Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am sorry, but I am not aware of whether they have. The last I knew was that they had not.

The Government could not possibly understand the costs that would attach to teacher negotiations in the process that I have just laid out. That will happen in due course. We could not negotiate for issues in teacher contracts that will arise from a bill that has not even been passed—that is still at stage 1, stage 2 or stage 3. That would have to happen afterwards. On that level, it is impossible to understand the cost. However, I reiterate that the committee should share my concern about the unknowns.

To provide some clarity, I have already made clear my enthusiasm for the outdoor residential sector—

Mr Adam puts the point perfectly. I have been very clear in what I have said. I appreciate the work that Ms Smith has done to bring down the costs of the bill if it proceeds to stage 2. The targeted provision and the commencement dates are very welcome, but the issue is with the unknowns. As Mr Adam has said, in some areas, a blank cheque would, in effect, have to be written. That is a difficulty for, and a matter of real concern to, the Government, which is why our deliberations on a financial resolution continue.

Mr Adam has raised an important point, because I believe that, according to some of the latest analysis and correspondence that Ms Smith has sent me, a new trend has been emerging in her discussions with stakeholders. Officials can correct me if I get the figure wrong, but I think that around 15 to 20 per cent of children and young people are not going on trips due to a level of anxiety about them. More work really needs to be done on that. A legislative proposal will not necessarily solve that problem, and I think that we really need to understand whether it is down to additional support needs or something else. Again, the non-legislative approach that I have been speaking to allows flexibility in that respect.

The Government abstained because we are neutral on the bill. As I have already said, the committee and the Government raised a number of unanswered concerns about it, and I wanted to work with the member over that period of time to understand some of those concerns and, hopefully, get some of them addressed.

I appreciate what the member has said about Parliament voting for the bill. I have been very clear about the process for the financial resolution. Of course, it is a matter for the Parliament’s standing orders, and if this is something that the member or Parliament is not content with, it is absolutely something that the Parliament can consider.

I cannot give any further information on the ministerial decision-making process. I cannot provide you with the information that I have given to Cabinet.

I understand the convener’s and the committee’s views on that. I have heard them—

As I confirmed during the members’ business debate yesterday, I have not yet drafted any amendments to Liz Smith’s member’s bill. I discussed areas for potential stage 2 amendments with Liz Smith at our meeting on 1 July, at which she indicated that she would be open to a more targeted approach to funding and to changes in commencement provisions. However, I made clear to her at the time that, procedurally, we are not at the point where producing draft legal text of stage 2 amendments is appropriate and that doing so would pre-empt the decision on the financial resolution.

Absolutely. I am very keen on the SFA programme. I visited one of its projects and can say that what it delivers for targeted primary school children from low-income families, through provision of before-school, after-school and holiday activity clubs, is fantastic. As Mr Adam rightly said, last Friday we announced that we are increasing our investment in the programme to £5.5 million. That will allow the programme to increase the number of clubs that it supports from 31 to 53 and ensure that it will reach children and young people across Scotland. The programme is very important because, as we are aware, families and children have different needs so taking a one-size-fits-all approach is not appropriate. Understanding that will be absolutely instrumental as we work towards establishing a system for school-age childcare in future.

Recently, an annual impact report on the programme was published, which highlighted the improved outcomes for children who participate, and particularly for those from families on low incomes. That is one of two publications; a more detailed process evaluation report will be published soon, which will explore some of the themes that came out of the first report, such as tackling child poverty, improving school attendance and achieving improved outcomes for children.

I really encourage any members who have not visited one of the projects to do so, because they are fantastic. The children and young people who spoke to me at the one that I visited said that they were having a fantastic time, so expanding the programme is a very positive move.