Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you, convener—welcome to the group and congratulations. I also congratulate our colleague Neil Gray on his new post.

What support will be given to young people who are transferring to ADP, and how will it be deployed?

I again thank my constituent Lewis Condy, who brought this important issue to the Parliament’s attention and provided a considered response to the Scottish Government’s submission. This is a good example of positive citizen engagement with the Scottish Parliament. Lewis has, throughout, emphasised the importance of equality of access to swimming lessons. Inequality of access is a big problem, as has been highlighted repeatedly in the responses to the committee, and is a key failure in the current situation.

I thank all those who signed the petition and the organisations that responded to the committee’s request for more information. They have provided a wealth of evidence about the value of swimming lessons and the factors that influence the inequality of access to them.

I note the following points in the response from COSLA. The Scottish Government previously answered a written question in Parliament from me about swimming lessons and competency levels in primary school children, by saying that the information was not held centrally. I am concerned and disappointed to learn that COSLA confirms that not only is there no data to indicate the presence of swimming lessons across Scotland, there is no mechanism to collect such data. It also notes the variations in the provision of swimming lessons across the country, with the availability of facilities and the cost of lessons being significant factors that drive unequal access. Although extracurricular support of the active schools network is highlighted, only 21 local authorities offer swimming activity through the network, and it is not known how many children that reaches.

The response from Scottish Swimming confirms the initial concerns raised by the petitioner that

“over 40% of children leave primary school unable to swim in Scotland”

Furthermore, it notes that only 10.5 per cent of children in swimming lessons through its learn to swim framework come from the most deprived areas of Scotland, and that there is a

“direct correlation between a child’s socio-economic background and their opportunity to learn to swim.”

If we are serious about tackling inequality, we need a very different approach.

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents notes that in England, despite swimming being a statutory part of the national curriculum, a significant number of children leave primary education without being able to swim. It highlights the known issue of equality of access, including that it is affected by a family’s affluence and location. ROSPA’s submission indicates that swimming lessons as a statutory requirement might not in itself be a panacea. Making swimming lessons mandatory without support for and from the organisations that would need to be involved in delivery may not have the desired effects, so a whole package of measures require consideration.

There is also evidence that is available through other sources in England and Wales that identifies particular barriers to accessing swimming regularly for some ethnic minority communities, which have proportionately fewer children who are able to swim and be confident in water safety.

From the responses to my constituent’s petition, we have seen that there is widespread support in the sector for doing more on that issue. The committee has heard that there is no statutory curriculum in Scotland. However, the Scottish Government has previously found means to mandate an inclusive education in other areas where it has deemed that necessary.

At its heart, this is a question of social justice as much as it is one of education. The committee has heard that there are significant social disparities in the provision of swimming lessons. We know that access to swimming lessons gives people a benefit to their safety around water and to their health, fitness and wellbeing. Resolving those disparities is a matter of equality of opportunity.

The issue has public support and clear support from the sectors involved and, if properly addressed, would provide significant benefit to society. Many points have been raised by the organisations involved in that area, and the committee might wish to put those points to the cabinet secretary for further comment.

I thank the committee for allowing me this opportunity to speak.

I have a question for Judith Paterson. If we accept that there will be no change until there has been a safe and secure transition, does the review of adequacy and eligibility need to wait until after that too, or could the Government start to review those things now so that the new system could be switched on straight after the safe and secure transition?

I have a small question. Have you had any communication from the Scottish Government on the process for making amendments? Does the panel accept the Scottish Government’s argument that changes to eligibility should be left to the independent review?

I do not have another question on that theme.

People who have pre-payment meters will have an immediate increase in their fuel bills, on top of their budgets being squeezed by the cost of living. Those using pre-payment meters tend to be on low incomes. Non-payment can lead to their having no fuel and people can get into debt as a result of standing charges. However, there is no way of quantifying fuel debt in Scotland. That debt can be hidden on credit cards and in overdrafts.

What can the proposed fuel strategy do to support people who are struggling with fuel debt? What can the Scottish Government do to increase take-up of the warm home discount? When does the Government estimate that the warm home discount will be fully rolled out in Scotland?

Fuel poverty decreased until 2017, but it then seemed to flatline. If the yearly average decrease continues, we will miss the interim target for reducing fuel poverty by seven years, and the final target by 10 years. Can it be guaranteed that the strategy will meet our fuel poverty targets?

No—they are for whoever feels comfortable answering them.

My question is for the minister. Are there any plans to make Scotland’s baby box more accommodating to parents with disabled babies, through, for example, providing more items in the box for low-income families?

How do you plan to limit the negative aspects of automation? For example, there has been a five-week wait for universal credit, and dealing with the DWP’s system has caused confusion.