Chamber and committees

The problem is not with professional development but with encouraging people to enter and stay in the childcare profession. The Scottish Childminding Association said that 34 per cent of childminders had quit since funding was increased for early education and childcare in 2016. That figure is expected to rise to 64 per cent by 2026. I know that the minister shares my passion for early years learning, so will she update Parliament on any progress that her Government has made to tackle those worrying statistics?

I take the minister’s point, but Sue Webber’s point was that linking the bill to that information would have been more appropriate so that we would debate the proposed legislation with better costings than we have. My concern is that agencies and key bodies that will be imperative to the bill’s implementation do not know whether they will be able to implement what it asks them to do.

I will now consider issues relating to the children’s hearings system.

At present, the system is stretched to breaking point. It is a volunteer system, but there are areas, including Aberdeen, that find it difficult to recruit volunteers and have to rely on people from other areas to fill the gap and deal with the backlog of cases. If the changes in the bill are approved, the children’s hearings system would need to recruit an additional 270 panel members. That would be a challenge, given the current recruitment issues.

However, former panel members have also raised serious concerns about the culture and behaviour within the children’s hearings system. It has been reported that panel members have had their reputations ruined because of the internal complaints system within CHS, and people have called for an investigation into behaviour within the organisation. I would be grateful if the minister could meet the group of former panel members to hear their concerns before stage 2, if she has not done so already, because the bill proposes extending the measures that may be included in a compulsory supervision order, which would give the children’s hearings system greater choice when deciding on which measures are suitable for a child’s individual needs.

The Education, Children and Young People Committee also raised concerns about section 3 of the bill, when considering victims and trauma. Section 3 could put the onus on victims to avoid people and locations that are harmful to them, so I agree with the committee that the Scottish Government must consider the wider needs of victims and how they can be met, especially when they are navigating the criminal justice system and the CHS.

I have not even touched on the bill’s intention to clarify the test that is to be applied when a children’s hearing or sheriff is considering secure accommodation or a compulsory supervision order, the introduction of an interim compulsory supervision order, cross-border placements, or care-experienced young people.

My last point—I understand that I need to close my remarks—is on the severity of crime and information that can or cannot be shared. There will be some nervousness among members about what is classed as a severe crime. Of course, there are the obvious examples of murder and rape, but we need to tread carefully with regard to where a young person is detained, especially in respect of crimes that are so severe.

I will conclude my remarks, Presiding Officer. There is merit in the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Bill, but I feel as though there have been many missed opportunities. We will no doubt get to those at stage 2.

We have had review after review of our education system—I think that we have had enough reviews to last this Parliament a lifetime. However, there is no strategy as of yet. From today’s statement, I understand that more reviews will be undertaken before any direction will be given by the Scottish Government.

I understand that the cabinet secretary has inherited a mess after 16 years of Scottish National Party Government: there is too much bureaucracy and too many education bodies, and reforms that could bankrupt councils should this Government not fund them correctly.

I have a final question. With the pilot being launched this year, will the Government be able to have the programme fully implemented by the initial date of September 2025?

I thank you for that response, minister, but are we saying that rural young people should stay in rural settings? Rural young people should have the flexibility to move into urban settings, should they wish to learn there, but, as it stands just now, and particularly in the case of New College Lanarkshire, we are actually closing the door to rural young people who might want to study there.

I understand that it is not the Government’s role to tell colleges what to do, but, if New College Lanarkshire is facing a £4.3 million cut, it has few options. I understand that the college is going to review the nursery issue in December, but what security does that give to people who work in those settings or to students who are on courses now but who might have to find alternative childcare at the last moment?

I will continue with the theme of the impact that the budgetary issues are having on our college estates. Like Bob Doris, I will use a case study—in this case, New College Lanarkshire. The halls of residence at the Motherwell campus have closed and the nurseries at the Cumbernauld and Coatbridge campuses have also closed. Those closures impact not just the hard-working staff at those facilities but our learners, whether rural young people who look to study in more urban areas or students with young children.

In last week’s debate, I referred to the example of a young person from Argyll who is no longer able to go to college because the student accommodation on the Motherwell campus has closed. We are moving beyond the stage where things are deeply regrettable and can now see the direct consequences that budgetary issues have for our young people.

What support is the Government offering for students who find themselves in such circumstances? Is the Government saying that rural young people cannot go to college because of budget cuts?

I can agree with you on that point, minister, but I hope that you share my concern that closing student accommodation will directly prevent young people from doing that.

Finally, on the back of the issues surrounding New College Lanarkshire, Unison is calling for a review of college finances and governance. What is the minister’s response to that? Will a full review take place?

I have a quick supplementary question. I take your point on that, minister, but it comes down to choices—all Governments have to make choices. Given the budgetary concerns that you have just voiced, I would have expected that the student exchange programme would have been brought to the Scottish Government Cabinet, to be discussed at a higher level. My understanding is that the issue has not been brought to Cabinet, but please correct me if I am wrong on that.

There does not seem to be a consistent thread of reporting on the programme. Why is that the case? Why have progress reports not been provided? An important element of the programme’s implementation is to ensure that people are updated on the progress that the Government is making.

No—not at this time, convener.

I want to pick up on the youth work aspect. When Liz Green attended a previous meeting of the committee, at which I was present, she said that progress had stalled around last summer or autumn and that regular meetings with the Government had stopped around January or February. I appreciate that you are newly in your post, minister, but do you know why those meetings stopped? If you are looking to have a youth element, which I believe is important, should you not be having regular meetings with stakeholders?