Children's Panels (Membership)
The final item of business today is a members' business debate on motion S2M-364, in the name of Scott Barrie, on children's panel membership. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament recognises the huge contribution made to public life by volunteers; notes that the children's hearing system has now been in operation in Scotland for over 30 years; applauds the dedication and commitment of children's panel members in undertaking a difficult and demanding task; recognises the Scottish Executive's current recruitment campaign for additional panel members, and encourages people from all sections of the community, but in particular men, to consider applying for membership of the children's panel in their local area.
First, and as is customary, I thank the many members of all parties and none who supported the motion in my name, and who have therefore allowed children's panel membership to be debated in Parliament tonight. I do so in all sincerity, as I believe that such support shows members' interest in and commitment to the children's hearings system. I look forward to hearing other members' contributions.
I wish to pay tribute to the past and present contribution to society of members of children's panels; to highlight the need for more people from communities across Scotland to come forward to serve on panels in their local areas; and to emphasise the contribution that children's panel members make, not only to child protection and youth justice systems, but to their employers by enhancing their own value as employees.
Scotland's unique system of dealing with youth justice and child protection was set up through the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968. That radical piece of social legislation followed from the work of the Kilbrandon committee, which had reported some four years earlier. The 1968 act was innovative and far-reaching in its reform of children's justice and welfare and in the inclusion of other key provisions, such as the duty placed on local authorities to promote social welfare and the bringing together of many different services into newly created social work departments.
A key part of the children's hearings system is the fact that panel members make up a lay body drawn from the local area that the hearing covers. Members give up their time freely and come from a wide range of occupations, neighbourhoods, income groups and backgrounds. They are unpaid and they all have a keen interest in the welfare of children and young people.
There are currently more than 2,100 panel members in Scotland. As the first phase of the annual recruitment process has just ended, children's panel advisory committees up and down the country will be organising interviews and selection and training events to ensure that that number is maintained over the coming year.
For the children's hearings system to work effectively, it is essential that children's panels reflect diversity within local communities. The stereotype of a typical panel member as some matronly figure in a twinset and pearls could not be further from the truth, although it is still the case today—as it was when I attended my first children's hearing as a social work student in Bathgate in the early 1980s—that not all socioeconomic groups are adequately represented. In that respect, I refer not simply to those groups that are traditionally excluded. The under-representation of men on children's panels is of particular concern. Men make up nearly half of society but barely a third of children's panel members.
A possible explanation is that men might appear to have less spare time in which to volunteer for membership, due to work commitments, and I will return to that point later. It is also suggested that an interest in child issues and child welfare is disproportionately a woman's interest. By statute, a children's hearing must consist of three panel members, of whom one must be male and one must be female. I might be wrong in my recollection, but I cannot recall any more than a handful of hearings that I have attended involving two men sitting on the panel. That, coupled with the possibility of a female reporter, female social worker, female teacher and female educational psychologist, as well as the mother, can make it an unrepresentative experience for the young person who is attending, who, sadly, is more often a young man. Just as we need to encourage more ethnic minority panel members and working-class members, we certainly need more male members.
During our all-day debate on antisocial behaviour earlier this month, Bill Aitken suggested that a reason why so many members resigned from their local panels was their frustration at the limited powers available to them at hearings. I disagreed with him then, and I would disagree with him were he here tonight. Figures that I have received show that, over the past five years, the proportion of members resigning during their first year of membership has varied between 12 per cent and 18 per cent. The overwhelming reason for their resignation was either family or work commitments. Having spoken to members of various children's panel advisory committees throughout Scotland, I know that that is also the major reason given by panel members who resign before their term of appointment expires.
Serving on a children's panel is no easy task. The issues with which panel members are confronted are sometimes distasteful. They can be distressing and, in my experience, they are often harrowing. Those stresses are exacerbated if members also come under pressure from their employer because of the time that they are taking off work to undertake their children's panel duties.
Panel members have a statutory right to reasonable time off, but we all know that one person or employer's definition of reasonableness can be dramatically different from someone else's. I draw that to the minister's attention and ask the Scottish Executive to promote the benefits that children's panel membership can bring to organisations.
