Chamber and committees

In relation to targeted measures and byelaws, does the minister agree that groups could move to other areas if such byelaws were to be introduced for an area, and that therefore, instead of tackling the issue throughout Scotland, we would be moving the issue between areas?

I thank Gillian Mackay for securing this members’ business debate on such an important topic. Members of the Scottish Parliament will have differing views when discussing issues relating to abortion and abortion services. The comments that I make are my own; I respect the rights of others to disagree and to debate the points that are raised.

I believe in freedom of speech and expression, which should be cherished and protected. However, I do not believe that an individual or group has the right to prevent someone from accessing a healthcare service. Regrettably, that has been the experience of too many women in Scotland who have tried to access abortion services.

The debate is not on the issue of abortion or to argue whether it should be legal; it relates to the safety and wellbeing of women who need to access abortion services. Unfortunately for many women, they have felt intimidated, harassed and unsafe when attending a clinic or hospital. Some groups hold vigils, put leaflets into the hands of women, hold placards showing pictures of developing foetuses, prevent staff and women from attending appointments, and, more concerning, film individuals as they enter and leave premises.

I recognise that not all groups are aggressive when holding demonstrations. The question is: do they need to be there in the first place? We must put ourselves into the shoes of the young women who access services. How would we feel if we were greeted by such a reception?

BPAS has advised that, since the beginning of 2017, seven hospitals and clinics in Scotland have been repeatedly targeted, which has had an impact on people who have accessed services—not only those accessing abortion services, I note—and who have felt degraded and traumatised by the actions of those who have created a picket line outside facilities.

I have always agreed with the concept of my body, my choice, because I believe in freedom of choice. I also believe that private concerns such as abortion should not be a matter of debate for a woman who has already made an informed choice. After all, the woman having an abortion could be a victim of rape or domestic violence, or could be attending a clinic on medical grounds.

As Gillian Mackay has mentioned, Back Off Scotland is campaigning to introduce buffer zones outside hospitals and clinics to allow women to access services without feeling pressured to justify their decision. The zoning would apply to pro-choice and anti-choice groups, which creates a fair balance for those on opposing sides of the debate.

I sympathise with the campaign, given some of the first-hand experiences that I read while preparing for the debate and the experiences that Gillian Mackay outlined during her speech. As I said at the start, I support freedom of speech and expression, and groups could gather in other places away from hospitals and clinics.

The introduction of 150m buffer zones is supported by a wide range of groups. I hope that the Scottish Government considers it to ensure that women’s right of access to legal and safe healthcare is always protected.

I understand that this is a delicate subject and that members should treat one another with respect in discussing it. I welcome the campaign to introduce buffer zones and I hope that the Scottish Government will recognise its importance.

To ask the Scottish Government what measures are currently in place to ensure the protection and preservation of war memorials. (S6O-00319)

There has been an increase in the desecration and vandalism of Scotland’s war memorials since 2015. One such memorial that was targeted was the Duchess of Hamilton park war memorial in Motherwell, an area that I represent as a councillor and member of the Scottish Parliament. Given that statistics show that vandalism has increased dramatically since 2015, does the cabinet secretary agree that any vandalism of such important memorials is unacceptable and that better protection for such sites, which hold a special place in the heart of Scotland’s communities, is needed?

No, thank you. I would like to make progress.

The total revenue funding from the Scottish Government is increasing, but significant variations in funding rates across local authorities still exist. Those variations have created an unfair system that benefits only some private providers. That has implications for partners if the funding rate is lower in their authority area.

The Scottish Government needs to address that to ensure that all private providers are treated the same, regardless of where their nursery is based. The truth is that the 1,140-hour policy document is littered with discrepancies that benefit local government at the expense of the private sector. That cannot and should not be allowed to continue if we are looking to create an equal playing field between private nurseries and local government ones.

Moving away from the PVI sector, I note that a concern has been raised by parents in relation to obtaining a place at their chosen nursery. That might seem odd, given that provision has expanded to 1,140 hours, but some local authorities have refused funding to parents on the basis that they have selected a private nursery over a council-run facility. Not only does that defeat the purpose of parental choice, it raises serious concerns about the influence that some local authorities have over where children are placed. That situation—[Interruption.]

