Seòmar agus comataidhean

I cannot speak for other ministers or about pieces of legislation other than the one that I have introduced. As I have said, it is regrettable that two aspects of the Promise bill are not compliant with the UNCRC. I have given the reasons for that, which relate to complexity and time. However, as Mr Ross has stated, I am seeking further advice in relation to the concerns that have been raised in the conversations that I have had around the Promise bill in its entirety.

I am more than happy to provide more information around that at the stage 1 debate next week. Claire Montgomery might be happy to follow up on Mr Ross’s points around the UNCRC more generally.

Could you be more specific, Mr Rennie?

They would have been entitled to that anyway; the point is that the placing authority would not have known about it, so it would not be able to plan in advance and consider the child’s needs. That is where the regulations come into play.

That is certainly something that we can consider. We need to be mindful that the cabinet secretary will be making a statement later today and what we have said about mandatory reporting this morning. However, that could follow on from those discussions.

I have been discussing that legislative review—not specifically in relation to that topic but more generally. It has come up in my discussions with The Promise Scotland and other stakeholders in relation to the Children (Care, Care Experience and Services Planning) (Scotland) Bill, which I will call the Promise bill for short.

Work has been done with The Promise Scotland to review the legislative landscape, but a decision was made not to take that forward in the Promise bill. Again, I am speaking of review in a general sense rather than in relation to the specific legislation on child protection that Mr Greer referred to. Given the scale of the reviewing task, it was agreed that taking it forward in the Promise bill was perhaps not the best approach. However, that does not detract from the fact that work on that is still under way in other areas of Government.

I still very much want to take forward the review, which was a recommendation from The Promise Scotland. It would be very beneficial for child protection and for other areas. However, given the timings around the Promise bill and the complexity of decluttering the landscape, it was decided that the review would not be taken forward as part of that bill. However, as I say, I have been engaging with The Promise Scotland on the review, and we still very much plan to do it, because it is key to our delivery of the Promise.

I would be happy to write to the committee on that exact point, because I do not have advice on that at this moment. I will need to consider that, and I will write to the committee to confirm that.

Mr Briggs will be aware that I met the petitioners to discuss the issue. That was some time ago, so I would be more than happy to seek an update on the most recent correspondence that has been received. This morning’s discussion on mandatory reporting links directly to the petition and, if I recall correctly, was something that was spoken about in my meeting with the petitioners.

Mr Briggs might also be aware of the Care Inspectorate report about Edinburgh. I have engaged directly with the City of Edinburgh Council on that. Although there were some positives in that report, there were also real questions to do with culture, as well as issues to do with the workforce not necessarily knowing who to direct problems to. Again, that reminded me of some of what came up in my meeting with the petitioners. I have written directly to the City of Edinburgh Council to ask exactly how it will remedy some of those issues. I believe that I requested a meeting with it, although I am not sure whether I have had any response. Again, I am more than happy to write to Mr Briggs on some of those points if that would be helpful.

Mr Greer has been very positive about the bill passing. The review is not being thought about in a way that is exclusive or detached from the bill. It is still going on aside from the bill. As I said, I have been discussing the matter with The Promise Scotland, which undertook some work around the legislative landscape. I now need to consider whether that work is a good basis for advancing that agenda or whether the Government will have to conduct its own review or enhance that work.

I assure Mr Greer that thinking around the review is under way and that it has not dropped off the agenda. He will be aware that I have engaged a lot with children and young people on the delivery of the Promise bill and that there has been a lot of focus on specific areas. I feel that the areas that we are delivering on in the bill are those that will make the most difference to children and young people right here, right now. However, please be assured that our longer-term view to tidy up the legislative landscape has not fallen off the radar—it is being discussed in conversations that I am having.

Absolutely—the investment in bairns’ hoose is absolutely key to that. We have to recognise the profound impact that abuse can have on children. The bairns’ hoose programme embeds a whole-system trauma-informed response that minimises the risk of traumatisation and supports not only children’s recovery but their wellbeing.

I have visited the north Strathclyde bairns’ hoose programme. Although I have not witnessed it in action, I have seen the environment and how the needs and wants of children who have been involved have been considered and reflected in it. That is really important.

However, I appreciate that, at the moment, the provision of such support is not consistent across Scotland. There are still more children and young people who could benefit from the support of the bairns’ hoose programme, and ensuring that they can is a priority going forward. The bairns’ hoose programme is a really positive example of how we are tackling something using a cross-Government approach, and it will really benefit the children and young people who are able to access it.

That is something that we absolutely have to do, because it makes no sense to ensure that there are statistics for the start of a care-experienced person’s educational journey and then not see that through. We will, absolutely, have to consider the issue.

It should not be hugely complex. A lot of care-experienced young people are already supported by certain services in a local authority, whether they are aftercare services, continuing care or whatever. It is very likely that connections with the young person will already have been made, and what you suggest might help to ensure that our care-experienced young people get those educational opportunities and, equally, the opportunity to remain in education. After all, we know from discussions that we have had with you, Mr Briggs, and discussions that I have had with the committee that, depending on what stage we are talking about in a care-experienced young person’s life, there are difficulties that can manifest themselves as issues with education. Essentially, I absolutely agree with you, and if there are ways of bolstering our approach, I am more than happy to look at them.