Chamber and committees

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the support and services available for children and young people with additional support needs in mainstream education across Central Scotland. (S6O-02706)

One of the many interesting aspects of our role as MSPs is learning about incentives that bring cash back to our local communities. I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate on a subject that I do not usually give voice to in the Parliament, which is how Governments reinvest dirty money that is obtained through organised crime.

I am not the only MSP in the chamber who wants the Scottish Government to get tougher on organised crime. We have already heard from our “Crimewatch” champion, Russell Findlay, who, since his election, has made sure that tackling crime is at the forefront of discussions in the chamber.

The cashback for communities scheme has the potential to do a lot of good for young people across Scotland. The £130 million that has been reinvested as a result of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 is not to be scoffed at, and I know that that money goes directly to young people who are at risk of turning to a life of crime.

Prevention is key when trying to protect young people from a life of crime, and I will always support incentives that are youth led and are targeted in areas where crime rates are higher. It is my understanding that the latest round of funding is for projects that aim to deliver a range of trauma-informed and person-centred services, including those for young people who are more likely to be involved in antisocial behaviour. Given the rise in antisocial behaviour in our town centres and high streets, I am sure that business owners and those who are concerned about such behaviour will be reassured that funding is being used to reduce the problem that many of us experience just now in our communities.

However, money is not just being directed at those types of incentives. The moving forward+ project, which is delivered by the National Autistic Society Scotland’s prospects team, is funded by the cashback for communities scheme. The project supports disadvantaged autistic young people on a path to becoming more engaged and happier citizens, and it reduces the chances of them becoming either the victims or the perpetrators of crime by recognising that each autistic young person has individual needs and aspirations. The project has two routes—one for children aged 10 to 15 who are not engaged with school education, and another for autistic young adults aged 16 to 25 who are not in training, employment or education. The support involves helping individuals to better understand their autism, explore their strengths and develop suitable strategies to help them to become more resilient. It is a wonderful project that benefits so many young people. I have a statistic here: since 2020, the project has supported more than 93 young autistic people.

As I said, the cashback for communities scheme has the potential to do a lot of good, but we should recognise that it is not perfect. I hope that the Government will realise that more can be done to increase the amount of cash that goes back to our communities. Crime should pay, and what better message to send to communities than that the Government backs them? As it stands, the money that has been recovered as a result of the 2002 act does not match the wealth that has been accumulated by criminals in Scotland. For example, as has been pointed out, it was reported in 2022 that £11 million of dirty money had not been paid back—that is £11 million that could be invested directly back into our communities—although I appreciate that that is subject to a review.

The Government must think about how it can recoup as much money as possible from organised crime. As Russell Findlay said, the scheme needs to be audited in order to maximise the amount of money that could be reinstated back into our communities.

Time is tight, so I will conclude. Prevention, which I mentioned earlier, is key, and investment is needed to ensure that effective programmes are rolled out, so I call on the Government to get tougher on crime and to ensure that prevention is at the heart of cashback for communities.

Good morning, cabinet secretary and others on the panel.

Last week, the committee heard from witnesses that they felt some frustration about the fact that it has taken more than two years for the amendments to come back to Parliament and for discussions on the UNCRC to restart. Why did it take that length of time to bring the bill back for reconsideration? What processes took place during that time, before the amendments were lodged?

I have a question about the concerns that you just raised, Professor Mayson, in relation to the role that the Lord President of the Court of Session would have with the Government if the bill was enacted as it stands. My concern from my first reading of the bill was that it could draw the two of them into a sort of collaborative administration. What would the impact of that be?

In section 20, the phrase,

“Measures open to the Scottish Ministers”,

concerns me, because of the performance targets that could be set and the potential for penalties to be imposed. Is that your understanding? What would the implications be?

Thank you. Perhaps I can throw the same question out to our other witnesses.

Good morning, panel. Thank you very much for joining us today.

My questions relate to the separation of powers and the respective roles of the executive and the judiciary. What are the panel’s views on the Law Society’s arguments that independent regulation could lead to increased costs and threaten the independence of the legal profession? Do you believe that the regulatory committee is a sufficient guarantee of independence? Perhaps I can start with Brian Inkster.

Thank you, convener.

Thank you very much.

A leaked document from staff at a Lanarkshire hospital has shown that senior medics fear for the safety of babies if the specialised centre at the Wishaw neonatal unit is downgraded. Does the minister share my concerns that medics in the facility in Wishaw are concerned about those proposals? As a result, should that be reviewed?

I agree that discussions need to take place around that, because we need to have a whole discussion on the issue of early years. I go back to the point about detail, because many such issues have not been mentioned today. That is why I think that the Government needs to have more open conversations with the whole of the chamber instead of having debates and not really informing us what it is trying to debate during its Government business.

I turn back to the point that I was making with regard to Pregnant Then Screwed. Carol Erskine, its head of policy and campaigns, said:

“there is a price on being a parent today is brutal. It is truly shocking that almost two-thirds of Parents are being forced to reduce their hours or leave the workforce entirely due to the cost and availability of childcare, and there is no end in sight.”

That view is coming not from politicians but from parents who are completely fed up about the fact that the system is working not for them but against them.

That brings me on to nurseries. Like Willie Rennie, I will raise the issue time and again until the Government finally gets it and sorts the problems that exist around the 1,140-hours policy. When we look at the various issues that were mentioned today around the policy, we can see that there are politicians on the SNP benches who get it: Fulton MacGregor and Evelyn Tweed get it, and I praise them for their honest assessment of childcare issues in their communities. Evelyn Tweed is right that rural communities have been left behind when it comes to nursery provision, and they have also been left behind in relation to other issues relating to pregnancy and bringing up a child. We need only look at Dr Gray’s hospital in Moray and the Caithness general hospital to see how hard it is for rural mums to bring up a family.

I realise that time is tight and I do not have much time left. There is much more that I would have liked to mention today, because there have been some really good conversations. Oliver Mundell mentioned speech and language therapy and said that the Government needs to sort those issues out, and Jamie Greene rightly mentioned the issues surrounding child dental care. There are many more issues that we need to resolve in relation to early years development as a whole, but, my goodness, this Government has a long way to go.