We often talk about transferable skills in the modern marketplace and, given the expertise that panel members gain through training and the skills required at hearings, employers get a favourable return—in employee development—on the modest amount of time off. A couple of years ago, I participated in an event organised in my local area at which a number of employers spoke favourably about their support for the hearings system because of what panel members contributed to their organisation. More events like that need to be held and the Scottish Executive needs to ensure that the message is heard adequately in the private sector, in both large and small businesses, so that panel members who are in employment are not drawn disproportionately from the public sector.
Some members have expressed concern about there being an upper age limit for panel members. Indeed, Christine Grahame has lodged a motion to that effect. I have stressed already this evening that it is essential that panels are representative of the whole community and must include older people. We would not want panels to be comprised only of octogenarians but, likewise, older people should not be excluded from membership solely because of an arbitrary age limit. There used to be flexibility in the system and I know from discussions with the children's panel advisory group that it would like to see that flexibility restored. I draw that, too, to the minister's attention.
Every day in Scotland, children's hearings meet to discuss the particular personal needs of individual young people. Panel members have to grapple with many different and complex issues, which could include sexual abuse, non-attendance at school, offences by the child, or the child being beyond parental control. Sometimes all those issues can emerge during one session, as in most areas three cases will be considered one after the other.
The skills required to conduct the hearing vary and panel members must deal well with difficult situations. It is a credit to children's panel members both today and in the past that they do that mostly unacknowledged and unthanked by society at large and that, in the vast majority of cases, they arrive at the right decision. Too often, members have been critical of the system, either directly or indirectly, because of the inadequacy of the resources available in a particular area. However, this evening we should recognise the dedication and professionalism that panel members bring to their role and acknowledge the immeasurable contribution that they make.
A considerable number of members wish to speak, so I ask them to stick to a tight four minutes.
I congratulate Scott Barrie warmly on bringing this issue to the chamber as it is one to which we must return again and again. It is not just about congratulating warmly those who take part in the children's panels. They would welcome our support, but they would also want a commitment from us to stand by them and to ensure that they are supported. They would want us to ensure that the system develops and that it is given the financial support that it requires.
I read recently a report produced by Iain Gault called "Study on Youth Offending in Glasgow", which was written in April 2001 and published on 6 October 2003. Its content is relevant to what we are discussing. We must remember that the children's panel system is not just a nice thing to have and something on which we can shine a torch and about which we can say that it is a Scottish solution to youth care and justice issues. It is essential and integral to our care system and youth justice system.
I will concentrate my remarks on the connection between care and justice. The report studied persistent offenders—children who had had 10 to 19 referrals and children who had had more than 20 referrals. Among those who had had 10 to 19 referrals, the average age of first referral was at 8.7 years, but the average first-offence referral was at 11.9 years. More than 40 per cent of those who had had more than 20 referrals and 47 per cent of those who had had 10 to 19 referrals had been referred originally on care and protection grounds. It is essential to consider that point in our continuing debate on antisocial behaviour. Our responses to youth issues must be integrated and must emphasise care and the importance of referrals and support at an early stage.
I contacted the Edinburgh children's panel. Although its referral rates between 2000 and 2003 have gone up by about 600, referrals for offences have actually gone down. There is a perception that our children's panels have, all of a sudden, been swamped by offence referrals. However, Edinburgh's biggest increase in referrals is in cases of alleged lack of parental care, the number of which has gone up from 1,700 to 3,200. We should reflect on that. If children's panels are considered essential in our youth care and justice system, they must be placed centre stage and given the support that they need.
Scott Barrie spoke about the value of children's panels in offering experience and transferability of skills. If more private sector employers knew the value of such things, they might, instead of sending people on training sessions on this, that or the other, consider the valuable benefits that adult volunteering can offer to everybody, not only the participants.
Many people over the age of 60 can contribute a great deal. Many members of children's panels have been members for 10 to 15 years. They feel a social obligation. For them, to stop being a member is very difficult.