That situation has undoubtedly been created because of the Government’s lack of leadership and inability to provide guidance to ensure that all councils were following similar practices.

If I compare the previous experiences to the needs set out by Upstart Scotland, it will highlight how far the Scottish Government needs to go to get things back on track. Upstart Scotland asks for children to be valued the same; sustainable hourly rates to be paid to the PVI sector; realisation by local authorities that using what they have is more sustainable than reinventing the wheel; a level playing field for the sector’s workforce; true partnership working; and a model that allows outcomes for all children to be shaped to meet their individual needs. I do not see any of that reflected in the concerns that have been brought to my attention, which should set off alarm bells for the minister. Perhaps the Government could look at the plans that the Scottish Conservatives launched in our manifesto, which would give parents flexibility in support as well as provide that wraparound childcare without leaving the PVI sector behind.

The 1,140-hour policy still has potential but, as with everything that the Scottish Government touches, it is falling apart. I urge the minister to get a grip of what could be a developing crisis and put young people and families at the heart of childcare policies.

I welcome the opportunity to open the debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives. I draw members’ attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests; I am a serving councillor on North Lanarkshire Council.

The Scottish Government’s policy to expand childcare through the 1,140-hour programme received widespread support, as it had the potential to improve the lives of families across Scotland by making childcare more accessible. Any childcare policy that puts a child at the centre is welcome, as it will allow parents to go back to work to sooner, as well as exposing children to a safe environment where they will learn necessary skills.

However, the postponement of the rolling out of the policy and the failure to address some of the serious and urgent concerns that have been raised have left many parents and providers in the private, voluntary and independent sector feeling let down. Despite today’s claim by the Scottish National Party Government that it is focused on the expansion of childcare, it appears that it is failing the early learning and childcare sector through its declining standards and inability to show any signs of leadership to make necessary improvements.

In August this year, the SNP finally increased the amount of free early learning and childcare that is provided from 600 to 1,140 hours—

Issues were raised about the early learning and childcare programme back in 2019, if not before. I am sure that my colleague Brian Whittle and others will say more about that. I will not accept any excuses regarding the pandemic.

Through its unpopular decision, which resulted in hundreds of complaints from parents to ministers, the SNP managed to turn a positive flagship policy into a postcode lottery. Regardless of the excuses that the SNP Government will use today, some of which we have already heard, it was running months, if not years behind in implementing delivery of the necessary infrastructure way before the pandemic hit.

During the previous parliamentary session, my Conservative colleagues continually warned the Scottish Government of concerns relating to the private, voluntary and independent sector. That prompted a response from the First Minister, who admitted that she was aware of the concerns of private providers and the implications that the 1,140-hour policy could have for their businesses. She promised that the PVI sector would be involved in the process and that the policy could not be delivered without its valuable contributions.

I have spoken to private nurseries up and down the country. Many do not believe that the Scottish Government has included them fully in the roll-out of its important policy. The Scottish Government must accept that there are still issues with the provision of 1,140 hours of free early learning and childcare. If it fails to act now, we will be heading for a childcare system that is not fit for purpose.

One of the main issues that private nurseries have raised with me relates to the staffing crisis that is developing throughout the childcare sector, for which there are a few reasons. Two of those relate to the ratio of council-owned facilities to private nurseries and the number of new housing estates that have been built without consideration for childcare demand. One of the main reasons is that private nurseries continually lose out to local authority nurseries. I am unconvinced that some local authorities gave thought to the repercussions that the strategy they adopted could have for their 1,140-hour PVI partners. After all, local authorities can offer better pay, working hours and benefits in hand. That has left the private nurseries in a continuous recruitment drive, as they keep losing their staff.

The pay gap between a nursery worker in a council-run nursery and a nursery worker in a private facility will only increase, and that leaves some in the sector feeling undervalued. If the Scottish Government had set out a fair-pay model to begin with, that would have ensured that, regardless of which nursery a worker worked for, they would be paid the same as someone else who was doing the same job.

Another key problem is the huge variations in revenue funding rates for the PVI sector.

Certainly.

Should the role of community councils be strengthened or changed and, if so, how? Some community councils flourished during the pandemic but, unfortunately, others have not been able to meet. What role will community councils be able to play as we head out of the pandemic?