I start by thanking members for their continued commitment to protecting and strengthening children’s rights. It is clear that the commitment that was demonstrated when the Parliament unanimously passed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill in March 2021 remains, and I am confident that when we are ready to bring an amended bill back to the Parliament, it will again receive the support that it deserves.

We have emphasised our commitment to that process on several occasions, most recently on 26 January, when the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills responded to Mr Whitfield’s question about our latest discussions with the UK Government. The cabinet secretary explained the importance of the discussions with the UK Government and said that they are currently focusing on what the Supreme Court judgment means for the application of the UNCRC compatibility duty when a public authority is acting under powers conferred by UK acts in devolved areas.

I hope that members will find it useful if I provide further details on that. We have been clear to the Parliament and stakeholders that the Supreme Court judgment means that the duty to act compatibly with UNCRC requirements as set out in the bill cannot apply when a public authority is acting under powers conferred by a UK act, and when that act requires it to act in a way that is incompatible. However, there will be cases in which a UK act in a devolved area gives a public authority discretion over whether to act in a way that is compatible.

Our hope has been that, in those circumstances, the bill could require a public authority to act compatibly. The discussions with the UK Government are focused on whether the Supreme Court judgment enables us to do that. As well as carefully considering whether that is possible in the context of the Supreme Court judgment, we also need to consider whether setting more conditions on the application of the compatibility duty would over-complicate the bill. The compatibility duty cannot become so complicated that duty-bearers and children and young people and their representatives find it difficult to understand.

It is a complex area and, as far as I understand, the reconsideration process has not been used in the Parliament previously, although it has been in statute. We are absolutely committed to making amendments to the bill under the reconsideration process for Parliament to consider and vote on. I am sure that there will be much discussion when that happens.

The motion includes a request that the Scottish Government set out a timetable for the reconsideration process. As Mr Whitfield pointed out in Parliament last week, previous estimates have proved to be optimistic. The nature of our engagement and the groundwork required to reduce the risk of another referral to the Supreme Court means that not all of the milestones are within our control. However 16 March is an important date and we will endeavour to provide another update by then.

In the meantime, our programme of work to embed children’s rights continues at pace, regardless of the status of the bill. We are building the capacity for public authorities to take a children’s rights-based approach in the delivery of services, including by developing a skills and knowledge framework; providing a fund to test innovative approaches to embedding children’s rights; developing tools to assist public bodies to evaluate and improve their approach to children’s rights; funding the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman to develop a child-friendly complaints process for public authorities under its jurisdiction; and funding the Improvement Service to assist local authorities and their partners to successfully implement the UNCRC at a local level.

I agree with Mr FitzPatrick that ensuring that the right financial support and practical help are in place will be critical in encouraging more people to become foster carers. That is why the Scottish Government is absolutely committed to delivering a national allowance as quickly as possible. We know that that has taken longer than was originally anticipated, and we share the frustrations of care givers and those working with them. I assure Mr FitzPatrick that we are looking at all available options to make that happen. My officials will next meet COSLA on Tuesday 7 February.

As part of keeping the Promise, we are committed to ensuring that children and young people who are looked after away from their own families and homes are provided with caring and loving foster families.

I am aware that the pandemic and the cost of living crisis have put pressure on foster carer capacity and that the situation has been worsened by the widening pressures that the social work sector faces, such as the pressures associated with the conflict in Ukraine and the issue of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children.

Although responsibility for recruiting a sufficient number of foster carers lies with local authorities, we are actively working with key national and local partners to identify action that we can take collectively, now and in the future, to improve the situation.

I think that I covered most of what Roz McCall has asked about in my response to Mr FitzPatrick. We appreciate that the Fostering Network has said that there is a shortage of almost 500 foster carers in Scotland, and we are working with stakeholders to explore ways to increase the number of people becoming foster carers. As part of that, we are willing to consider all options that have the potential to improve the lives of children with care experience, including the possibility of national and local remuneration.

I hear what the member says, but I do not accept the premise that ELC is failing or that it is in crisis in the way that she describes.

Scotland is the only part of the UK to have made a commitment to paying staff the real living wage for the delivery of funded ELC, and we have made real progress. Before the expansion, approximately 80 per cent of staff who were delivering funded ELC in the private and third sectors were paid less than the living wage. In contrast, our 2021 health check indicated that 88 per cent of private providers intended to pay the real living wage to all their staff from August 2021.

Our investment in sustainable rates is also critical to enabling employers to pay the real living wage to professionals who are delivering funded ELC, and to ensuring the quality and sustainability of provision.

We must recognise that the childcare industry is a mixed economy and that employers in the private and third sectors are responsible for the business decisions that they make. Public funding accounts for only 33 to 45 per cent of the overall income of private childcare services.

The Scottish Government has worked closely with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities because we would not have been able to roll out the 1,140 hours without working with it and the PVI sector. What does Martin Whitfield suggest that the Scottish Government do over and above what we have done already?

What Mr Whittle alleges is very concerning. If he has evidence of that happening, I would be happy to receive correspondence from him on the matter.

Will the member take an intervention?