Children's panels are only as good as the partnerships that surround them. We cannot address the children's panels system without acknowledging the problems in social work recruitment and with the support that social workers can offer the panels. If the panels do not have support from social work departments for their disposals, those disposals will be ineffective. If things are referred to local authorities, we have to be sure that local authorities are able to support the recommendations of members of children's panels. If we are serious, we must address the social work crisis that exists in many local authorities. We have an obligation to support this essential and integral system of care and protection in Scotland.
I very much welcome Scott Barrie's motion and the positive points that he raises. As the Scottish Socialist Party's justice spokesperson, I have taken three opportunities in recent weeks to meet various professionals in the Scottish children's hearings system. Indeed, I sat on a panel in Edinburgh last month. I offer my impressions, not with Scott Barrie's expertise and experience, but perhaps as an objective outsider.
I am full of admiration for the service and the work that volunteers and professionals do. The 2,200 volunteers, in particular, show dedication, pride and a sense of putting something back. They illustrate some of the most admirable qualities in civic Scotland today. Like Scott, I am fully persuaded of the benefits of the system. It is far-sighted and has the best interests of children in its viewfinder.
However, I have detected—and Scott mentioned this as well—a certain slump in morale in the service in recent years. The mood is that the ethos engendered by Kilbrandon all those years ago is at odds with the prevailing political climate. People have an overriding sense that their efforts are being undone by insufficient support, as Fiona Hyslop mentioned. In reading about the service at the time of the Kilbrandon report in the late 1960s and early 1970s, I was struck by the difference between the atmosphere then and now. I was struck also by the ethos of the children's hearings service then, which considered the welfare of the child by considering the whole child. What strikes me about the children's hearings system now—and Scott highlighted this in his motion—is that its very ethos is being criticised. I feel that it is being criticised unduly. Some quarters say that it is soft on yobs, and there have been renewed calls for the system to be replaced by juvenile courts like those in England.
Reading about the contrast between the situation in England and Wales and that in Scotland is illuminating. In the past 10 years, there has been a 100 per cent increase in youth custody in England and Wales and an 800 per cent increase in the number of 12 to 15-year-olds in custody. A total of 3,200 youngsters are now behind bars in England and Wales, which is the highest number since 1908.
We need a champion for the children's hearings service in Scotland and we need further development rather than abandonment. Some 65 per cent of children who are referred to children's panels are there for care and protection and not because of offences. The question is: how can we extend the service and how can we get volunteers?
Will the member give way?
I will give way as long as I get some extra time.
Please be quick, Mr Barrie.
I hear Mr Fox's criticisms of comments that are made about the children's hearings system, but does he agree that one of the difficulties with the current system is the sometimes unimaginative recommendations of social workers and the unimaginative use of disposals by children's panels? Disposals could be far more effective than they are at present; the system is not being used to the extent that it could be.
I fully accept that and I will come to the question of social workers in the 30 seconds that I still have available. The point that Scott Barrie raises is not so much that we need volunteers in the service and that the service needs to be expanded but the question of how we do that. I note the remarks of the former Bishop of Edinburgh, the Right Rev Richard Holloway, a man who is more acquainted with the field than most. Last week, he suggested at a conference at Edinburgh sheriff court that if we offered expenses to working-class people to attend panels, and if we held the panels in local areas rather than in city centres, we might get people more involved. It might also encourage more younger people to get involved, which I think is part of the motion.
In my last 30 seconds, I will touch on the point about teamwork and social work provision, because that is critical. The social work service in this field sometimes appears to be in meltdown—I am told that, at 40 per cent of hearings, no social work report is available—and that has a detrimental impact on the service that is available to us. As Scott Barrie highlighted, we need to find more ways to get volunteers and to attract social workers to the field.
The key thing that we must do is to celebrate the success of the children's hearings system rather than denigrate it, and we must dedicate to it the resources that are needed for it to develop during the next 30 years as well.
