Seòmar agus comataidhean

We might want to mention things such as automatic enrolment—that might be helpful.

Thank you for being here this morning, Pam. It is great that you have been highlighting this stuff.

What you said about your mum saying, “Now I can be a mum again,” was really quite powerful. That is so important. You mentioned the legislative salad and the fact that none of the legislation is delivering what needs to be delivered. Having guidance, strategies and duties is absolutely fine, but the issue comes down to relationships, advocacy and people feeling that they have agency.

We have heard from young people and families—this has been mentioned in the evidence that has been submitted to us, too—that professionals will often identify “positive destinations” for them but that those do not always reflect the aspirations and interests of young people or the things that matter to them and their families. We have also heard about data and control and about young people wanting to own their own story, to have that agency and control, and to have choices around sharing their data.

I am interested in two specific issues. First, how will the bill bring an approach that is centred around the young person and their aspirations? Secondly, how will it improve their outcomes?

I do not disagree with much of what you have said. I hear such stuff myself. However, the part that really concerns me, as you know, and as we hear when we talk to practitioners, is that transitions should not be separate but organic and built in all the way through.

I know that North Lanarkshire Council has done loads of great work over the past 12 years. It has been absolutely fabulous and fantastic. However, practitioners have said that legislation is legislation but it is about the quality that is underneath that. We have heard them say that they are worried about the idea of having yet another plan. Plans are piling up on somebody’s desk and it becomes something to be completed. That could be reductionist and could end up being a bit of a tick-box exercise for them as well, so the plan might get in the way of some of the good practice that they are doing and that is evolving.

Would it not be better to focus on the good practice that is happening just now rather than what is specifically in the bill—to look at bringing that forward, really supporting it and bringing in legislation to support it and make sure that it is happening, if there turns out to be a need for that?

Thanks for allowing me to come back in, convener.

Bill Scott made a really important point about scrutiny really making a change in that area. I really appreciate that.

I go back to Ross Greer’s point about practice. For example, we heard about a wee boy who wanted to be a pilot. He was taken along to the airport, and he was as interested in the baggage as much as he was in anything else, so he ended up with a job in the baggage department. Will the bill really be the thing that changes practice? Would that happen for other wee boys? Would it change things for them? That is the nitty-gritty of the issue.

Cabinet secretary, you already touched on this point in your response to Ruth Maguire. I am going to roll what I want to ask into one question because I am mindful of the time. We are all clear that narrowing the poverty-related attainment gap is a key education priority. Will you outline the role that teachers play in narrowing that gap? Are we seeing results from investing in teacher numbers? Finally, what impact will cutting teacher numbers have?

Thank you, minister.

I will pick up on what Sue Webber was talking about and will probably go back to other stuff as well. We are talking about consistency, but it can be difficult to look at consistency when you are looking at people who have really different needs. We are great at measuring positive outcomes and really good at collating a lot of different data, but what are we doing about measuring the things that actually matter to the individual, and doing that every single time? Is there a focus on that just now? What I mean is measuring how that individual feels they are progressing towards their aspirations and whatever their life goals are. I suppose that that brings us back closer, to a degree, to them having someone they have a good relationship with and can rely on. It is not a single transition, but something that develops over time. How can we include young people’s feelings about how they are moving towards their aspirations? At the end of the day, surely what really matters is the individual’s experience.

Sorry, could I just come back in for a second? I am really interested in measuring every single time how an individual views their own progress and outcomes.

I wish to ask about the independent living fund. We have heard from quite a few people that they were not aware of the fund. Some of them found out about it by accident. Other organisations were very well up on the independent living fund—they had quite a lot of people applying and were getting quite good funding from that route.

I have a couple of questions. Is that the fairest way to do it? Will that approach possibly be reviewed? Should there be smaller grants that go out to a wider range of people? I can imagine that, as awareness around the fund increases, the demand will increase, too, and that will create funding pressures.

That is perfect.