necessarily resulted in the number of staff growing, and we are very open minded and clear eyed about the fact that that will have to happen once again as we expand the offer.
We know that uptake has been good. A census that was published in 2025 shows that uptake is nearly universal for three and four-year-olds, with almost every child taking up their registered hours. We also know that the vast majority of parents and carers are satisfied with the quality of ELC.
Will the cabinet secretary give way on that point?
Will I get the time back, Presiding Officer?
Yes.
I will, of course, give way.
I want to follow up on the previous question and what the cabinet secretary has just said. What are the Government’s estimates on the number of additional staff who will be required? What is the Government’s estimate of the total cost of the expansion over the lifetime of the parliamentary session?
In our manifesto, we set out an estimate of about £500 million. However, the Government is in the early days of developing the policy, so the estimates on costs and workforce requirements will be developed in due course. I remind members that the commitment is to have completed the policy by the end of the five-year period. It is a huge piece of work, and we will all have to work together on it. We are in the early stages just now.
The Diffley report, which we commissioned and which reported recently, set out an important perspective on what has worked and what needs to be improved. I am short of time, but there are a couple of points that I want to draw out. First, it is clear that funded childcare has had an important impact on maternal employment. Secondly, it was demonstrated that, once an eligible two-year-old has undertaken a year, little developmental difference can be observed between them and a three-year-old peer who is starting on the universal offer. I see that as a really important bit of success for the project.
Of course, as colleagues have said, recruitment, skills development, rates, flexibility, additional support needs aspects, practical issues of roll-out and costs must all be developed. I sincerely look forward to working with colleagues across the chamber on the project.
I have focused my remarks on the 1,140 hours, but there is a huge amount of other work that the Government has completed or is looking to take forward, such as the expansion of breakfast clubs, our extra time programme and our work in priority communities. It is worth noting that those communities are Clackmannanshire, Dundee, Fife, Glasgow, Inverclyde and Shetland. We have deliberately chosen those areas to help us to understand how best these measures work across different demographics in Scotland.
I will bring my remarks to a close so that we can have a good and full debate. However, Presiding Officer, it has to be said that, as you will know from your previous role, we are facing some of the most challenging fiscal conditions since devolution, and so are households in Scotland. Therefore, we have to make every penny that we spend work for the people of Scotland.
The Government and I believe that there is a strong case for expanding childcare. It reduces inequalities, tackles poverty and provides new economic opportunities across the country. It is an ambitious but vital task. I know that there is consensus across the chamber and I look forward to getting to work with colleagues and the minister to deliver that expansion for Scotland.
I move,
That the Parliament believes that every child deserves the best start in life and that a child’s earliest years are crucial in their development; recognises the importance of high quality, accessible and affordable childcare in tackling poverty, supporting employment opportunities for parents, supporting child development and driving inclusive economic growth; acknowledges the Scottish Government’s investment in early learning and childcare to date, and supports its aim to extend year-round childcare support to every child from nine months old to the end of primary school.
Thank you, cabinet secretary. I call Katherine Sangster to speak to and move amendment S7M-00128.2. I remind members that this is Katherine Sangster’s first speech, so there will be no interruptions or interventions.
14:52
It is a huge privilege to make my maiden speech as Scottish Labour and Co-operative MSP for Edinburgh and Lothians East. I thank the voters across our communities who placed their trust in Scottish Labour and in me. I also thank those who ultimately decided to put their cross elsewhere for our conversations and for sharing their challenges with me.
Politics should take place not just online or in the chamber but on doorsteps, in community meetings and in conversations with our neighbours. That is where mistrust of politics and politicians can be overcome, consensus can be reached and progress can be made.
Although the election result is settled, the challenges that Scotland faces are not. The need to tackle deep-seated issues in Scotland remains as urgent today as it was during the campaign, and this Parliament must rise to that challenge.
I pay tribute to Sarah Boyack, who represented the Lothian region before me, for her years of public service, her commitment to the Labour movement and her wise counsel over many years. I also thank Chris Murray MP, who campaigned by my side, proving that Westminster and Holyrood can sometimes work together.
Politics is indeed a team effort. I owe a huge debt of gratitude to the people who supported me over the past few years—they know who they are and I thank them not only for their belief in me but for their belief that Scotland can be a fairer, better country.
I am especially proud to represent a region that has been my home for most of my adult life. Over the years, I have made many friends here, raised my family here and worked here. I know the communities of Leith, Portobello, Musselburgh, Wallyford and Elphinstone not simply as places on a map but as places that welcomed me and my family—places that are full of warmth, resilience and enormous potential.
One of the first votes that I cast was for the establishment of a Scottish Parliament—never imagining then that one day I would stand in this chamber. I believe deeply in the power of devolved Government to improve people’s lives—however, good intentions alone are not enough; Government must deliver in practice. A policy cannot just sound good on a campaign leaflet; it must make the everyday lives of working families better.
I am therefore pleased that my maiden speech comes in a debate on childcare. My involvement in politics began with campaigning for fairer access to childcare for working parents some 10 years ago. Many of the problems that parents faced then are still with us today. Across Scotland and the Lothians, parents speak about nursery costs consuming huge chunks of household income, long waiting lists, inflexible hours and free childcare provision that does not cover the full cost. For many families, childcare determines whether a parent can return to work, increase their hours or progress in their careers. Therefore, although I welcome the commitment to expanding childcare provision, we must address the pressures that families are under now.
In Edinburgh, restrictions on cross-boundary nursery placements have affected families from East Lothian and Midlothian who need childcare close to where they work. Parents have lost access to nurseries that match commuting patterns and working hours or they have lost funding for places where children were happy and settled. Those points speak to a wider challenge at the heart of Scotland’s childcare system, which is to align national ambition with local delivery and the everyday realities that working parents face.
Childcare is one of the most important investments that we can make in Scotland’s future. When childcare works, parents can participate fully in the workplace, women are more able to continue their careers and children get the best possible start in life. However, for too many families, that is not the reality.
On behalf of the families and staff who need change, Scottish Labour will hold the Scottish National Party to account in keeping its promise on delivering childcare policy in this parliamentary session. The SNP introduced this debate, and our questions for the Government are simple: when and how will the delivery of childcare policy happen? Scottish Labour has set out its own plan to reduce the cost of childcare for working parents, improve the flexibility of the system, support childminders and give parents more choice and control. A failure to tackle those matters would be a missed opportunity that no family can afford.