I, too, welcome Scott Barrie's motion, which acknowledges the huge contribution, dedication and commitment of children's panel members, and I welcome the opportunity to debate the issue. I am sure that Scott Barrie will understand that I cannot speak for Bill Aitken, who has had a bad accident and is trying to cope with crutches and a wheelchair. I am sure that he will respond to Scott Barrie's comments when he returns to Parliament.
Although I commend the recruitment campaign, which I hope will bring forward more men as well as women, we should also focus on the retention and morale of existing panel members, as Fiona Hyslop and Colin Fox mentioned, particularly given those members' experience and the training that they have undertaken.
A briefing from the city of Edinburgh children's panel notes that panel members are not a bunch of do-gooders from the Morningsides of Scotland; they reflect the communities in which they live and serve. As others have said, we are unlikely to retain those committed volunteers unless they are supported by local authorities. Although a hearing can in theory impose wide conditions, if the resources that are needed to follow those conditions through are not available, their effectiveness is undoubtedly muted. That is a demoralising factor for panel members. I understand that the promised additional 29 places in secure accommodation are not yet finalised, but perhaps the minister will confirm that.
Conservatives would also support more detox and rehabilitation services for young drug and alcohol abusers. It is simply not good enough to tell a person who is ready to try to kick his or her habit to come back in a few months. I represented a 15-year-old in Fort William, who had been referred by the children's panel to detox and rehabilitation services in Lincoln in England, but the council said that it could not afford to pay for that treatment. However, the council eventually paid after quite a bit of intervention from elected members.
The responsibilities and decisions of the children's panel can be made more difficult when a wide range of disabilities are misinterpreted as antisocial behaviour. Such disabilities include mental health problems, autism spectrum disorders, learning disabilities and emotional, social and behavioural problems. A recent report by the Audit Commission indicated that 90 per cent of children who have been permanently excluded from primary school and 60 per cent of children who have been permanently excluded from secondary school have special needs. It might, therefore, be more important to ensure that assessment is made of whether behaviour is the result of disability before further sanctions are considered.
If we want to be successful and effective in recruiting and retaining volunteers for the children's panel, we could do no better than address the points that were raised in the Audit Scotland report of December 2002. I want to pick just a few points from that report, which has been mentioned by other members. Unless we pay attention to that, the children's panel members will continue to be demoralised and feel that their contribution is not effective.
As I tried to point out in my speech, the reason that was given by panel members for stepping down before their time has expired was not that they were demoralised because of a lack of disposals, but that they found it to be an impossible task to deal with the work load that was being asked of them while holding down full-time employment. Does the member accept that we need to press employers to give panel members adequate time off?
Employment is one issue, but I can only reflect the points that have been put to me by the panel members whom I have met in the Highlands. If Scott Barrie thinks that he knows better than Audit Scotland, he should challenge its report.
Finally, let me mention what Audit Scotland said should be tackled to assist the children's hearings. It takes an average of five and a half months for a child to reach a hearing, during which time much more offending behaviour can take place. It takes seven and a half to eight and a half months to get a court decision. About 400 children are not getting the service that they need and to which they are legally entitled because of staff shortages, lack of specialist services and lack of social workers. More programmes should be focused on persistent young offenders who are under 12.
Please wind up.
I will be very quick.
Over £60 million is spent on residential and custodial places, but only £25 million is spent on community-based services. There is also an increased, and increasing, vacancy rate for social workers in children's services. However, children's panel members need support.
I congratulate Scott Barrie on securing tonight's debate. Along with other antisocial behaviour measures, an effective children's hearings system is an important part of protecting vulnerable children.
I am sure that we will be forgiven for being late at the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets reception across the street tonight. Ofgem wants to educate us about its priorities and objectives for the future, but what is new about that, given that this is what we do all the time? We might be at a school on a Monday, at a committee taking evidence from experts on a Tuesday and on a Wednesday we might be at a parliamentary debate such as today's debate on changes in general practitioners' contracts.
