Seòmar agus comataidhean

As other colleagues have done, minister, I thank you for your very helpful letter in advance of the meeting. The regulations, whatever else they have done, have shone a light on the whole issue, in particular given the commissioner’s response to them.

I will touch on one point. There is a report in The Times this morning on the problems down south. It asserts that there are “scores of inexperienced ... owners” opening children’s homes, with the inference that that is clearly not good for vulnerable children who have been taken into care for very serious reasons.

How do we, in Scotland, ensure that settings in which those children, or any children, are placed are of a type that we would deem appropriate? Are there any plans to strengthen safeguards further in the forthcoming primary legislation?

In the interests of time, my opening question can be answered by a nod or shake of the head, or a simple yes or no. A few moments ago, Willie Rennie advanced a theory—a criterion, if you like—that two-year-olds should attract an enhanced rate because of the ratios that would be required to supervise them. Do we accept that that is the case—yes or no?

I am seeing nodding heads, so we accept that that is the case. In that case, Matthew Sweeney, why are so many councils not paying an enhanced rate for two-year-olds, set against what is available for three-year-olds and above?

I do not accept that at all. A number of councils are doing that. Angus Council, my own local authority, has the fourth highest rate of provision for two-year-olds in the whole of the country, and it is paying considerably more for them than for children aged three and over. Some councils are clearly walking the walk.

That takes me to the process for rate setting. Forgive me for asking what might be a layman’s question. What is the process? What are councils meant to take account of? Should they look at issues such as the cost of rents in an area or economies of scale? What do they take account of in setting rates and how is the private sector involved in that process? Do they have discussions? Is there input? Is there an appeals procedure if the rates being offered are deemed to be completely unsatisfactory?

Thank you. That clears it up.

What would you consider to be “recent”?

I want to be clear. Are you saying that the conversation about the proposals took place only last week, after they had become public?

My question is about the interaction and relationship between the office of the commissioner and the Scottish Government. From what you have said, there seems to be quite a lot of blue water between your position and that of the Government. Was there any discussion between the office of the commissioner and the Scottish Government while the regulations were being put together?

You mentioned the opportunity for the child to challenge, but surely that challenge would lie with the placing authority. The challenge ought to be between the child and their representatives and the placing authority, so it would not lie in Scotland, would it?

I will come at the issue from a slightly different direction, cabinet secretary, and perhaps get a more detailed answer to the point that the convener is making. To approach the issue from the bottom up, teachers we have spoken to in our evidence gathering have been clear that the impacts of the pandemic have been significant, and we have to recognise that. We also have the cost of living crisis. Teachers have also acknowledged that they now have a much clearer idea of what works in addressing the attainment challenge.

We have that as well as the funding and the Government providing direction. Looking at all that in the round, now that those foundations are in place, would it be reasonable to expect that, in the coming years—the next few years—we will begin to see further and quite significant progress?

Cabinet secretary, I am one of the majority of members of the Scottish Parliament who very much welcome the funding that is going to the 23 other local authorities and will reach the 59 per cent of youngsters who were not previously captured by the approach. However, I am keen to get an assurance that the money will be accompanied by access to the gathered knowledge that we now have about what works.

I was very struck by the sessions that we have had with teaching staff from the west of Scotland. I found them incredibly positive about the work that is being done. However, I note that most of the knowledge has been amassed in the west of Scotland. We have the regional improvement collaboratives for sharing best practice, but I am looking for some assurance on how that best practice—the gleaned knowledge—will be made available to the other local authorities that have not had the opportunity up to now, other than through individual schools and their pupil equity funding. That is important so that they do not have to reinvent the wheel but can capitalise on the best practice and what we know works. Within that, there is a question about the role of Education Scotland.