I turn to the motion in the cabinet secretary’s name. In the election campaign, the First Minister and his party promised big on expanding childcare, and they now have the responsibility to deliver. Parents such as me have been raising these issues for 10 years. That is why I am calling on the Government to fix the issues now and to set out a fully costed plan and a timeline for delivery.
As a new member of the Parliament, I hope to contribute constructively and seriously to that work. I came into politics because I believe that Scotland deserves a Government that is relentlessly focused on making the country work better for working people. It is the honour of my life to stand here representing Edinburgh and Lothians East, and I look forward to serving its people.
I move amendment S7M-00128.2, to leave out from “acknowledges” to end and insert:
“further recognises that the Scottish Government needs to do more to reduce the costs of childcare for working parents, improve the flexibility of the childcare system, support childminders and give parents more choice and control over the childcare that works for their family, and calls on it to set out a fully costed delivery plan and timeline for its commitment to extend year-round childcare support to every child from nine months old to the end of primary school.”
14:56
Every child deserves the best possible start in life. Every parent deserves the chance to work, study, rest or simply breathe without the crushing anxiety of impossible childcare costs. Every childcare worker deserves dignity, fair pay and recognition for the profoundly valuable work that they do. That is why the Scottish Greens were proud to stand in the recent election on a pledge to introduce the biggest expansion of childcare in a generation.
We see today’s motion as the start of the changes that need to happen, and our amendment pushes the Scottish Government to go further and faster. Expanding childcare is not simply a matter of economic policy; it is about equality, justice and human dignity. I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for her letter last night, which stressed the importance of working together on this vital work. I welcome her to her new role and confirm that the Greens will work with her to deliver the best for our children and young people and those who care for them.
We have much work to do. For too long, childcare has been treated as a private burden that is carried disproportionately by women rather than as the essential social infrastructure that it is. The reality that faces families across Scotland is stark. Research from Pregnant Then Screwed found that two thirds of mothers in Scotland say that their childcare costs are the same as, or more than, their income. Half of mothers said that, after paying for childcare, it simply does not make sense for them to work. More than a third said that they regularly face a choice between paying for childcare and paying for household essentials. Those figures should shame us all.
Behind every statistic is a person, a family or a mother who is trying to hold everything together. One mum in Aberdeen said:
“I have two children 20 months apart and pay over £2000 a month for childcare that isn’t even full time. There is no support. It’s exhausting, terrifying."
Another mum, from Angus, said:
“Recently, I found out that I am pregnant with my second child and the joy I should be feeling is dampened by already worrying about childcare costs when it’s time to return to work.”
No parent should describe raising children in Scotland as terrifying. The joy of a new baby should not be marred by anxiety about childcare costs. However, that is the reality for many families in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. That is why the Scottish Greens are clear that childcare must be universal, flexible and genuinely accessible.
Universal provision matters, because cliff edges punish families and means testing leaves people behind, whereas universal services create dignity, certainty and fairness. Flexibility matters, because families’ lives are not neatly lived between 9 and 5. Too many people—shift workers, rural families, parents of disabled children, single parents and parents working irregular hours—are locked out of the current system because it was not designed around the reality of modern life.
That is why our amendment calls for immediate, practical changes. First, by making available cross-border placements across Scotland, so that funding follows the child rather than stopping at arbitrary council boundaries. Secondly, by providing access to funded hours immediately after a child’s relevant birthday, rather than forcing families in some council areas to wait months for support, costing them thousands of pounds. Thirdly, our amendment recognises something that is too often ignored: expansion will work only if we properly value the workforce.
Care work is work. Childcare workers are not volunteers propping up a broken system through goodwill and exhaustion; they are skilled professionals carrying enormous responsibility for children’s wellbeing and development. The childcare workforce, which remains overwhelmingly female—95 per cent—is underpaid and undervalued, and poor pay and conditions are driving problems in recruitment and retention.
If we want a world-class childcare system, we need world-class terms and conditions. That means fair pay across councils and private providers. It means workforce planning and investment in training, particularly around additional support needs. It means collective bargaining that puts power in the hands of workers to negotiate better terms and conditions. It means recognising childcare not as a cost to be minimised but as a public good worthy of investment—because investment in childcare delivers enormous social and economic returns. The evidence is clear: childcare investment creates jobs, supports women into employment, reduces child poverty and boosts economic participation.
Care jobs are also low-carbon jobs. Investment in care creates more jobs and less pollution than equivalent investment in traditional infrastructure. This is feminist economic policy, green economic policy and, fundamentally, humane economic policy.
Let us build a childcare system that is rooted not in patchwork fixes or postcode lotteries but in equality, dignity and collective responsibility—a system that values children, parents and, finally, truly values care.
I move amendment S7M-00128.1, to insert at end:
“and further agrees that as a first step towards this expansion, the Scottish Government and COSLA must work together to ensure that cross-border placements are available across Scotland, that all children can access the current funded hours the week rather than term after the child's relevant birthday, and that the required flexibility in provision will only be achieved with proper workforce planning.”
I call Meghan Gallacher to speak to and move amendment S7M-00128.4.
Thank you, Presiding Officer. I welcome you to your post. I also welcome the cabinet secretary to her post.
I will begin on a point of consensus with the Scottish Government: I believe in expanding childcare provision across Scotland.
Throughout the previous parliamentary session, I repeatedly called on the Government to expand the early learning and childcare from nine months onwards for working parents. In 2023, I believed that those calls had finally been heard when the then First Minister, Humza Yousaf, announced a pilot to expand childcare to children from nine months onwards. However, since that announcement, despite my trying repeatedly to establish what progress has been made, there has been little to no clarity on that point.
I believe that there is an opportunity to reset relationships and work constructively across parties to find solutions. First, however, the Scottish Government must provide answers and explain—not just to parents but to the Parliament—why it failed to deliver the expansion that it had previously promised. Right now, too many parents simply do not trust that the Government can deliver.
During the election campaign, I had the privilege of serving on a cross-party steering group led by Pregnant Then Screwed Scotland. Together, we discussed how childcare could better support parents, particularly mothers, and explored practical ways to improve the current system.
