Chamber and committees

I mentioned vision because I think that scoping that opportunity and the jobs of tomorrow for our rural communities should be a key part of what you are doing. What is your vision for the organisation?

I will bring you in, Mr Hall. What is your impression of skills planning, given what I have outlined specifically around farriers, and is SRUC meeting or not meeting broader industry needs?

Do you think that the Scottish Government understands that and is taking forward work in that space or is there a disconnect? We hear consistently about shortages across all sectors, which is a real concern for the economy, but also that institutions are not managing. The credits system has often been put forward by the college sector as the reason why it does not have the flexibility to put on additional courses. However, I do not see who is leading the work to make sure that shortages are filled over time.

I will take a deep breath before I ask this question.

To ask the Scottish Government, as part of the cross-Government co-ordination of infrastructure, what discussions the finance secretary has had with ministerial colleagues on when a decision will be made on the design and construction of a new grade-separated junction on the A720 Edinburgh city bypass at Sheriffhall, including what cost revisions have been undertaken. (S6O-05364)

The cabinet secretary states that the Government is committed to the project. However, I have been seeking updates from several ministers on what the cost revisions will look like and when motorists across Edinburgh, the Lothians and south-east Scotland will finally see this critical transport project start.

Funding was secured as part of the city region deal almost a decade ago. To date, Scottish ministers have spent almost £6 million, but only on consultation. Given that the Scottish budget that was announced yesterday contains £860 million of cuts to capital spending from plans that she outlined just six months ago, what assurance can the cabinet secretary give that resources will be made available to deliver the Sheriffhall project and that a decision will be taken before the elections in May?

I thank all the organisations that provided helpful briefings ahead of today’s debate. There is cross-party support for ensuring that the Promise that was made to care-experienced people is kept, and that is exactly what Scottish Conservatives have been working to help achieve.

At the outset, as others have done, I thank the minister for her constructive engagement, which is important. However, I hope that she has heard the frustration and concern about where the bill stands and acknowledges that it needs significant change at stages 2 and 3.

I pay tribute to those who are involved in the care sector. Over the past year in which I have been the Conservative education spokesperson, I have met them and I have seen the passion and commitment that the former First Minister outlined. We can pass legislation, but the change of attitude that they have brought since the Promise was made is important.

I hope that the Parliament will make sure that we meet our side of the bargain. We can and must make sure that our children and young people who are currently in the care system or who may come into contact with it, and adults who have experience of it, are at the heart of this. From the outset, we have tried to engage with ministers on what that could look like. So often when we pass legislation, it is not about outcomes but about having a better process. We need to make sure that the bill does not end up in that space.

In the time that I have, I will highlight several areas in which I want to see progress at stage 2 to help strengthen the bill.

Ross Greer and Willie Rennie mentioned family group decision making in councils such as in Glasgow and Edinburgh. I hope that that can be embedded as part of the bill. Intensive support provided early can make a huge difference to families, keep them together and prevent family breakdown. That whole-family approach can make a critical difference and provide the capacity needed to help families. Let us face it—such capacity will often not be available from social work or other services. I hope that improving support for families before they end up in crisis will be at the heart of the bill. Every parent and carer will face pressures. That is where family group decision making can help to provide workable solutions and, as Paul O’Kane mentioned, the scaffolding to keep families together. It is important that we grasp that opportunity.

Willie Rennie also mentioned the important issue of aftercare and the right to return, which was at the heart of the work that the Education, Children and Young People Committee did in considering the bill. We should look to the positive work, which we did not have a chance to go and see for ourselves, that is being taken forward by North Yorkshire Council. That model has been highlighted again and again. We should look to the progress that the council has made in supporting care-experienced young people and empowering them to access information—an issue that is often at the heart of problems—through an app that it has developed. The “Linking Lives” app is a support tool for care-experienced young people that offers centralised resources on budgeting, housing, education and mental health and key links to organisations in that part of the world. I hope that ministers will consider a proposal for something similar for Scotland because having access to such a service could make care-experienced young people information rich.

The Housing (Scotland) Bill, which recently went through the Parliament, did not put care-experienced young people at its heart. When we speak to homeless people, we hear that so many of them have had experience of the care system. I would like to see where the Government’s amendments to the bill at stage 2 will cross into other areas, such as that covered by the housing bill, to fix those other parts that should be at the heart of policy.

