I am pleased to be taking part in the debate. I hope that my previous experience can add to the conversation.

I will start by acknowledging some of the good stuff and the positive impacts, and then I will go on to suggestions that I make as a critical friend. I pay tribute to the best start grants, the food payments, the baby box and the Scottish child payment, which have inevitably made significant differences. I welcome the expansion in childcare.

We know that investment in early childhood, families, prenatal care and that crucial stage of bonding in the early stages after birth makes a huge difference. As the Dalai Lama says, the foundations of our lives are laid in our childhood, so it is really important that we get it right.

From that point of view, I would like to touch on attachment. The motion in front of us talks about child development, but it does not mention anything about attachment theory. We know that that is really important, so I want to link it in with staff training. Although I welcome the expansion in childcare, I would like the early years staff that we have to be fully trained in attachment theory. That is especially significant at the moment, because we know that our children suffered during Covid, and that it had an impact on their speech and language. I speak to teachers regularly—I was in a nursery last week—and the challenges around that are immense.

I am going to push for an additional response and investment in speech and language. I have to do that—my conscience tells me to ask for it—because there is a knock-on effect on communication, obviously, but also on children’s ability to self-regulate.

We have had a bit of a debate about the impact of speech and language challenges on children’s behaviour. If children are not able to communicate properly, and if staff are not trained and do not have enough exposure to the right materials to support the whole family, that will have a knock-on effect on behaviour. It is really important that we invest in speech and language therapy, to reduce the stress levels of children who cannot communicate and of their parents. I know that brilliant work on that is being done by Children 1st, for instance, which has a parent line that parents who are struggling can take advantage of.

I will touch a wee bit on play—I will not go into it too much, although I could talk about it a lot. I echo the remarks made by my colleague Ruth Maguire on the importance of outdoor play in particular. I will give a wee shout out to the investment that has been made in our playgrounds; I can see the result of that.

We have not talked about the impact of adult behaviour on children. I came across a study that was published at the beginning of October on the impact of verbal abuse of children by adults. It was by Professor Peter Fonagy, and it discovered that more than 40 per cent of children are exposed to verbal aggression or hostility from adults. Half of those children are exposed to that each week and 10 per cent are getting screamed and yelled at every day. We know that children will grow up to have increased levels of anxiety and stress from that. That takes us back to attachment theory, which leads to separation anxiety, and we know that that is coming through in our schools.

What can the Scottish Government do about that? I have suggested investment in staff training that is attachment-theory led, so that staff are fully au fait with that. There should be more investment in speech and language, psychological support services and early intervention.

We need more detail on that when we get more flesh on the bones of the programme. I know that the Scottish Government will absolutely be able to do that.

Thank you. Do any of the other panel members want to come in on that area? It was very specific, I suppose.

I move to questions from Maggie Chapman.

I will bring in Meghan Gallacher shortly, but first I will ask you all a quick question. What, if any, involvement did you have in the development of the amendments to the UNCRC bill?

I see that all our witnesses are shaking their heads, so the answer is none. I just wanted to know about that.

The word that I was thinking of was “pragmatic”. It is a pragmatic way forward but we realise the complexities of it. Can you give an example of any unintended consequences of the process? You alluded to possible legal challenge. Could you go into that a little bit more?

Thank you.

Thanks very much. We will move to questions from Karen Adam.

Did you have any involvement in the preparation or development of the amendments?

Our second agenda item is to take evidence on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill at the reconsideration stage. We will take evidence from two panels of witnesses this morning.

I welcome our first panel. Nicola Killean is the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland; Gina Wilson is head of strategy in the office of the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland; Juliet Harris is director of Together (Scottish Alliance for Children’s Rights); Jan Savage is executive director of the Scottish Human Rights Commission; and Fiona Menzies is a policy manager at the Law Society of Scotland.

I refer members to papers 1 and 2.

Before we begin our questioning, I invite each of the witnesses to make some brief opening remarks, should they wish to do so.

Thank you. I am always impressed by the clarity of children’s thoughts and how they can bring them alive through visual aids and storytelling.