One statistic that I have pulled out today from the state-of-the-nation survey that Pregnant Then Screwed Scotland conducted should concern the Scottish Government: 66.8 per cent of Scottish mothers did not believe that the Scottish Government would deliver on expanding childcare provision.
Behind that statistic is a simple reality. Parents feel that the system is not built around modern day life. Parents are doing everything that they can to stay in work, provide for their children and build a future for their families, but childcare costs are making that harder.
I hear Meghan Gallacher’s points about delivery and public trust. I take the opportunity, early in the development of the policy, to acknowledge the importance of delivery, to put on record that it is what I want to happen, and to ask her whether she will work constructively with the Government so that, in a few years’ time, when the policy comes to fruition, the mothers who she is talking about can say that the Scottish Parliament, including Meghan Gallacher’s party, delivered for them.
I said right at the start that I believe in expanding childcare. Later in my contribution, I will speak about what I believe it should be expanded to, but I am more than happy to meet the cabinet secretary on that. I believe that childcare is fundamental not just for parents and families but for our wider economy.
To go back to the point that I was making, for some families, childcare costs now rival mortgage payments. Parents across the country have to cough up more than £1,000 a month to pay for childcare. When families sit down at the kitchen table to work out whether it is financially worth while for one parent to return to work, the answer is far too often that it is not. For mothers in particular, the choices can feel impossible. Some reduce their hours because childcare costs do not match working patterns. Others leave the labour market altogether because the cost of childcare wipes out much of their income.
This is not just a family issue; it is an economic issue. When skilled workers are pushed out of employment, Scotland loses talent, productivity and economic growth. If we are serious about growing our economy, childcare must be viewed as economic infrastructure that is every bit as important as transport or housing.
Affordability is only part of the problem. Flexibility matters, too. Parents have repeatedly told me and my colleagues who have previously held the education brief that funded hours might exist on paper, but they are often delivered in ways that simply do not reflect the realities of working life. Shift workers, national health service staff, hospitality workers and parents with irregular hours cannot always make rigid nursery patterns work.
I want to talk about some of the other issues that are currently faced not just by parents but by the sector. If the Government is serious about expansion, it must confront the reality that is facing the private, voluntary and independent sector, which delivers a substantial proportion of childcare across Scotland. Too often, the PVI sector feels like an afterthought, despite being critical to delivery on the ground. Providers are struggling with rising costs, staffing shortages and Government guidance that does not reflect the economic position. There are also serious concerns about the unfair distribution of funding between local authority settings and the PVI sector, which Willie Rennie has already mentioned.
That is not sustainable. We cannot continue as we are and then put an expansion on top of the current model. If the Government wants the mixed-market childcare model to survive, the funding must absolutely follow the child fairly and sustainably because, without the PVI sector—
Would the member go as far as to say that, unless the disparity in funding is properly tackled now, the expansion, which we all support, will fail?
When I entered the Parliament in 2021, one of the first issues that came across my desk was that the PVI sector did not feel part of the overall 1,140-hour package. That is why people were leaving the sector. Childminders did not want to remain part of the sector. That it is one of the issues that needs to be addressed urgently.
I know that I am running out of time, Presiding Officer, but I am moving towards my conclusion.
Before ministers make new promises, they must answer basic questions: who will deliver the expansion, where will it happen and how will it be paid for? Those are my concerns today, and I believe that we will probably address those issues later in the debate this afternoon. I welcome the approach so far from the cabinet secretary and I will take up the offer to meet her in due course.
I move amendment S7M-00128.4, to leave out from “acknowledges” to end and insert:
“notes with concern that many families still face limited availability and choice of early learning facilities and high childcare costs, which is a barrier particularly for mothers seeking to return to work; understands that the funded childcare current model has resulted in wage inequalities, a severe decline in childminders and unfair distribution of funding between local authority-run nurseries and the private, voluntary and independent sector; believes that, should the Scottish Government wish to extend childcare policy, it should fix the current funding model and address staff shortages within the sector, and calls on the Scottish Government to publish a clear and properly-funded timetable for expanding childcare support from nine-months-old, with reassurances of working with the sector, detailing any learnings from the pilot scheme they said they would introduce in 2023.”
15:09
I will begin where Meghan Gallacher and Stephen Kerr finished. We need to get the fundamentals of the provision of ELC in Scotland right before we look to expand it. There is a fundamental problem with the PVI sector, which provides the flexibility that many parents are looking for. Many council nurseries are simply unable to provide that flexibility. If we want childcare that is suitable for a variety of family needs, we need to sort out the significant leakage of experienced staff from the PVI sector to better-paid jobs in the council sector. Sometimes, people get paid more in a supermarket than they would be paid in a private nursery. We need to sort that out in order to maintain the quality of provision in the PVI sector—and not just the provision itself. That is essential for any expansion that comes.
A number of other factors need to be addressed, too. The level of take-up by two-year-olds—the terrific twos was discussed earlier—has varied. Although we have managed to develop a relationship with the Department for Work and Pensions, so as to share the essential data and to identify the families concerned, the number of people who are taking up the provision has dropped in the most recent period. We need to reverse that, because we can make the biggest impact on the life chances of that group of two-year-olds if we can get them into that provision at an earlier stage.
We have already discussed cross-border placements and the issue of the third birthday. I accept the point about the practicalities of dealing with constant flux on the third birthday. There must be a better way than losing months of provision because the child happens to have their third birthday at the wrong time. Childminders are also essential, particularly in very remote and rural areas, where it is impossible to have a fully constructed nursery, and they provide the flexibility that many families are looking for. Those issues need to be addressed.
I thank the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Culture and Gaelic, and I welcome her and her ministerial colleague to their posts. We now have a ministerial team that can be fully focused on the Promise—following on from the outstanding speech that my colleague Duncan Dunlop made yesterday. Màiri McAllan’s predecessor was recused from addressing the issues around the Promise, but we now have a team that is dedicated to it, and I hope that we will see significant progress on those issues in this session, because it is sorely needed.
Let me deal with some of the fundamentals around childcare and early learning. The early learning bit is incredibly important. We sometimes forget that it is not just about the hours that we provide but about the quality of the provision as well. We sometimes forget about quality in the race for expansion, which is why investing in good-quality staff is essential, particularly in the PVI sector.
