Chamber and committees

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.

How many more statements will be made to this Parliament before we see legislation that will transform our education system?

Does the minister share my concern—a concern that is shared by the Finance and Public Administration Committee—over the bill’s financial implications and the ability to resource what is outlined in the bill?

There is a lot to digest in the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Bill, and I am sure that many members would have preferred to have a stand-alone debate this afternoon. I fully understand the challenges for members who have been allocated only four minutes, because they will be stuck for time to develop their arguments. That does not allow for good debate. However, I understand that it is process-related and is a matter for the Parliamentary Bureau. When it comes to important bills such as this one, members need the time to debate and challenge the thoughts of others in the chamber.

On the bill itself, I will start on a positive note. The Minister for Children, Young People and Keeping the Promise and I recently had a productive meeting in which we discussed issues relating to her brief, which I shadow. I hope that we can work together on the bill and across other issues. We both care about the wellbeing and safeguarding of children and young people. I also agree with the principle of the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Bill—supporting young people, whether they are victims or perpetrators of minor crimes, to try to reduce reoffending, and ensuring that wraparound care is available.

Should the bill be approved by the Parliament, it would increase the age of definition of a child from 16 to 18 in the criminal justice system and will mean that most offences that are committed by under-18s will be dealt with by the children’s hearings system rather than by the court system.

However, the bill does not come without its problems. Some are historical but it is imperative that we MSPs do not allow bad law to pass through Parliament.

I welcome the opportunity to debate at what age a child becomes an adult. I have struggled with that when looking at devolved law, because the Scottish National Party has moved the goalposts, depending on portfolio area. For example, a person can get married at 16 and can buy alcohol or get a tattoo at 18, but is not viewed as an adult until 21 or 25 for justice-related issues.

Then there is the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. The SNP suggests that young people should be able to change their gender at 16, but the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Bill changes the age of a child from 16 to 18. We need to have a serious conversation about age, but I understand that that discussion will need to be for another day.

My colleague Sue Webber, in her capacity as convener of the Education, Children and Young People Committee, highlighted the valid concerns of MSPs who sit on that committee. She raised the important issue of finance and resource. As it stands, the bill lacks detail on costings and outlines issues regarding key agencies. The Finance and Public Administration Committee also highlighted the lack of financial information in the financial memorandum. That already puts the bill at a disadvantage; it causes doubt about its deliverability and provides no reassurance that bodies such as local authorities and Children’s Hearings Scotland will be able to implement the changes that the proposed legislation will introduce.

I could not agree more with Sue Webber about the timings for the bill. With no full costings, debating the proposed legislation is like putting the cart before the horse.

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?

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?

Until December.

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?