Chamber and committees

The committee has heard some views that national parks lack the power to do things differently and that the model should be strengthened before new designations are made. What are your views on that? Will the legislative proposals make a significant difference to how national parks operate?

The new UK Government reinstated funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East in July. Now the Israeli Parliament has voted to ban it from operating within Israel. That decision means less life-saving aid getting into Palestine.

When the cabinet secretary met the deputy ambassador of Israel, did he raise the importance of UNRWA? Will he join me in condemning the Israeli Parliament’s decision?

I congratulate Alex Cole-Hamilton on securing a debate on this important subject. It is saddening that there will be hardly a community in Scotland that will not be experiencing the issue that we are discussing today. The Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004 was passed 20 years ago, but the yearly disorder on bonfire night in Edinburgh shows that such behaviour is still a problem that affects people’s lives.

Sometimes, antisocial behaviour is dismissed as a normal part of life, but we must recognise that persistent unacceptable behaviour has terrible effects for those who fall victim to it. I note the findings of the “Still living a nightmare” report, which includes troubling testimony from those falling victim to persistent antisocial behaviour. I quote:

“every day I’m crying, it makes me anxious... and it actually makes me physically sick”.

That sort of thing is not minor and cannot be ignored.

I have heard from constituents, many from ethnic minorities, stories of feeling victimised and targeted by antisocial behaviour. Some were told that their best course of action was just to move house. That is not good enough. People have the right to feel welcome in their communities and safe in their homes.

That extends to businesses, too. Last week, I spoke to the Scottish Grocers Federation. Its crime report found that violence, shoplifting and threats were commonplace, but 93 per cent of the retailers stated that police responses to shoplifting incidents were unsatisfactory and 76 per cent said that they were unlikely to report incidents to the police. The public must have confidence that they will be listened to if they report antisocial behaviour.

Scotland has, rightly, taken a preventive rather than a punitive approach to tackling antisocial behaviour. We know that such behaviour is more common in areas of multiple deprivation and that those who engage in it are often dealing with other issues. Given that the review of Scotland’s approach to antisocial behaviour found that third sector organisations were often highly effective in intervention and prevention, it is disappointing that the very organisations that can tackle the issues are struggling. Earlier this year, the investing in communities fund, which aims to address poverty and disadvantage by funding third sector projects, was cut. When that is combined with local government and Police Scotland underfunding, our capacity to prevent antisocial behaviour is weakened.

Antisocial behaviour is not some minor issue. It causes anxiety and fear, and it makes our communities less welcoming. There are multiple drivers of such behaviour, which cannot be solved in one fell swoop, but the public must have confidence that, if they report antisocial behaviour, they will be listened to.

My constituent Andrea cares for her daughters, who are full-time wheelchair users. Her home is not large enough for wheelchairs or for the specialised bed that has been recommended by her daughters’ physiotherapist. Andrea has applied for adapted housing but, despite her daughters living in pain, there are not enough suitable homes, so they are stuck on a waiting list. Will the First Minister look into my constituent’s case? Does he recognise that the severe shortage of social housing for disabled people means that Andrea’s case will be far from unique?

Four years have passed since the introduction of the Promise. Although I was not a member of the Scottish Parliament then, I was pleased to see parties united in the shared ambition that care-experienced children and young people grow up safe, loved and respected. I join members in reaffirming my commitment to that today.

I spoke during the debate on the implementation plan for the Promise two years ago. I discussed several areas then and will come back to some of those today. I will first focus on the care workforce. The Promise highlighted that many in the workforce felt overwhelmed and anxious, and were boxed in by professional language that made it difficult to build relationships with young people and their families.

February’s Who Cares? Scotland report on the Promise found that 22 local authorities have implemented destigmatising language in their practice, and that 27 have training courses for school staff on understanding care experiences. However, training levels differ and courses are not always mandatory. Although there are positive steps, improvements need to be made across the board. We cannot have a postcode lottery of support for care-experienced young people.

Members will note the impact of care experience on education prospects. The most recent outcomes data for looked-after children shows that attainment and attendance rates are down 3.5 per cent year on year. That is greatly concerning, because those are key outcomes. If the Promise is to be delivered, improvement is needed urgently.

Education and training can do a great deal in tackling prejudice and creating the conditions for care-experienced people to succeed. That extends to my next point. Project Esperanza, with which I hosted a round-table meeting earlier this year, offers training to practitioners to deliver race-sensitive and faith-sensitive services. The Promise called for shifts in the culture around care, and that should include building understanding and creating an anti-racist culture. Training on race and faith for social workers is needed, because the Promise must be fulfilled for all, including people with minority ethnicities, who are overrepresented in the care system. Supporting the workforce with training relating to stigma and the care experience is one of the themes of “Plan 24-30”, and we should put that into practice over the next five years.

Third sector organisations play a vital role. The Promise oversight board’s second report called for greater use of the support that is provided by third sector partners. That should be taken on board. The Scottish Government delivers funding to third sector organisations via the Promise partnership fund and other funding streams. The Corra Foundation, which administers the Promise partnership fund, found that 36 per cent of organisations in receipt of funding experience staffing issues, including burnout, and that 39 per cent stated that short funding cycles and time constraints affect work on systems change. I recognise that those are common issues across third sector organisations, but those organisations’ key role in delivering the Promise should be recognised and treated as such.

I will conclude by discussing data. The Promise oversight board noted that there is a range of data sources, which are not always shared between agencies, and it recommended that we improve the quality and completeness of the data. The blueprint on the creation and control of data was due to be released in June 2023, but it has yet to be delivered. Although care should be led by those who receive it, a strong data environment can inform future practice and allow greater transparency.

Ultimately, many of the issues that have been raised today can be resolved through legislation. Today’s debate and the fact that the 2030 target date is fast approaching make it all the more clear that the proposed Promise bill is needed. Members know how serious and wide ranging the subject is and how important it is that we get this right. We cannot let the Promise be broken. We cannot let down our young people.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am sorry, but I could not get connected. I would have voted no.

NatureScot made other recommendations to improve how national parks are run. For example, it said that there should be more involvement of communities and different sectors in developing national park plans, and that funding streams should be available to deliver the plans.

What are your views on those suggestions?

Thank you, convener. The Scottish Government has proposed to make changes to national park legislation in a bill that is due to come out later in this parliamentary year. What are the implications of that process running alongside the investigation of a new designation? Are stakeholders aware of the changes that are being proposed?

That was a very powerful statement by Tess White, and I think that we should invite the chief constable or Police Scotland to give evidence at a future meeting and keep the petition open.

Did I hear you say that you are not aware of the proposed changes? What should the Scottish Government do to get the stakeholders more involved when it is making any changes to legislation?