We should remember the role of families. Some families want to look after their children, and they sometimes feel guilty for not putting them into ELC provision. We should welcome the fact that families want to look after their children for longer, because we know from Suzanne Zeedyk, the acclaimed academic, that attachment is incredibly important in the early years. Too often, children do not have the warmth of a loving relationship, so we should ensure that that is valued in our discussion. I want the focus to be on families who want to take up the provision—I think that the cabinet secretary also pointed to that. Families should not be made to feel guilty for not taking it up.
I remember, some years ago, taking part in a discussion run by Save the Children. Everybody was arguing about the expansion of the provision. People were asking, “When are we going to get it?” “How are we going to get it?” “How quickly are we going to get it?” and “Will it be available in my community?” A lone mother stuck up her hand and asked, “Why don’t you want me to look after my own children?” You could hear a pin drop. That was something that needed to be said, and it was important that it was said.
Another issue is the economy. We have a major problem with economic inactivity and high levels of unemployment, particularly among women who have had children. We need to incentivise and encourage people, which is why I disagree fundamentally with the universal approach. Of course, childcare should be universal for three and four-year-olds, so that, in the years just before they go to school, they can get that extra lift before they go into the education system proper. However, we must make sure that work pays. When finances are tight, we must use our money in the best way that we possibly can to make sure that work pays. It is essential that everybody participates in the economy and in society.
I make no apologies for targeting that issue. We are in a crisis. The Parliament has a £5 billion deficit coming down the track, but, sometimes, you would not think that that was the case. Too often, we think about spending money without thinking about exactly how to spend it to have the best effect on families or on the economy and the Government’s finances. All of that needs to work—and it needs to work well.
The final issue I want to raise is about after-school clubs and flexibility. We should talk not only about childcare up to the age of five but about supporting after-school clubs, many of which are precarious and find it difficult to make ends meet. We must make sure that there is extra provision for them, particularly in rural areas where families find it difficult to sustain them.
For those reasons, we will work with the Government to make this work. I am desperate to make it work—I have a long-term commitment to it. For decades, I have argued for the expansion of childcare, but we must get the foundations and the expansion right.
I move amendment S7M-00128.3, to leave out from “and supports” to end and insert:
“but notes that parents must be provided with the choice that they were promised as part of the rollout of 1,140 hours of funded childcare by introducing fairer rates for private, voluntary and independent providers to cover the actual costs of delivering high-quality early learning and childcare (ELC); believes that working families need to be prioritised in any extension of ELC funding, starting with shifting the 1,140 funded hours to start on a child’s third birthday, thus treating this as a critical part of our economic infrastructure that would help parents return to work, close the gender pay gap and raise additional tax revenues; calls for local authorities to be brought together to strike a partnership agreement that ensures parents who live in one council area but work in another have choice on where their child attends nursery, thus guaranteeing that funding really does follow the child; considers that childcare options in remote and rural areas can be more limited; therefore believes that there needs to be a new support package for childminders in these areas, and calls on the Scottish Government to make sure that there is no postcode lottery for childcare in Scotland.”
I call Angela Ross to make her first speech.
15:16
I, too, congratulate the cabinet secretary on her appointment.
As this is my first speech, I thank the voters of Edinburgh and Lothians East, who have put their trust in me. I will serve them diligently.
I will start by saying a little bit about myself. I have a background in education. For nearly 30 years, I have been either teaching or involved in instructional design, helping public and private organisations globally with learning. I understand the importance of having the appropriate structure and pedagogy for learners of all ages, so this subject is a particular passion of mine.
I am sure that we all agree that every child deserves the best start in life. We all agree that childcare matters for families, for work and for child development. However, agreeing on the principle is not the same as agreeing on the policy. We cannot keep pretending that a system that is already under strain can simply be stretched further without consequences. That is why we cannot support the motion as it is drafted. In the spirit of being constructive, we offer a different approach—one that is targeted, sustainable and grounded in evidence.
We believe that the solution should provide choice for parents, because a system without flexibility and competition risks becoming one in which families have fewer, not more, options. We suggest that the existing 1,140-hour offer should be strengthened by prioritising working families and by targeting support on the basis of need. We insist that funding should follow the child, so that the provision is flexible, transparent and not restricted primarily to council-run delivery. We recommend a phased approach to expansion, with published results and evaluation at each stage, focusing on ages two to five alongside early primary school—that is, primary 1 to 3—wraparound care. A phased approach would allow the opportunity—which we have in the business world—to reflect and to measure, understand and assess success before moving on.
We, in Reform, believe in supporting families and not limiting their options. We believe in childcare that enables work, not a system that ignores cost, capacity and choice. We must also be honest: childcare supports participation in the labour market but it does not, on its own, drive economic growth. It is an enabler, not an engine.
Before the existing system is expanded, we need to ask whether it has delivered as intended. The 1,140-hour policy was meant to improve child development, close the attainment gap and deliver more support for parents who were in work or who wanted to get into work, but, although some progress has been made—I acknowledge that the Government’s policy has had positive aspects—overall, the reported outcomes seem to be mixed. The attainment gap has certainly not narrowed, and the impact on employment has been, to use the Government’s own word, modest. I agree with Willie Rennie that the targeted approach to support for two-year-olds has delivered the best signs of improvement. The more universal provision for children from the age of three onwards seems to be the area that is struggling, and that is where the evidence is far less certain. Therefore, the question before Parliament is not whether access to childcare matters—I am sure we all agree that it does—but whether expanding a universal taxpayer-funded model on such a scale is the right way to achieve the aims set out in the motion.
We must also look at the reality of the system today. The 1,140-hour system costs close to £1 billion without clear and consistent evidence of success. Private nurseries have struggled to deliver funded hours sustainably—some have fallen short and even closed—and there has been a significant loss of places offered by childminders. Staff are under incredible pressure. Surveys by organisations such as Unison have shown the level of stress that staff are experiencing. In some cases, providers are withdrawing from offering funded hours. That raises concerns about long-term capacity and choice for parents. We must remember that, behind the figures, there are real families and real providers. Parents are struggling to find places, and staff are working under tremendous pressure to keep services going. That is not a secure platform for expansion.
There is also the question of funding, as we have heard. Scotland faces significant fiscal pressures, and we are being asked to support an expansion that would require billions more in spending. I think that the £500 million figure is a low estimate.
