Chamber and committees

I am pleased to be able to discuss this issue with Mr Rennie in the committee, because normally we talk about this in the chamber, which means that I do not have very long and I have to rush my answer. Perhaps we can have a little bit more discussion about it.

As Mr Rennie will be aware, I have tried to be very proactive with regard to sustainable rates. The budget protects our £1 billion funding for early learning; I think that, on top of that, it is really important to highlight the progress that we have made with the funding rates. The Government has invested another £11 million in the real living wage for staff in the private and voluntary sector for ELC, and that comes on top of the £25 million that was invested in previous years. It is really important to point out that we are the only country in the UK to have done this, and it has led directly to an increase in sustainable rates.

As I have said, and as Mr Rennie knows, it has been an on-going issue, and is an on-going priority for me. There has been the sustainable rates review, and the Scottish Government and COSLA are continuing to work through the continuous annual rate-setting process. The Diffley Partnership has also undertaken a cost collection exercise, the findings of which will be published in the spring. I am confident from the feedback that I have already had from the sector, and from the uptake of responses, that it will produce some very informative data on the costs of delivering early learning.

I should say that, as a result of our investment, average rates paid to providers for three to five-year-olds receiving funded ELC have increased by around 78 per cent. However, over the past two years, we have still seen a consistent difference of £2.23 between the lowest and highest payments to a funded provider for the free meal commitment. Although, as I have said before, some variation is to be expected, I am still highly concerned about the high level of disparity that we are seeing. Therefore, when the data that I have referred to is released in the spring, I encourage local authorities to have real regard to it when they set their rates for the coming year.

I am yet to receive advice on the findings of that cost collection exercise, and I will be considering next steps as we go along. I just want to ensure that Mr Rennie knows that the door is not closed. That work is still very much in train.

I have been very clear in laying out my concerns. I thought that the cost collection exercise was an appropriate next step to ensure that local authorities were fully aware of the costs of running ELC for private providers and to try to enable a further level of equity to be put in place. However, I have been very clear with my own officials that we will need to consider the next steps if we do not see results from the cost collection exercise that bring a little bit more parity to the situation.

The two aspects to that are breakfast clubs and activities, and it is clear from the engagement that I have had with parents and families, that those will go a long way to helping them. For example, the breakfast clubs will ensure not only that children are provided with a nutritious meal, but that parents have the ability to take up employment opportunities over and above the normal school hours.

I have spoken to the committee before about the activity clubs. I have been out to visit some of the projects in the extra time programme—they are doing fantastic work and we are investing further to grow those and to work with other activity providers to build them up so that parents have more choice. That will go a long way to ensuring that children stay active and have the opportunity for healthy activity after the school day. It also takes us back to the aspect of tackling poverty and ensuring that parents are able to take up employment.

It is all about bolstering what is already there. I know exactly what Mr Adam is referring to; I have been out to visit St Mirren FC Charitable Foundation, and I know the fantastic work that it is doing.

We have invested £5.5 million in our extra time programme, which supports around 5,000 children most at risk of living in poverty to access free after-school meals and ensure healthy activity. We want to expand that provision to new clubs and more families. As I have said, I have been out to visit a number of the extra time projects, which are football based; they are doing fantastic work, and it is great to see the young people involved in them, but I would like to see that provision expanded. I am absolutely not taking away from the importance of football in our local communities, but I think that we might be missing out on some opportunities for children here. Therefore, I want to continue to work with the SFA, but I want to expand the approach to take in other activities, perhaps, and ensure that there are choices and opportunities for all children and families.

Absolutely, and I think that that fits with our whole-system approach. One of the extra time projects that I visited—I believe that it was in Dundee—had very close links to the early adopter work that was being undertaken in that area, and that allowed the people involved to understand some of the difficulties that families were experiencing, to wrap care around the family and to work together to provide them with the best support. It started off with a focus on the activity itself, but it was then expanded into something more. That sort of thing fits into that ethos and everything that I have been talking about this morning with regard to prevention.

It takes me back to my point about the importance of taking our time to consider this and to understand the work that the early adopters are doing. I am imagining a system in which everyone talks to each other and families need knock on only one door to get the right support that they need, whether it be from a number of different support services and organisations, or whether it be just childcare activities. You have raised an important point, Mr Adam.

Some of that fits into the transition space as well. I would like to talk about that, because it comes back to the discussion about prevention. If we do not support children in school but support them only when they reach adulthood, that is a reactive rather than a preventative approach. We need to ensure that support is in place in schools.

12:30

The aim of the national transitions plan is that every young disabled person feels ready and supported to enter adulthood. A lot of the discussion around that has been about when we start talking about such transitions. Obviously, moving from school to the point after school—for example, further education—is important. However, it is also legitimate to discuss the transition between primary and high school. It is key in this space that we think about the child’s plans and the discussions that will take place to bolster and support children through the transitions.

What is also key—this is an issue that Mr Briggs and I have discussed at length—is that children’s services and adult services talk to one another. We know that there are issues and inconsistencies across Scotland in relation to that, which the legislation that I have introduced intends to combat.

I do not want to take anything away from anyone. There was real ambition with the whole family wellbeing programme. I have said to the committee previously that transformational change takes time, and perhaps the level of local change that would be required was not understood. Whole family wellbeing funding is being routed directly to enable children’s services planning partnerships to break down barriers and work with other organisations in order to take a whole family, multisystem approach.

You asked about lessons, and I know that other members of the committee have expressed concern about the £500 million that was announced and the spend that is being utilised every year. Spending is at the pace of what the CSPPs are able to spend. It is not that we are drawing back from that commitment in any way; it is just that we are going at the pace that CSPPs are able to go on the ground.

Over and above the element 1 funding that goes directly to CSPPs, we have element 3 funding, which is a cross-Scottish Government approach to embed system change in local organisations. I am committed to continuing that. There are various aspects to whole family wellbeing funding, but I would say that it is having real impact. We can see transformation happening, but it does not happen overnight.

We are doing a number of things in that respect. The budget directly responds to many of our priorities in the Promise. We have discussed whole family wellbeing funding, and we will establish a care leaver payment this year, which will go a long way towards improving transitions into accommodation for care leavers. We are furthering our investment in the secure care estate. That investment funds not only additional beds and remand places, but adaptations and progress in relation to some of the difficulties that we experienced with capacity last year, which, thankfully, we have not seen in recent months. I have spoken about the continuation of funding for the bairns’ hoose, which is making transformational changes for young people who are involved in the justice system and young victims. Those are just a few of the things that we are doing, on top of what is already being spent to deliver the Promise, which shows the priority that the Government is giving the issue and its continued commitment to it.

We also have funding in relation to the Promise bill. Should it be passed, that funding will grow in future years, as the provisions are brought in. I have been clear that, although they are not directly related to spending on the Promise spending, many of the interventions that we are taking across education fit with our aims to deliver on the Promise and to tackle poverty. The things that I have outlined are on top of what is already under way.

No, I do not. I believe that we would need to see what has been proposed as unacceptable before we could make any comment on whether we agree or disagree. I agree with the cabinet secretary on that.

Yes, there will be; that has already been considered. For example, it is already a focus in the extra time projects. We want to ensure equity for children and that no one is left out. We also understand that parents who have children with additional support needs could have needs in respect of employment opportunities and also for respite. That is a focus for the investment.