Chamber and committees

Very productive conversations about the bill are on-going with Ms Smith, and I will arrange another meeting with her—as long as she is happy with that—prior to the summer recess.

I assure Mr Mason that we have been working at pace, because I am aware that recess is a long period during which we might be more limited in what we can do. I have been trying to be as proactive as possible before recess.

It seems, from the correspondence between a specific local authority and the Government, that there has been some level of miscommunication. However, the Scottish Government has written to that local authority to set out the guidance more clearly and to overcome that miscommunication. I believe that we are waiting on the local authority reaching out further.

I and the First Minister have been clear in the chamber that we are further reviewing the guidance. At the moment, we are ensuring that local authorities are aware of the guidance as it currently stands.

Mr Adam raises a really important point. I have said a lot about the delivery of the Promise. We will not deliver that in isolation: we will need a joint approach between the national and UK Governments and we must work with UK Government colleagues, local government and our third sector.

We are taking a number of different approaches to ensure that we have that joint approach. For example, at Government level, we have a Cabinet sub-committee on the Promise, which includes ministerial colleagues who have a relevant interest, to ensure that everyone is aware of the actions that are being taken within their own remits. I recently met Paul McLennan, the Minister for Housing, to discuss housing issues in relation to delivering the Promise.

In relation to local authorities, the Promise progress framework will be instrumental in understanding how we are keeping the Promise and I welcome the oversight board’s recognition of that. That framework has been developed by COSLA, the Scottish Government and The Promise Scotland, with input from a range of key stakeholders, including Who Cares? Scotland, CELCIS and a number of other organisations.

To go back to my first point, this is the first step in understanding progress in relation to what is being delivered, by whom and how we are working together to deliver on the aims. There will be a number of actions that we can take from that, and a range of learning.

I have met UK Government colleagues to discuss different aspects of the Promise. We are, obviously, on quite separate journeys, but it is important to discuss that because it relates to a number of approaches that are being taken by the UK Government and we must be aware of those areas. It is relevant to ensure that we are talking to each other because of issues such as cross-border placements in secure care.

Finally, I draw members’ attention to the progress with, and success of, the whole family wellbeing fund. Mr Adam will be aware that that provides funding to children’s services planning partnerships in local areas to encourage a joined-up approach so that local authorities are working with relevant partners and key stakeholders. There can even be barriers to having departments within local authorities speaking to each other at times, but the whole family wellbeing fund has really helped to transform and embed approaches, which is key.

I thank Mr Adam for that question, because it is really important to place on record the importance of having a joined-approach to delivering on the Promise.

I do not think that it would be appropriate to negotiate. I certainly would not class that as appropriate for either myself or the member in charge. However, as I have said in my correspondence with Ms Smith, it is appropriate for her to engage with COSLA and trade unions so that she has more of an understanding of some of the bill’s implications and is able to relay that to the Government. However, I do not think that it would be appropriate to negotiate.

Sorry, Andrew, I was going to bring you in on childminding; I was too busy chatting.

I do not think that I am going to say anything that I have not said before to Ms Smith, but she raises a valid point. I am very much in favour of leveraging private finance to support or supplement public finance; as far as I am concerned—and I believe that my colleagues will feel the same—it is definitely a possibility, especially in relation to outdoor education. There are private financiers who would welcome the opportunity to invest in that sort of thing.

If we are talking about putting in place, say, a public trust model or some other approach that we have looked at before to directly finance something that has been put on a statutory footing, where that funding would have to be guaranteed on a year-by-year basis, that will pose some difficulties. That said, as my colleagues and I have alluded to, there are definitely opportunities in that respect in relation to outdoor education.

Of course. Our six early adopter communities are backed by £16 million of Scottish Government investment. That goes back to what I said earlier about the extra time projects, which are providing really valuable insights into what families require. Our early adopter community projects are involved in a number of things over and above childcare in order to support families, and that will be key to the learning that we will take forward.

In relation to Joe Fitzpatrick’s constituency, I know that Dundee City Council is working in partnership with local providers such as the Yard to deliver services that are designed to respond to local needs and to support families who have children with additional support needs—something that has been much discussed at the committee today.

The Yard not only provides activities during the school days and holidays but also supports families through weekend sessions, which provide opportunities for families to come together and play with their children and to meet other families and gain a form of peer support. Such opportunities to come together and garner support from peers—and to share information, although that sounds too formal—are really key for families, especially in our post-pandemic world. Equally, there are opportunities for children’s development and for them to play. The Yard is doing fundamental work, which stretches over and above the services that it carries out—indeed, I know that it has helped to provide additional training to other school-age childcare projects in Dundee, so it has a much further reach than it would appear to have on paper.

The early adopters work has been really positive, and the learning that we will get and the outcomes that we will be able to evaluate from it will be instrumental in improving school-age childcare more generally.

Absolutely. As the member is aware, we have committed to introducing Scotland’s first national transitions to adulthood strategy to ensure that a joined-up approach is taken so that young disabled people who are transitioning to adulthood get the support that they require. I wrote to Ms Duncan-Glancy on that recently. The strategy will be published before summer recess.

We discussed the bill at length the last time that I was at the committee, and I am aware that Liz Smith is here and may want to discuss it during her questioning.

I have been clear about the Government’s position, our support for outdoor education in all its forms and our support of the principles in relation to outdoor education. However, there are very clear concerns about not just affordability but equity of provision as well as the workforce implications. I have been having productive conversations with Ms Smith in person and via correspondence about how she could amend the bill to combat some of the concerns that have been raised by the committee and the Government. I am also looking at non-legislative options that I have been discussing with members, and I am more than happy to discuss those with Mr Mason outside the committee.

I probably cannot go into detail right now because, as Ms Duncan-Glancy would agree, safeguarding children is the most important thing. However, I hear what she says about providers who have been around for a long time potentially facing quite a bit of regulation. I am looking at the legislation and various approaches that we could take to try to strike a more balanced approach. Although I cannot give any more detail on that just now, I will be more than happy to share it with the committee once I have a bit more to say. I reassure Ms Duncan-Glancy that I have heard about the issue directly from a number of school-age childcare providers when I have been out on visits to them, and I am actively working on it.