The motion assumes that economic benefits will follow from the proposed expansion, but that assumption is not guaranteed. The Quebec model is often cited as a good example, but that model was released in times of economic growth and fiscal stability in Quebec. In Scotland, the opposite is the case, and we are being asked to expect childcare to deliver that growth. The reverse is true.
We should be cautious about relying on that aspect. Policy cannot override economic reality. Even if funding could be found, there is the serious issue of the workforce, which we have mentioned previously. Infant care is the most complex and resource-intensive form of childcare, and, if we are to expand entitlement to it, we must take the workforce into consideration. Without a credible workforce plan, not only will further expansion be difficult, but there is a risk that it will be undeliverable.
We encourage a more responsible approach that is not about doing less but about doing things properly. If the intention is to support economic growth, responsible policy must focus on providing support where it is most needed, ensuring that funding follows the child and prioritising working families.
The motion asks Parliament to expand a system that is already under pressure without offering a clear plan for funding or delivery. For the reasons I have given, we cannot support it.
We move to the open debate. I call Calum Kerr to make his first speech.
15:23
What an honour it is to have the opportunity to speak in our national Parliament, not least as the representative for Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale—the constituency that I was born in and have called home for most of my life.
Before I come to the very important subject of the debate, I pay tribute to my predecessor, Christine Grahame. [Applause.] She served as MSP for the area, in its various forms, for 27 years and as a Deputy Presiding Officer of this Parliament. She was a formidable and determined champion for her constituents who always put people first and took no prisoners—even, occasionally, on her own side of the political aisle—to get results for them. She is, and will remain, a patriot and a champion for Scotland and for independence. I am grateful for her support and wish her well in her retirement.
I whole-heartedly support the motion. The case for expanding childcare is clear, and, from the introductory remarks, I can say that it is in safe hands. For the best part of a year, I have heard about the issue’s importance from parents on the doorstep, from Peebles to Penicuik and Galashiels to Gorebridge, and from the charities and providers that work with them.
I was brought up in a household where childcare was a truly valued part of working life. My dad was a teacher and my mum, Grace, trained at Barnardo’s, became a nursery nurse and then a nanny, ran her own playgroup and then built and ran her own nursery in Peebles, which all three of my children went to. I do not claim to be an expert, but I have been steeped in the importance and value of good professional childcare, in the value of those who deliver it and in the reality that they can sometimes feel undervalued.
When we announced the policy during the election campaign, the response from my constituency was instant. Parents welcomed the ambition, and they had questions about the how and the when and about whether it would fit their specific circumstances. The sector immediately got in touch to raise practical concerns about delivery and the workforce that would have to carry out the policy. Our manifesto has given us the ambition and has committed funding. The opportunity is now ours to seize.
I will share two stories from the constituency: one concerns the challenges that parents face, and one concerns the good practice that we can build on.
In rural areas in particular, there are fundamental gaps in provision. A constituent in Galashiels wrote to me during the campaign to say that her child’s after-school club had closed and that there was no local alternative, although she lived in the second-biggest town in my constituency. So that she can keep working, she now pays £10 a day in taxi fares to get her child to a club in Melrose. That is what those gaps look like in real life. It also represents the cost of living in the most literal sense.
However, also during the campaign, I visited Stow primary, which is a few miles up the road from that constituent’s town, where Stow Kids Club, with support from School’s Out, runs a breakfast club and an after-school club on site. Built by parents and providers and run on a tight budget, it shows what is possible.
Our ambition for childcare extends in two directions: down to nine months and up through primary. In practice, those are two very different operations. Extending wraparound care to the end of primary offers the chance to build on infrastructure and models that already exist. After-school clubs, breakfast clubs and holiday provision represent the fastest path to real relief for working families. The Government recognised that in the previous budget, with an initial £15 million for breakfast clubs and £2.5 million for after-school provision. The work now is to make sure that our investment grows to match the scale of the gap and that what works in Stow becomes the norm rather than the exception.
As we all know, the extension down to nine months is a different proposition. At that level, requirements on staffing ratios, training and equipment are all much higher. I know that we will make sure that we get this right, but a phased approach would give us an opportunity to deliver benefits early while building out that capability.
Whatever the phasing, we have to do this with the sector, not to it. Providers tell me that they feel stretched and sometimes undervalued. As one person put it to me, this is not just playing with children all day; it is skilled professional work, and we must treat it that way, with pay, training, career structure and regulation that fit the setting. Childminders, private nurseries and school-age providers such as School’s Out all want to be part of what we are doing. Let us make sure that we do not unintentionally undermine them; instead, let us ensure that we build on what is working with them in partnership.
This is one of the most significant pieces of work that the Parliament will deal with over the next five years. The expansion of childcare can be transformational, with childcare built around families rather than families having to fit around childcare. It can give children the best start in life. It can support more parents into the work that they want. As a party and as a Parliament, let us get this done, for the families in Galashiels, in Stow and in every town and village beyond.
I call Claire Baker, who has seven minutes; however, we have time in hand.
15:30
There seems to be an issue with the lectern. [Interruption.] I will switch to a different one—no, that is it.
I welcome the cabinet secretary to her new post. Every child deserves the best start in life, and every parent deserves a childcare system that works for the reality of modern family life. A good childcare system should support the child’s development, help to reduce poverty and give parents the flexibility and confidence to work, train and study.
Scottish Labour recognises that high-quality, flexible and affordable childcare is essential both for children’s outcomes and for Scotland’s economy. However, expansion has to be credible, sustainable and deliverable in practice. Families need a system that genuinely works for them.
The SNP manifesto promised a
“transformational national expansion of childcare, from 9 months to the end of primary school, 52 weeks a year, making life easier for families.”
That was a commitment, not an aspiration or an ambition, but it came without a clear timetable, a workforce plan or detailed costings to make it credible.
The first step must be to publish a fully costed delivery plan with a clear timetable for implementation. We are just beginning the parliamentary session, but it is one in which fiscal responsibility will be more important than ever. Difficult choices will have to be made across devolved budgets. That means that we must have transparency from the outset—not simply headline announcements, but clear planning, clear funding models and clear accountability—so that the Parliament can properly scrutinise delivery and the people of Scotland can have confidence in it.
Ahead of the election, the now Deputy First Minister promised an additional half a billion pounds in childcare funding. The Parliament deserves to know how that money will be delivered, how it will be distributed fairly across local authorities and private providers, and how the Scottish Government will ensure that the expansion does not simply place even greater pressure on a childcare sector that is already struggling with workforce shortages, closures and capacity constraints.