The events that we attend are such that I learned a bit more about the children's panel system during one lunch time when I—I think back in June—along with other members, met the chair of my local children's panel. For me, that did wonders in dispelling the popular misconception, which I think I shared with others, that the hearings system was only about dealing with young offenders. We have concentrated on that a bit tonight, but I learned then that that is only part of the job. The panels also exist to look out for kids who need care or protection. It was explained to me that a child can be referred to a panel for many reasons, from being the victim of an offence to misusing alcohol or drugs. It is up to the hearing to decide what is in the best interests of the child.
As has been made clear in the debate, the unstinting work of the panels, which consist of unpaid trained volunteers, is what has made the hearings work and endure over the past three decades. People give up their time to take part and in an age when people say that volunteering and community spirit is dead, the panel members contradict that wonderfully.
I was delighted to learn that Inverclyde children's panel boasts 58 members. Good as that is, when one considers that the panel deals with 1,000 referrals a year and holds five hearings a week, it is understandable that the panel wants to boost numbers further. As the three panel members who make up a children's hearing may not all be female, the panel is particularly keen to recruit more men.
Making the right choices for children is a huge responsibility, but we must send out the message that panel members do not need to be child care experts or top lawyers. As I discovered when I dropped into a training session one Sunday morning, children's panel members come from all walks of life. Although people were committed for a whole day, the place was packed.
We can all argue in support of children's panels, but we need to convince people, such as those in my area who may not be in employment but who have skills that they have built up over many years through working with apprentices, and who are blessed with common sense, that they can care about their community and kids. We should encourage them to become panel members.
I congratulate Scott Barrie on securing this debate and thank him for enabling us to debate an issue as important as children's panel membership. I also extend my heartfelt thanks to all members of children's panels. I know many of them, especially in the Glasgow area. They do stalwart work, spending many weekends and evenings trying to put something back into society. They tell me that they see that as their duty.
Scott Barrie and other members have highlighted a number of issues. It is important that we examine the way in which agism affects membership of children's panels. I know many people who are 70 or 80 years of age and who could put me to shame, never mind younger people.
We also need to consider the under-representation of ethnic minorities on panels and the fact that, for some reason, men are not taking up places on panels. Scott Barrie suggested that that may be the result of work commitments, but during the past 30 years, as children's panels have evolved, men have had more time to get involved in the voluntary sector. More women now work, and if they can find the time to serve on children's panels I am sure that men can do the same. The Executive has run an advertising programme to encourage men to become more involved, and further advertising would be more than welcome. I urge more men to consider serving on children's panels.
As Duncan McNeil said, the members of children's panels come from all airts and pairts and should include people who have worked in shipyards with apprentices. We need to involve everyone in panels—their membership should be much more wide ranging than it is at the moment.
I congratulate the Executive on investing more funds in children's panels, especially in the Glasgow area, and I thank it for doing so. Some people may disagree with the fast-tracking of social workers, but not everyone opposes it when the aim is to enable more social workers to assist children's panels. We could say that children's panels are absolutely marvellous. The volunteers who offer their services to panels are marvellous and panels do a good job. However, we cannot ignore the fact that there is a lack of social workers, which is a big problem. We all recognise that.
I will not repeat everything that children's panel members have said to me. However, children's panels were set up as a means of intervention before children become involved in criminal activities. Unfortunately, at the moment we are failing those vulnerable children, because some of them do not have social work reports.
Scott Barrie made the point to Fiona Hyslop and Mary Scanlon that people leave children's panels because of work and family commitments. Like the children's panel members whom Mary Scanlon mentioned, the members of the Glasgow children's panel to whom I have spoken are leaving out of frustration. They do not feel that their work is being undermined, but they feel that they are not able to fulfil the duty for which they volunteered. They believe that they are failing the children whom they set out to serve.
I know that we are actively involved in trying to recruit more social workers, but we must monitor what happens in the long term. We can throw money at any problem, but if there is no monitoring to determine whether that is working it is hardly worth while.
I sincerely congratulate everyone who offers their time and energies to children's panels. It is up to the Scottish Parliament to ensure that adequate resources—whether money or social workers—are provided to enable them to help kids who are desperately in need. I thank Scott Barrie for lodging his motion.
