Chamber and committees

Bob Doris seems to be implying that the destination of the new taxes that are being proposed would go into an expansion of public services or at least entitlements. Does he not consider that any of that money should go towards reducing the £5 billion deficit that is coming down the track?

Will the cabinet secretary give way?

When it comes to what Paul McLennan would like to spend the extra money on, his list is different from the one that Bob Doris gave. Does the SNP have a coherent position on that?

The First Minister will be aware of the huge fire at Lower Melville Wood in my constituency, which burned for two weeks. The conditions were intolerable for local people, especially those with lung conditions. Today, I have written to the Government asking for an independent investigation, because it involves multiple agencies, into what caused the fire, the handling of the fire and the future of the site. Does the First Minister agree that there should be a Government-commissioned independent investigation?

Legislation to control the use of mobile phones in schools is certainly a welcome step, but I ask the cabinet secretary to look further at the use of digital devices in schools. A growing body of parents are concerned about their unregulated use, which is not based on the best practice and best evidence. I urge her to consider that and potentially to include that in any proposed legislation.

I will begin where Meghan Gallacher and Stephen Kerr finished. We need to get the fundamentals of the provision of ELC in Scotland right before we look to expand it. There is a fundamental problem with the PVI sector, which provides the flexibility that many parents are looking for. Many council nurseries are simply unable to provide that flexibility. If we want childcare that is suitable for a variety of family needs, we need to sort out the significant leakage of experienced staff from the PVI sector to better-paid jobs in the council sector. Sometimes, people get paid more in a supermarket than they would be paid in a private nursery. We need to sort that out in order to maintain the quality of provision in the PVI sector—and not just the provision itself. That is essential for any expansion that comes.

A number of other factors need to be addressed, too. The level of take-up by two-year-olds—the terrific twos was discussed earlier—has varied. Although we have managed to develop a relationship with the Department for Work and Pensions, so as to share the essential data and to identify the families concerned, the number of people who are taking up the provision has dropped in the most recent period. We need to reverse that, because we can make the biggest impact on the life chances of that group of two-year-olds if we can get them into that provision at an earlier stage.

We have already discussed cross-border placements and the issue of the third birthday. I accept the point about the practicalities of dealing with constant flux on the third birthday. There must be a better way than losing months of provision because the child happens to have their third birthday at the wrong time. Childminders are also essential, particularly in very remote and rural areas, where it is impossible to have a fully constructed nursery, and they provide the flexibility that many families are looking for. Those issues need to be addressed.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Culture and Gaelic, and I welcome her and her ministerial colleague to their posts. We now have a ministerial team that can be fully focused on the Promise—following on from the outstanding speech that my colleague Duncan Dunlop made yesterday. Màiri McAllan’s predecessor was recused from addressing the issues around the Promise, but we now have a team that is dedicated to it, and I hope that we will see significant progress on those issues in this session, because it is sorely needed.

Let me deal with some of the fundamentals around childcare and early learning. The early learning bit is incredibly important. We sometimes forget that it is not just about the hours that we provide but about the quality of the provision as well. We sometimes forget about quality in the race for expansion, which is why investing in good-quality staff is essential, particularly in the PVI sector.

We should remember the role of families. Some families want to look after their children, and they sometimes feel guilty for not putting them into ELC provision. We should welcome the fact that families want to look after their children for longer, because we know from Suzanne Zeedyk, the acclaimed academic, that attachment is incredibly important in the early years. Too often, children do not have the warmth of a loving relationship, so we should ensure that that is valued in our discussion. I want the focus to be on families who want to take up the provision—I think that the cabinet secretary also pointed to that. Families should not be made to feel guilty for not taking it up.

I remember, some years ago, taking part in a discussion run by Save the Children. Everybody was arguing about the expansion of the provision. People were asking, “When are we going to get it?” “How are we going to get it?” “How quickly are we going to get it?” and “Will it be available in my community?” A lone mother stuck up her hand and asked, “Why don’t you want me to look after my own children?” You could hear a pin drop. That was something that needed to be said, and it was important that it was said.

Another issue is the economy. We have a major problem with economic inactivity and high levels of unemployment, particularly among women who have had children. We need to incentivise and encourage people, which is why I disagree fundamentally with the universal approach. Of course, childcare should be universal for three and four-year-olds, so that, in the years just before they go to school, they can get that extra lift before they go into the education system proper. However, we must make sure that work pays. When finances are tight, we must use our money in the best way that we possibly can to make sure that work pays. It is essential that everybody participates in the economy and in society.

I make no apologies for targeting that issue. We are in a crisis. The Parliament has a £5 billion deficit coming down the track, but, sometimes, you would not think that that was the case. Too often, we think about spending money without thinking about exactly how to spend it to have the best effect on families or on the economy and the Government’s finances. All of that needs to work—and it needs to work well.

The final issue I want to raise is about after-school clubs and flexibility. We should talk not only about childcare up to the age of five but about supporting after-school clubs, many of which are precarious and find it difficult to make ends meet. We must make sure that there is extra provision for them, particularly in rural areas where families find it difficult to sustain them.

For those reasons, we will work with the Government to make this work. I am desperate to make it work—I have a long-term commitment to it. For decades, I have argued for the expansion of childcare, but we must get the foundations and the expansion right.

I move amendment S7M-00128.3, to leave out from “and supports” to end and insert:

“but notes that parents must be provided with the choice that they were promised as part of the rollout of 1,140 hours of funded childcare by introducing fairer rates for private, voluntary and independent providers to cover the actual costs of delivering high-quality early learning and childcare (ELC); believes that working families need to be prioritised in any extension of ELC funding, starting with shifting the 1,140 funded hours to start on a child’s third birthday, thus treating this as a critical part of our economic infrastructure that would help parents return to work, close the gender pay gap and raise additional tax revenues; calls for local authorities to be brought together to strike a partnership agreement that ensures parents who live in one council area but work in another have choice on where their child attends nursery, thus guaranteeing that funding really does follow the child; considers that childcare options in remote and rural areas can be more limited; therefore believes that there needs to be a new support package for childminders in these areas, and calls on the Scottish Government to make sure that there is no postcode lottery for childcare in Scotland.”

The cabinet secretary knows that Liberal Democrats will always be constructive, as we have been for a number of years. We are still in the midst of a housing emergency—it is an emergency—but she has not answered the question about the scheme potentially providing a subsidy to those who can already afford to buy their own home. I will give her another chance to explain what lessons she has learned from previous schemes so that that does not happen.

I echo that appreciation for the work that those early learning and childcare professionals do. However, if the cabinet secretary believes that, will she finally tackle the difference in the pay rates between the private, voluntary and independent sector and the council sector? Staff are paid massively different amounts for doing exactly the same job, so will the Government finally get a grip on that problem?

The difficulty is that the cabinet secretary’s predecessors have been open minded for years about the issue and we have not made any progress. We need more than open-mindedness and open doors; we need a solution.

Bob Doris and I have a long track record of debating this issue over many years, and he will understand that, in order to have a mixed model, we need a private, voluntary and independent sector that is treated on an equal basis with council nurseries. Will he pledge to support all of us who want to achieve that?