The reality is that the current system is already under strain. Parents are struggling to access places, and private and voluntary providers warn that the funding model is unsustainable. In some parts of the country, because of shortages in provision, parents cannot even secure their third choice of nursery.
The briefing that we received from COSLA ahead of the debate outlined some of the pressures on current funding and the consequences of the tension between choice and quality. It also makes clear the need to ensure that the current model is suitable and sustainable in resource and workforce before any further expansion can be considered. Talk about expanding entitlement means little if, already, families cannot access the places that they are promised.
Any expansion of funded childcare relies heavily on an increase in the capacity of the private and voluntary sector as demand rises, and on sufficient capacity in every community. Without that, families are left frustrated, providers are stretched and inequalities deepen between areas where provision exists and areas where it does not exist.
We also need to have a full discussion about the purpose of childcare and early years provision. Is childcare the primary purpose, to enable parents to work, or is it nursery education, which focuses on children’s development and early intervention? How do we ensure that the system supports vulnerable families, including eligible two-year-olds, when parents may not currently be in work?
The reality is that the system is trying to achieve all those things, but that means recognising the practical implications of that ambition. For many families—especially those who face poverty or vulnerability—early years services provide much more than childcare. Early intervention at that stage can have a lasting impact on educational attainment, wellbeing and life chances; the services can provide speech and language support, identify developmental concerns early, offer parenting support, reduce isolation and connect families to wider services. Largely, however, we run a drop-off-and-collect system.
If the purpose of provision for vulnerable two-year-olds is to tackle inequality and support vulnerable families, we need to consider whether the current model builds family resilience and capacity. Willie Rennie talked about the importance of attachment in early years. I have spoken to education authorities, which have told me that they are seeing a spike in disruptive, dysregulated and even violent behaviour in some young children as they start school. We need to consider how the early years offer addresses that trend and whether it has unintended consequences that we need to be aware of.
To pick up on Claire Baker’s point about the value of provision for eligible two-year-olds, I completely agree with her about the importance of early learning at that point. Will she, like me, welcome the findings in the evaluation report—I said that it was published by Diffley, but it was the Scottish Government’s report, so I will correct the record on that—which demonstrated that, after one year, those who had been eligible two-year-olds showed no developmental difference when compared with the three-year-olds who were coming into childcare on a universal offer?
I recognise and welcome that, and I do not denigrate the policy on two-year-olds in any way. However, last week, figures were released on violence in schools. In Fife, a 50 per cent increase in violence in schools was reported. When I recently met education authorities, they highlighted particular pinch points and said that there was a trend of increased violence among younger children when transitioning between nursery and school. We need to think about whether the nursery offer prepares children for school and whether any issues arise from having families drop off young children but not taking the opportunity to build relationships between parents and their children.
That is why, in our recent manifesto, we argued for wider family support through measures such as family network hubs, which are based on sure start principles, that would help families access advice on childcare, employment, housing and financial support in a more joined-up way. The benefit of the vulnerable two-year-olds policy is that we support the child, but we must ensure that parents or the family are still involved. Equally, if childcare is intended to support employment, it must function in a way that allows parents to work. Currently, too many parents say that it simply does not.
Childcare costs are among the biggest outgoings for working families. Research from Pregnant Then Screwed found that around two thirds of mothers surveyed in Scotland said that childcare costs are the same as, or more than, their income. Around half said that it does not make financial sense for them to work, and more than a quarter said that they relied on debt or savings to pay for their childcare. That should concern every member of this Parliament, because childcare should remove barriers to employment, not create them. At the moment, many parents, particularly women, are reducing their hours, turning down promotions or leaving work altogether because childcare costs and inflexible provision make participation in the workplace impossible, which is damaging for family finances, economic growth and equality.
We need childcare that is built around the realities of family life, which means: greater flexibility; recognising the needs of shift workers, single parents and families of children with additional support needs; ensuring that funding genuinely follows the child, so that parents have a meaningful choice over providers; and supporting childminders and private providers, which are essential to making flexible childcare possible in many communities.
There is a lack of clarity about how the current 1,140-hour system works, with the Scottish Government giving money directly to local authorities that then decide what to keep for their own provision and what to pass to partner providers. Some partners say that they do not get enough funding to meet their costs and that they are not advertised equally by local authorities.
At the same time, I recognise the need for local authorities to be properly funded to provide their nursery provision, because they provide the bedrock system for many families. We need to see progress towards an agreement—
Will the member take an intervention?
If there is time.
Yes, there is time.
Does Claire Baker believe that we need to look again at the guidance that the Scottish Government wrote and which local councils implement, as it has led to these problems?
I agree with that. I understand that a difference has been made in England, where there is an agreement in place that has led to a more sustainable approach to rate setting and how the funding is distributed. I agree that we need to look at that.
We also need to look beyond the nursery years. One of the biggest pressures for working parents comes when children transition from nursery into primary school. Families can move from longer nursery hours into a school day that finishes in the middle of the afternoon, which creates immediate childcare gaps and additional costs. That is one of the reasons why wraparound care is so important and has to be of good quality and flexible.
That is why Scottish Labour has argued for breakfast clubs and better holiday care provision to support working families and provide stability for children, because childcare challenges for parents do not suddenly disappear when a child starts school. I look forward to hearing much more detail about how and when the Scottish Government will deliver that support across all our communities.
The debate is about much more than counting funded hours. It must be about whether the system genuinely works for children and families, whether it supports child development and tackles inequality, whether it allows parents to work and progress and whether this Scottish Government is prepared to match the scale of its promises with the funding, planning and reform that are needed to deliver them.
I call Bob Doris, to be followed by Patricia Gibson. We still have some time in hand.
15:40
I am pleased to hear it, Presiding Officer. I welcome you to your position and the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Culture and Gaelic to her position.
This may surprise you, Presiding Officer, but this is by no means my first speech in this place. However, it will be my first speech as the MSP for Glasgow Kelvin and Maryhill, with the substantial boundary changes that were put in place ahead of the 2026 Scottish Parliament elections. It was a privilege to represent areas such as the Garngad, Springburn and Milton, but that now passes on to Ivan McKee MSP. I look forward to continuing to represent my constituents across the wider Maryhill corridor, however, and the many new communities that were formerly part of the Glasgow Kelvin constituency.
