Seòmar agus comataidhean

This group of my amendments seek to address a gap that has been identified in inspection in relation to secure care and education. Amendment 320 would create a duty on the chief inspector, in the exercise of their function, to consider the use of restraint and seclusion in education settings in secure accommodation in Scotland. Although the chief inspector inspected the educational aspect of secure accommodation, the Care Inspectorate covers other aspects. That is considered to be a gap. The purpose of the amendment is to introduce the function of inspecting the use of restraint and seclusion in secure accommodation. The effect is to provide for that role and responsibility to be exercised by the chief inspector.

Amendment 344 would expand the chief inspector’s remit to monitor the use of restraint and seclusion in education settings in secure care services, through the existing joint inspection framework with the Care Inspectorate applicable to those services. It aims to ensure that all use of restraint and seclusion in such services is appropriately recorded, reported and monitored as part of the joint inspection process between the Care Inspectorate and the chief inspector, thereby ensuring compliance with article 37 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and articles 3 and 5 of the European convention on human rights.

Amendment 353 would provide the necessary definitions to support the joint inspection duty that is specified by amendment 344. Since lodging my amendments, I have had correspondence from various individuals who have been working with us on these issues to acknowledge that some movement has been made with the Government. I therefore intend not to move the amendments tonight, but I seek assurance that they could be brought back at stage 3 if the conclusion of that work has not delivered what was expected with regard to addressing the gap in inspection. Although I do not intend to move the amendments, it is important that we identify that there has been a gap. Since I lodged the amendments, some activity seems to have been encouraged, which is an important aspect of what the process is about.

I take Mr Greer’s point that amendment 334 could be read in that way. It could also be read in such a way that the people providing support are taking part in training and education, too, and support staff often tell us that that is what they are having to do. However, I would not want there to be any ambiguity in the drafting so, if the member has found that, it would be important for us to work together on the matter ahead of stage 3. The principle behind amendment 334 is an important one, and I hope that the member will consider it to be so.

My amendments in the group are crucial. We need to find a way to ensure that inspections pick up on what is happening as regards the wellbeing and experience of the pupils in schools and the people who work there. I realise that there have been behaviour plans, summits and other initiatives, but it would give a real focus to inspections if they were to include those factors. The mental and physical wellbeing of everyone in a school, whether they are working or being educated there, is incredibly important, which is why I lodged the amendments.

I move amendment 331.

Amendment 318 says that the chief inspector would “coordinate the support provided” instead of delivering the change. Once schools get their inspection reports, which, at the minute, are one word long—or, at least, are fairly short—they can be left without much support or advice on how to improve, and my amendment aims to add to the inspectorate’s work the function of trying to help schools collaborate with others to get as much information and support as they might need in order to make the improvements that the inspection report suggests that they need to make. If members support that principle, I would be prepared to bring the issue back at stage 3, but that is the intention behind the amendment. I would hope that I could get some support for giving the inspectorate that type of collaborative, supportive function at stage 3.

I will not be moving my amendment 350, for the reasons that the cabinet secretary and Ross Greer have highlighted with regard to Education Scotland being named specifically. Again, however, I would note that I lodged my amendments in this group, because I felt that it was important for us to understand that the system needs to be coherent and that all the parts need to work together. Teachers on the front line and people who work in schools need to feel closer to the decisions around the improvement function in respect of how they can improve the delivery of education to the young people in their establishments. That is what these amendments were intended to do.

The text of amendment 318 is that

“The Chief Inspector may work with relevant educational establishments and local authorities to coordinate the support provided to children, young people and their parents in those establishments.”

That is quite clear, and I think that it takes us a step further than the wording in amendment 87, which is that the chief inspector should

“have regard to the desirability of”

collaborative working, because it is a little bit more directive.

Amendment 318 also says that

“The Chief Inspector may prepare and publish guidance on the exercise”

of their functions under this section of the bill. I think that there is scope to provide the flexibility that is needed, as well as to ask or expect the chief inspector to support education authorities and others in the sector as part of their function, which is to improve schools.

I have listened to the points on whether the timescale should be 60 or 40 days, and I am erring towards Ross Greer’s argument that it should be 60 days. It is important that the Parliament has as much time as possible to scrutinise the plan. Narrowing the period to 40 days could make it very tight. For example, if it was laid on the day before recess, we would have very few days left when we came back from recess to be able to do anything about it.

I thank the member for that intervention and I encourage him, and his party and Government, to support my colleague Daniel Johnson’s bill. However, we have this bill in front of us, and there is an opportunity to look at restraint and seclusion. As I have put on the record, the issue is incredibly important, and I am pleased that Joe FitzPatrick thinks that it is important to include it in Daniel Johnson’s member’s bill. Given that I am sure that he supports what my amendments seek to do, I hope that he will also support that bill.

I move amendment 320.

I thank the cabinet secretary for that. However, there was a discussion in the chamber about recruiting to the board of qualifications Scotland, during which I said that I thought it unusual that we were being asked to vote to begin the recruitment process for qualifications Scotland. It is that point that I was referring to—

I am happy to.

My amendment 309 would place an obligation on ministers to make regulations that specify the intervals at which establishments are to be inspected—the bill as currently drafted states that Scottish ministers “may” specify the intervals. That is incredibly important. As my colleague Stephen Kerr has set out on the record, it is important to continually understand what is happening in our schools and to get a regular picture of what is going on. It is not acceptable that ministers may not set out in regulation the intervals at which establishments should be inspected. That is why my amendment 309 would place an obligation on ministers to do so.

Amendment 312 would require ministers, before drafting such regulations, to consult teachers and

“people who ... represent the interests of ... teachers”.

That is important, because we have seen how inspections can lead to significant stress and concern for teachers and in establishments, which is one of the reasons why, in the debate on the previous group, I said that I was concerned about the Government’s amendment 84. It is crucial that we engage teachers so that they understand when and how often inspections will take place. The regulations must be laid and the sector should be engaged when the regulations are being drafted.

Is there anything that you think we could do in legislation that might, for example, have highlighted some of the concerns that we see across the sector at the moment, particularly in Dundee?