I do not disagree with anything that members have said so far. I sincerely congratulate Scott Barrie on raising this issue. That has become a cliché, but it is particularly important for the Parliament to show that it values the work of volunteers on children's panels.
British society relies heavily on well-trained volunteers, whether they are on a children's panel or in a citizens advice bureau, or are sports coaches, youth club workers or people who help the elderly. It is important to maintain the flow of volunteers, who must feel that they are making a difference. That is what life is all about.
Some sections of the media have attacked children's panels. Sometimes, politicians have done that because they are understandably concerned about the disruption to communities that some persistent offenders and difficult young people cause. Some remarks that politicians make are interpreted as hostile and disparaging to children's panels, so it is important to show how much we value children's panels.
Scott Barrie discussed how more people could be attracted to join children's panels. He is right to say that we must have propaganda for employers. We can tell employers that if they moan about young people misbehaving, they can do something by letting people off work to act as children's panel members.
Agism has been mentioned. There are people who are considerably older than me who have a much younger outlook than some people I know who are middle-aged at the age of 25.
We also want to encourage among Scottish men a non-macho attitude and what I think are called soft skills in some quarters. Sensitivity is considered unfashionable in some sections of Scottish society, but we must try to develop that sensitivity. To care about people is not unmanly. We must put across that message to encourage more men to join children's panels.
It has been said that, because of the shortage of social work support, the procedure is too slow. That causes people to criticise the system, because they see the local tearaways whom nobody seems to be dealing with. I hope that the minister can assure us of a genuine increase in social work support for panels and for bringing people into the system more quickly. In addition, once a panel has made a decision, that should be given effect more quickly.
We can draw on advice from panel members on many issues, such as how to deal better with family breakdown, the problems of people who need care and protection and antisocial behaviour. We can also draw on their advice on the measures they have found that work and what we need more of in order for the system to work better. As everyone knows, persistent offenders cause a disproportionate amount of trouble and we do not deal with them effectively. I am sure that children's panel members would have good advice for us on many of those issues.
I thank Scott Barrie for the debate. We must support panel members, attract more volunteers and make their work worth while by giving them adequate support.
I thank Scott Barrie for giving us the opportunity to have the debate and to recognise the contribution of volunteers in the children's panel system. In my previous existence as a pupil support teacher, I often attended children's panels with pupils from schools and the base from which I worked and with parents. One of the most frustrating aspects for panel members and professionals is the fact that different social workers represent pupils and young people at different times, simply because of the shortage of social workers and not through any fault of social workers, who are very dedicated.
Often when I attended a panel meeting, I would meet one social worker who represented the young person; then, at the review meeting further down the road, I would meet a different social worker. That does not help with providing the best that we can for our young people. I agree with all the speakers who said that the social worker shortage must be sorted out nationally.
We know that things are happening at the moment, but all of us would like clarification of exactly what is going on in the recruitment campaign for the social workers, who are crucial to providing the best that we can for our young people.
The Executive should be congratulated on its recruitment campaign to attract volunteers into the children's panel system. Without a wealth of people from our communities who dedicate themselves and give up their time, the system would not continue to work in the way that it has done up until now.
We want to keep and value our children's hearings system. I hate to hear people say that they want to do away with the system and replace it with something else. We should fight strongly and do everything in our power to keep our system. I agree with Scott Barrie that employers should be approached—encouraging employers to support the system is a great idea. In addition to support for social services and recruitment of social workers, there is a need for increased resources.
Panels often find themselves toothless because no alternatives are available to them. It can often be the case that a young person has reached the stage at which they are out of parental control and need to be placed elsewhere. Sometimes, the local children's unit, which is the only available option, is not appropriate for the young person, as they would find themselves with other young people whose problems were incompatible with their own. If one young person has a problem with severe truancy and another has a drug abuse problem, the young person with the truancy problem can also end up with a drug abuse problem. We have to ensure that specialised placements are kept open for young people who need them.