The real reason for mentioning the changes is that it allows me to mention Glasgow Kelvin. I pay tribute to Kaukab Stewart, who was the MSP for Glasgow Kelvin from 2021 up until the election. Kaukab was the first woman of colour elected to the Scottish Parliament, and she served diligently as a hard-working constituency MSP and as a Scottish Government minister. She will be a loss to this Parliament.
I turn to the substantive debate on the Scottish Government’s ambition to expand early learning and childcare provision. The Scottish Government has already presided over a more than doubling of free early learning and childcare for three and four-year-olds in Scotland, as well as eligible two-year-olds. Although that doubling has not been without its challenges, some of which I hope to refer to during my speech, it is still a tremendous achievement, and that should not be forgotten in the debate. That achievement was driven and secured by an SNP Government. However, it was delivered on the ground not by politicians but by early learning and childcare professionals employed by local authorities or by providers in the private, voluntary and independent sector, which is often referred to as the PVI sector.
The 1,140 hours have been in place since 2021, by and large, and have been worth more than £6,000 for every eligible child each year. That has benefited my family, and we have used our hours mixed between a local authority provider and an independent provider as we have tried to best match our family needs with the available provision.
That mixing and matching of provision to best meet family circumstances will be a common experience for families. Flexibility is essential. The Scottish Government is, of course, aiming to move towards year-round childcare provision for children from nine months old up to the end of primary school. It was a central manifesto commitment. More than £0.5 billion has been earmarked for expenditure on that endeavour, and that will have to be kept under review as we plan for the next five years.
I think that we can all agree that achieving that aim would be hugely welcome and transformational.
As usual, Bob Doris is giving a thoughtful speech about an important matter. However, he has just indicated that the Government has “earmarked” £500 million for the expansion programme, but I do not think that that is what the cabinet secretary said. In the Scottish National Party manifesto, it was estimated that that would be the ballpark figure, but nobody really knows, and there is not an earmarked fund of money set apart for the purposes that Bob Doris suggests, is there?
I will need to mind my Ps and Qs with Mr Kerr for using the word “earmarked” in the chamber. If Mr Kerr is more comfortable with the term “ballpark figure”, let us go with that and move along with a degree of consensus.
I very much hope that the policy will command strong cross-party support, receive constructive and meaningful scrutiny along the way and have the good will of Parliament. Achieving the ambition to have as much childcare as necessary to fit around family needs and circumstances will be challenging—it will also be expensive, I suspect. It will require innovation, flexibility and a mixed-model approach to delivery. Our councils will and must remain the cornerstone of successful delivery.
Bob Doris and I have a long track record of debating this issue over many years, and he will understand that, in order to have a mixed model, we need a private, voluntary and independent sector that is treated on an equal basis with council nurseries. Will he pledge to support all of us who want to achieve that?
I specifically mentioned the PVI sector, which shows that I think that we have to acknowledge the sector’s growing importance and fund it as effectively as possible. I will say more about that in the latter part of my speech, but I appreciate the member’s intervention.
Our councils will, and must, remain the cornerstone of successful delivery. However, it will be vital that we have a truly meaningful, respectful and constructive partnership with the private, voluntary and independent sector, as well as with childminders. I welcome COSLA’s acknowledgement of that in its briefing to members for this debate. Although that partnership has often worked well, we should also acknowledge that the issue of councils paying PVI providers a sustainable rate has been the subject of much debate by those in the sector, who do not always feel that that has been forthcoming from councils. That must be addressed—I hope that that will reassure Mr Rennie. I very much hope that that key relationship can be developed and that the matter is addressed.
The success of our transformational childcare offer will also require a major uplift in the early years and childcare workforce, and that has to be considered strategically. It is a great opportunity to develop a pathway back to employment for some, often women, and to support others to increase their working hours, given that underemployment, as well as unemployment, is a challenge for society. It is ironic that the absence of affordable childcare when required might have been a barrier for some who might now, with the policy, be able to consider employment. That new workforce might require specific additional and transitional support.
I appreciate Mr Doris’s comments that the policy will certainly suit working families and the economy. However, does lowering the age of the children for whom there is free childcare to nine months impinge on a child’s rights to be loved and to a family life? Half of a child’s brain development happens in the first 1,000 days of life, and the broader evidence out there says that a child really needs attachment. Yes, that should be in a mixed economy with group interaction, but having alone time with a parent really matters. The policy seems to be pushing us away from really respecting a parent’s ability to parent.
I very much welcome that intervention, as it allows me to put on record that, as the cabinet secretary said, there is no compulsion for a parent to put their child into a childcare establishment at nine months old.
I acknowledge Mr Dunlop’s expertise, however, and if he has concerns in that area, he is absolutely right to bring those to the Parliament and work through them as part of the positive, constructive scrutiny of this policy proposal.
I understand that the childcare workforce increased by 8,000 to 46,000 individuals to support the doubling of early years provision, and that colleges were supported to assist with the upskilling of the sector. I hope that those statistics are right, because they are on the Scottish Government website. Many more will now be needed to expand early years childcare further. Well-paid and supported workers will be central to the delivery of the commitment, and anything that we can do to address the associated costs and make it more affordable would be very welcome.
I will make one suggestion. Perhaps the Scottish Government could reach out to the UK Government to look at changing rules over employer national insurance contributions where employers seek to expand their early years workforce. Such dialogue and potential co-operation between the Scottish and UK Governments should be the norm, and should be supported cross-party in this place, irrespective of our constitutional positions. I hope that, on these types of things, we can start to make common cause. After all, moving someone into employment or providing someone with further hours reduces the benefits bill and bolsters the tax base, and it is a better outcome for all involved. The cost to an employer of NI contributions, however, can be as much as £2,800 each year.
In closing, I will say a bit about wraparound childcare and all-year-round childcare for young people of primary-school age. Breakfast clubs, after-school clubs and holiday clubs have been a mainstay for many years now. Some provision may look like a more traditional after-school club, but there is also the growth of emerging additional provision that is based around various activities such as football and dance, in particular during the summer holidays.
