Seòmar agus comataidhean

I will move on, and I will ask Duncan Dunlop to respond to this question first. Some of the submissions to the committee said that there needs to be clarity on the bill’s proposal for guidance in relation to care experience to ensure that it is effective. You touched on that earlier. There was also a range of views about who should be included in any proposed definition.

How can the Scottish Government ensure that the provisions have a positive impact on care-experienced people, and how do you suggest work to decide on a definition—

Duncan Dunlop has mentioned advocacy and Jo Derrick has spoken about aftercare, and both have made important points. I previously used an example of kids who are about 15 or 16 who were ready for the transition. They had issues with housing and concerns about what their next step in life would be, and very little support was provided. Getting that start in life could have made a huge impact on them.

There is another question about geographical differences. The care that someone will be provided will be very different in rural Aberdeenshire or the Highlands and Islands compared to urban Glasgow and Edinburgh. We have not really discussed that, but we need to ensure that the level of care, support and advocacy is not impacted by geography.

My question is on some general points. Who Cares? Scotland, The Promise Scotland and the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland commented on the drafting of sections 1 and 2, on aftercare. Laura Pasternak, you mentioned that issue, as well as the issue of section 10’s amendment of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 in relation to the register of foster carers. Of course, the 1995 act is pre-devolution UK legislation that falls outwith the scope of the UNCRC, as you noted. What are your views on how that section has been drafted, and what might be done at stage 2 to bring it into scope?

I want to touch on advocacy, which I know that Pam Duncan-Glancy was going to move on to. I do not know whether you heard the evidence in the previous evidence session. My background is 15 years as a councillor, during which I dealt with situations involving kids with care experience; advocacy was a really important part of their journey, not only for them but for their families. Section 4 of the bill talks about new

“rights of access to care experience advocacy services”,

with that right shaped by secondary legislation. What would that secondary legislation look like?

The other key thing is that this is almost an urban versus rural discussion, because advocacy services are probably much easier to access in urban areas than in rural ones. When we spoke to the sheriff in the previous evidence session, we found that this also related to section 18, which is on advocacy in the hearings system. Is there confusion on that point? What are your thoughts on that?

Claire Burns, I will come to you on that question and then open it up to anybody else who wants to come in.

I do not know whether Maria Galli or Kate Thompson wishes to come in.

It does. Before I come to David Mackie to ask about the hearings system, I want to highlight a key point that I discussed when I met Who Cares? Scotland. As someone who represents East Lothian, which is a mix of urban and rural, I think that it is probably easier for someone to access an advocacy service in Edinburgh or Glasgow than it is for someone in the Highlands. There is not a one-size-fits-all approach to provision.

What are your thoughts on that? Independent advocacy is important, but provision needs to be as universal as possible across the whole of Scotland, and that will not be as easy in remote areas.

I will get your thoughts on that and then come to David Mackie on the hearings system.

I want to build on some of the discussions that we have had about advocacy services and to delve a little bit deeper into that issue. Having been a councillor for 15 years and having spoken to families and care-experienced children, I know that that is really important, but it is now complex.

Section 4 of the bill mentions

“rights of access to care experience advocacy services.”

It is a complex area, as we know, and there are also advocacy services for children’s hearings, which are covered in section 18 of the bill. Several organisations, including The Promise Scotland, have commented to an extent on the new rights of access to care experience advocacy services that will be shaped by secondary legislation. What will those services look like in practice? Secondary legislation will be an important part of determining that. How will those services interact with section 18 of the bill, which covers advocacy in the hearings system? Given that we have started to discuss the system, it is an important point.

That is helpful, thank you.

Thanks, Claire. Does anybody else want to come in on that point?

Very briefly, before she comes in, how do we measure how effective the advocacy process has been? I think that we asked our previous witnesses about that, too. It is fine to have access to that, but how do we measure its effectiveness?