Just before the recess, towards the end of June, we had a debate on the closure of Red Brae School. We have to watch the situation carefully to ensure that establishments such as Red Brae are kept open. Such centres of excellence across the country support young people and their families. We need those centres for the small percentage of young people who cannot be maintained in their own school and community. They need a place to go to in the short term that can help them become reintegrated into their community.
That is the kind of approach that we need to take rather than the punitive approach that we hear about with the proposed antisocial behaviour bill. Such a positive approach would be much more helpful for all of us.
We should applaud Scott Barrie for securing the debate. We should also applaud the work of the volunteers in the children's panel system. That said, we should also look at the resources that are being provided to let people in the children's panel system do their jobs.
Like others, I thank Scott Barrie for bringing this subject to the Parliament. I emphasise that one of the great strengths of the Scottish Parliament is that individuals such as Scott Barrie who bring a wealth of skills and knowledge from their backgrounds can make a firm impression on the issues that come before the Parliament and can influence the outcome of legislation by contributing to debates in the chamber or at committee meetings. As legislators, I suppose that that is what all of us want to do.
I think that I am the only member present who has also served at Westminster. I remember well people from England and Wales asking me with great envy about the working of the children's hearings system in Scotland. They were envious of the strategy that had evolved from the Kilbrandon report and the passing of subsequent social work legislation. Those of us who represented Scottish constituencies were proud of what had been achieved in Scotland. The comparison with the system in England and Wales was sad to see. Not least of the proponents of the Scottish system was our late First Minister Donald Dewar, who spent a great deal of time working as a reporter in the system. I remember sitting in on one or two occasions when he undertook that role.
I became involved with the children's hearings system as a teacher and a politician. Like Rosemary Byrne, I was involved in special needs teaching. I was always impressed by the sensitivity of the volunteers and by the way in which they questioned the youngsters and tried to draw out what the real problem was. I was also impressed by the heart-searching way in which they decided what should happen to the child after they had gone through a hearing. The lack of the adversarial aspect that we see in juvenile and other courts often meant that youngsters did not feel threatened and could open up. Like other members, I pay tribute to the volunteers for their work over the 30 years that the system has been in place.
Tonight, I am pretending to be Christine Grahame. In fact, I turn up on these benches in various guises, although I have to say that it is easier to imitate Christine than it is to imitate Stewart Stevenson. However, I know that the minister is well aware of Christine's views on agism. On that point, I have a note from the chairman of the city of Edinburgh children's panel, who says that
"many of the younger members do not stay as long as others – reasons being that their employment needs to be more mobile, or if they are at university, they move elsewhere after graduation. Younger folk also can find employers less obliging in allowing them time to attend panel hearings – often the panel member does not wish to be viewed less favourably in the promotion stakes for this very reason."
He goes on to say that the panel often involves grannies and points out that their experiences of life and life skills can substantially help youngsters with their needs.
You have one minute.
I do not think that I am going to take all of it.
The gender balance on panels seems to have improved very slightly since the recruitment campaign began. I think that the ratio used to be four women to one man; it is now three women to one man. However, although there has been a slight improvement, we should still try to recruit men as volunteers.
Moreover, we should not simply assume that everyone who volunteers for the children's hearings system is a reader of The Guardian or turns up in a twinset and pearls. If we made a bit more noise about the system in the tabloid press, people from other areas might become interested in volunteering.
I ask the minister in his closing remarks to give us an update of the results of the campaign that was launched on 25 August. At the campaign launch, he made a very favourable statement about the importance of the system and I think that such an update would be very helpful. Finally, I should say that training and support are essential for all our volunteers.
I congratulate Scott Barrie on securing the debate and warmly endorse the sentiments expressed in the motion. Moreover, I thank members for their helpful and heartening speeches.
The debate gives me the opportunity to express publicly the Scottish Executive's gratitude for the time and energy given by members of the public who have supported Scotland's children's hearings system. I include in that group not only panel members but those who volunteered for the children's panel advisory committees. Scott Barrie rightly pointed out that the results of the recruitment campaign for those advisory committees will be worked on. Although the role of those volunteers is a little less visible, it is no less important to the system.