We have heard about the welcome progress on addressing stigma in schools. That matter has been taken forward by the Promise Scotland and others outside this building. However, there needs to be a more nationwide approach to understanding care-experienced young people and to the educational support package and offer that they will be given. Our young carers have a number of similar challenges.

The minister will be aware that I have also advocated for better palliative care funding for organisations such as CHAS. I highlight its concerns: it seeks clarification around children and young people with life-shortening conditions, who are also at the heart of the bill.

I continue to be concerned about the decision making that ministers have decided will rest with IJBs, and I have highlighted that to the minister. We need to look to the delivery of policies. Across Scotland, our IJBs are looking at what they could not do, rather than at what they could be doing in addition. We need to be mindful that the bill could result in a postcode lottery emerging. The Promise should not become that. It would be unacceptable if our IJBs were to end up having to take decisions about the delivery of the Promise that they will not be able to fund or deliver.

Douglas Ross highlighted the issue of compatibility with the 2024 act, which the Government needs to move to fix.

Paul O’Kane highlighted the poor engagement that, sadly, there has been with stakeholders and what they told the Education, Children and Young People Committee is missing from the bill. I hope that ministers will make substantial amendments to the bill in that area and strengthen support for kinship carers. The minister has already suggested that she will take action in that area, but that challenge has not been met in the bill.

As MSPs, all of us will have met and supported members of families—often grandparents—who are providing safe and stable kinship care. That comes from a place of love, but the costs and pressures of such arrangements are often not sustainable. We need to make sure that the bill includes more on kinship care and that kinship carers are put at its heart.

I have not had time to expand on the new national social work agency, which will have to provide the workforce that is required to deliver the bill. Workforce planning must be strengthened. That will come largely from reducing bureaucracy for the sector, which is a process that has not progressed at pace.

All those who are watching today’s proceedings will be underwhelmed by the bill. In the coming weeks, we all have the opportunity to look to significantly improve the bill to get it back on track. Ministers must be honest and admit that the bill will not meet the Promise and that, in the next session of Parliament, all those of us who are lucky enough to be returned, along with new MSPs, will have to step up to deliver the Promise by 2030.

Five years ago, the First Minister stated:

“If we are re-elected in May, the SNP will roll out a new programme to deliver into the hands of every school child in Scotland a laptop, Chromebook or tablet to use in school and at home.”

Five years on, that election pledge is nowhere near being delivered. Will the cabinet secretary tell me how much money there will be in the budget to deliver that election pledge in the 100 days that the Government has left to do so? If it does not deliver, why should any young person or parent believe a word that the SNP tells them in May?

Since 2021, Scottish Government investment in colleges has fallen by 20 per cent, leading to 12 per cent fewer students and nearly 9 per cent fewer staff. As well as the reduction in core funding, individual funding streams have been withdrawn, including the promised £26 million for transformation and £10 million for a flexible workforce development fund. What discussions have ministers now had with colleges that are expressing that they have severe and deteriorating financial situations? What support will the Government give them?

I will carry on with John Mason’s line of questioning. We know that young people are expressing concern that they are unable to access health services, and often education services. We also know that children who are receiving treatment in Scotland—for example, in our cancer centres—often have their education disrupted and there is no continuity. That issue has not been completely resolved.

With regard to the notification, I am interested in what you expect that the two distinct organisations—the national health service and the local education authority—will do in order to fund and

“provide or secure the provision.”

A notification is one thing, whereas a duty to fund that provision—as expressed in, for example, a chief executive’s letter—is very different. A notification will not necessarily close the gap completely between the expectation that those services will be delivered and their delivery.

I think that the minister will understand my concern as an Edinburgh MSP, given that some children here are waiting for two years to access mental health services—the city has some of the longest waits in Scotland.

Is the minister suggesting that, if a placement is made in Edinburgh, young people who are placed within the health board area would be prioritised? Alternatively, would they just join the end of the queue, with that being seen as mental health services having been delivered? I am not quite sure that a notification does much more than simply say that the young person who has been placed somewhere has been in mental health services in a different part of the United Kingdom. What expectation do ministers have in relation to that?