In my constituency, I am lucky to have various providers such as Summerston after-school care, Maryhill mobile crèche, Achieve More! Scotland, and North Kelvin Sports Development Group, to name just a few. There are huge opportunities to expand provision in exciting, innovative ways; however, how and when delivery will take place will have to be co-ordinated. That also applies to funding, which can come from different pots of cash—for instance, for the Scottish Football Association’s extra time initiative partnership with the Scottish Government. Local organisations offering different opportunities and models of delivery, often with very different cost bases, must be seen as partners, not competitors. Planning will be crucial.
Given the time that I have taken, I will draw my remarks to a close. I hope that we can come together as a Parliament and deliver this transformational Scottish Government policy.
You have helped us to make up time.
15:50
I congratulate the Deputy Presiding Officer on securing her place.
I am delighted to speak to the motion in the name of Màiri McAllan. The proposals are radical and will take some time to fully come to fruition, but they must be welcomed for the support that they will deliver for our young families. Early learning and nursery education is extremely important, because all the evidence shows that children who benefit from early learning in positive settings, such as a nursery, tend to have better and more successful longer-term outcomes. It is important not just to support young mums into work but to ensure that those who are already in work can stay in work. Well funded flexible childcare is good for parents, children and our economic growth.
At this point, it is important to say that many mums—I say mums, because most of the childcare falls to them—would love to have the opportunity to stay at home and be full-time carers for their children but, too often, that is not financially viable, although that, too, is work.
We all know that childcare is extremely expensive. We do not want to see a situation in which a parent has to stop working because the cost of childcare that meets the needs of their family is prohibitive. I am pleased that the cabinet secretary addressed that in her remarks. The 1,140 hours of high-quality childcare that parents can access and that is worth up to £6,000 per year per eligible child is welcome. I am delighted that the Scottish Government is going further to reflect the needs of hard-pressed working parents. As we have heard from others today, I have also spoken to parents who found that returning to work full-time after maternity leave posed practical and financial difficulties that the current system does not address.
The SNP’s commitment and transformational offer of year-round childcare for children from nine months old until the end of primary school, which is backed by over half a million pounds of new investment, will be a real boon to all working parents, as well as those who are trying to get into the workplace, perhaps after a period of absence or even for the first time. Finding appropriate and affordable childcare will help them to deal with that problem on an on-going basis.
We are aware anecdotally of parents who find that the current childcare arrangements simply do not have the flexibility that they need built in. A new system that will fit around families, instead of families having to fit around the system, including cross-border childcare placements, is exactly what working parents have been asking for. In the early days of the new SNP Government, I am pleased that the cabinet secretary is announcing those new plans. I know that that will hearten many parents who have been struggling. I am sure that the cabinet secretary will ensure that the current providers are part of conversations as the initiative is rolled out.
Of course, as we have heard, capacity is an issue. I know that the cabinet secretary is mindful of building workforce capacity in the early learning sector to deliver the childcare commitment. Perhaps we could have a little bit more detail about how that might work and what the timeline might be. I agree with my colleague Calum Kerr’s comments that, very often, early learning education and childcare is undervalued as a service. Unfortunately, that is just the world that we live in. I wonder whether the cabinet secretary has considered what might be done to further professionalise that important sector.
This is all part of a wider package of measures, and I am glad that the work is taking place. It is good to see that provision has been made for improved wraparound activities to expand after-school clubs. That is not just good in further supporting children’s social skills; it has a vital role to play in developing children’s confidence and offers them more options instead of, unfortunately, sitting in front of a screen. Anything that takes children away from screens and social media is good for their mental health. Living in the real world, making and mixing with friends and discovering and developing hobbies and latent talents will help to foster happy and healthier young children who will have much more positive outcomes and much better mental health.
If you will indulge me, Deputy Presiding Officer, I want to say a few words about the expansion of breakfast clubs—a universal offer by August 2027—which is one part of the larger package of measures. We all know that hungry children do not learn well, and ensuring that a healthy, nutritional breakfast is available is a key aspect of raising attainment and levelling the academic playing field for young people. Together with free school meals for primary school children up to primary 5; the best start grant, which helps parents to equip their child with essentials for the new school year; the school clothing grant; and the best start food payments—not to mention the Scottish child payment—that will ease the financial burden on families during these difficult times.
I know that providing free school meals for all primary school children from primary 1 to primary 5 took time, because we had to build capacity, but I wonder whether any further detail can be provided on when the offer can be extended to include those in primary 6 and primary 7.
Taken together, the Government’s commitment to our young people and the focus on supporting household budgets, which remain under such pressure, mean that an unprecedented level of support is being provided. As someone who grew up in deep poverty, I can barely imagine the impact that such support would have had on my childhood and that of my siblings, had it been available.
The measures that the Scottish Government is taking to support families are not, and should not be considered to be, a silver bullet, but they will chip away at the barriers that too many young people face and level the playing field just a little bit. Incrementally, the Government will help young people to reach their potential and develop their talents by removing some of the everyday barriers to accessing early learning and by ensuring that they have access to nutritional food in school, a new school uniform for the new school year and the essentials that they need. After 25 years of secondary teaching, I know that not having those things can scar children’s school experiences and create clear and obvious social barriers in our schools, which do not support learning.
Therefore, I very much welcome the proposals and the support that they will provide for families, and I applaud the early inclusion of such funding in the 2026-27 budget.
I call David Smith to make his first speech.
15:58
Deputy Presiding Officer, I congratulate you on your election, and I welcome the cabinet secretary to her role. I also extend my thanks, welcome and congratulations to all the other members in the Parliament.
I thank my family and friends for their love and support during the election campaign, and I thank everyone who has been working in my party over the past few years to get us all elected.
I am here to represent the West Scotland region. Therefore, I give a very special thanks to everyone from our region for all their incredible efforts so far.
With regard to receiving childcare, nine months seems an incredibly young age to me. I remember when my oldest children were growing up. They were fortunate enough to be able to stay at home with their mum. My youngest child went to a childminder, and she would fondly describe her childminder as her best friend. That went on for a number of years.
With regard to Scottish Government funding over many years, policies that sound fantastic are created, but providers are often short changed at the end. Private nurseries are struggling to deliver funded hours sustainably, which has resulted in a significant loss of childminders and places. Staff are under incredible amounts of pressure, and many of them are leaving the sector.
The rest of this Official Report will be published progressively as soon as the text is available.
Previous
First Homes Fund