I am heartened by the support for volunteers that has been expressed this afternoon in speeches and tributes from all parts of the Parliament. Of course, some of the comments come from members' personal experience and we have benefited greatly from that experience in the debate. Many members have worked closely with the hearings system and know well the contributions of members of the public. I agree with Donald Gorrie's point about the importance of volunteering in Scotland. The hearings system is a very good example of how volunteers are making a significant difference.
In the few moments that I have available, I will try to respond to a number of points. However, many good points were raised and members will forgive me if I do not manage to respond to all of them. First, I should say that children's panel membership is of immense benefit to employers. Indeed, we have tried to make that very point on a number of occasions. Apparently, a campaign on this specific issue was launched in 1999. An employers' awareness campaign was introduced in 2001 and a further campaign is due to commence in March 2004. Members might like to take advance notice of that campaign and use it to reinforce the message, because it is extremely important that employers allow people to have time off.
Men are under-represented, and that is an historic problem. I understand that the current balance is 41 per cent male and 59 per cent female, but there are local variations, as members have said. It is extremely important that we get men to come forward and volunteer, and I am pleased to be able to tell Margaret Ewing that the 2003 campaign has produced about 3,750 expressions of interest, from which we hope to draw about 450 new panel members. I think that I am right in saying that, so far, there has been a 19 per cent increase in the number of men who have put themselves forward. To see how that translates into the number of male panel members who eventually come through, we shall have to see how the children's panel advisory committees take their decisions, but they are well seized of the situation, as the Executive is, and I know from the speeches that we have heard tonight that members are too.
Scott Barrie mentioned the fact that the prime reason stated in the Executive's figures for people leaving children's panels is family and work commitments. I recognise the figures that he quoted from Executive sources, and we must understand that family and work commitments can cause people to retire from panels. We now accept that mobility in employment means that, unfortunately, people will resign from panels, but we want to ensure that that does not happen as a matter of course. As Margaret Ewing said, we have invested in training, which is generally accredited to be good training. It gives volunteers the self-confidence to participate. If they feel that they are well trained, have facilities available to them and are supported in their activities, that is immensely important, and we want to ensure that that continues and that the support that volunteers get is the best that can be achieved.
I turn now to other points that were made in the debate. Mary Scanlon mentioned secure accommodation. Progress is being made on that, and the Executive is apparently currently in discussion with the agencies that will be delivering the 29 places. Unfortunately, I cannot tell her quite how far we have got, but those discussions will be on-going.
Where are those 29 places likely to be?
I hope that Mary Scanlon will forgive me, but I shall have to write to her about that. I have in the back of my memory where those places will be, but I would not want to mislead her. The places have been identified and, if I may, I shall write to her about that.
The question of age has been raised tonight and on previous occasions. Scott Barrie alluded to the fact, and members will recall, that it was Kilbrandon who suggested that the age profile of panel members should fit the potential age of parents. That is why there was originally some concern that there should not be panel members over the age of 60. There has been some flexibility, and although Mary Scanlon said that that flexibility had been reduced recently, that is not my understanding. As I understand it, the current system does not allow new appointments of people who are over 60, but it is considered acceptable for people who reach 60 once appointed to continue.
As I have said, there is some flexibility, but I would like to make it clear that a review is soon to be announced. That is something that I have talked about on a number of occasions. That review will make it clear that age considerations can be looked at so, if members have points to make as part of that review, we want to hear their views on whether the age restriction should be lifted or amended in any way. The review will be announced soon; we have trailed it regularly, and age is one of the areas that it will cover.
I am conscious of the time, Presiding Officer—in fact, I have strayed over my time. I will close by joining members in extending our grateful thanks on behalf of Scotland and Scotland's children for all the work of the unpaid volunteers who are involved in the children's hearings system. In partnership with paid professionals, they are doing a great deal to improve the lives of all Scotland's most vulnerable children and Parliament must express its appreciation for that.
Meeting closed at 17:55.