Seòmar agus comataidhean

Lynne McMinn can give some information about the process of automatic listing.

Anyone who is mentally ill or who lacks capacity at the time of their conviction would also automatically be added to that list.

The regulations will amend the prescribed period that must pass before a person has the right to make an application. They will increase the age threshold for what is referred to in the principal regulations as the shorter prescribed period from under 18 to 25 and under . That means that an individual who is included in the barred list when they are aged between 18 and 25 will be able to apply to be removed after five, rather than 10, years have passed since the date of inclusion.

I make it absolutely clear that the amendment regulations will not lead to individuals being removed automatically from the barred list; they will simply amend the circumstances in which an application for removal will be competent. As I said in my opening remarks, the proposed changes are consistent with the approach that is taken in the rest of the United Kingdom to when individuals can ask for a review of the Disclosure and Barring Service’s decision.

Thank you for inviting me to say a few words on the draft regulations. The amendments are technical and are necessary to ensure that the Age of Criminal Responsibility (Scotland) Act 2019 can be applied as intended. The 2019 act raised the age of criminal responsibility in Scotland from eight to 12, and it established the role of the independent reviewer, who oversees the disclosure of convictions and other relevant information relating to when a person was under the age of 12. The purpose of the regulations is to amend the 2019 act.

The regulations are a consequence of the Age of Criminal Responsibility (Scotland) Act 2019 (Consequential Provisions and Modifications) Order 2021. That order, which is currently being considered by the Westminster Parliament, makes provisions in relation to the independent reviewer that will apply in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. In particular, the order places a requirement on specified persons in those jurisdictions, such as chief police officers, to refer and provide information relating to an individual’s pre-12 behaviour to the independent reviewer.

The regulations therefore modify, in light of that order, the relevant functions of the independent reviewer in the 2019 act, in order to require the independent reviewer to review that information, invite representations, notify the outcome of the review and, where appropriate, advise on the right to appeal that decision.

The changes support the Scottish Government’s decision to raise the age of criminal responsibility from eight to 12 by ensuring that the independent reviewer can review relevant information that is received from specified persons in other parts of the United Kingdom, as well as in Scotland. Committee members will wish to note that the regulations do not take forward any new policy. They are required to fully implement the 2019 act.

I would be happy to take questions on the regulations.

That is certainly not something that I recognise. Local authorities and the Scottish Government have worked very closely on the matter, and we are certainly keen that any carers or parents who are keen to take up the offer are aware of it—that is important—and can make an informed choice about whether they access that offer. Obviously, it will not be suitable for or wanted by every family, but we need to make sure that people are aware of it, and we will continue to work hard to do that. If Mr Mundell has concerns about specific areas, I am keen for him to write to me so that we can try to address those with our COSLA and local authority colleagues.

We are keen to ensure that any child who is eligible for the ELC offer can take it up if appropriate, and we will continue to work hard to promote that through all channels and avenues that we can.

We have been working closely with the UK Government on data sharing so that local authorities can access the data to target families and provide them with information about the provision.

I would be happy to pass over to Joanna Mackenzie, who can update you more fully on the work that is being done, if that would be all right with you, convener.

That is a question that I asked myself, Mr Kerr. The simplest answer is that we do not know what the increases to the national living wage will be year on year, and we want to ensure that we maintain eligibility for the families who are currently eligible for the ELC offer. That is why there are to be yearly reviews.

I do not have anything further to add, other than to thank the committee for its questions this morning.

Motion agreed to.

Convener, I missed part of the start of that question, but I hope that I can answer Mr Rennie fully. If not, I am more than happy to write to the committee with an update on the work that we are doing with COSLA.

As Mr Rennie will be aware, there has been a huge expansion of the ELC estate right across the country. In just about all local authorities, additional building work has been done. We are certainly keen to encourage and promote the ELC offer to eligible two-year-olds, and we will continue to do that through all the avenues that we can. We work closely with COSLA on that and on other issues relating to ELC.

If I have not answered Mr Rennie’s question fully, I am more than happy to come back to the committee.

Thank you, convener. This is my first opportunity to speak to the committee. I welcome you, Ms Stewart and the new committee members to your roles.

This amending order will increase the income thresholds for families with a two-year-old who is eligible for funded early learning and childcare because they get a joint working tax credit and child tax credit or a universal credit award. Without the amendment, the relevant order specifies that a two-year-old is eligible for funded ELC if their parent is in receipt of child tax credit and working tax credit, with an annual income that does not exceed £7,320, or if their parent is in receipt of universal credit, with an income that does not exceed £610 per month. The amending order will increase the income threshold to £7,500 per year for households in receipt of both child tax credit and working tax credit. The universal credit income threshold will increase to £625 per month.

We are making the change to reflect changes at a United Kingdom level. The UK Government has increased the national living wage from £8.72 to £8.91 per hour and has reduced the age at which a person receives that living wage from 25 years of age to 23. Those changes mean that it is no longer possible for a parent of a two-year-old who is 23 or older to meet the criteria for those who are on combined working tax credit and child tax credit or on universal credit.

The purpose of the order is to protect eligibility for two-year-olds whom we would expect to be eligible for funded ELC as a result of their parents or carers being in receipt of those affected qualifying benefits. We estimate that, if we chose not to make any changes to the income thresholds, about 1,000 two-year-olds would no longer be eligible, despite there being no significant difference in the household circumstances of their families.

It is important to be clear that no two-year-old who currently receives funded ELC will be affected by the changes. Once a child has met the eligibility criteria, they will remain eligible, despite any subsequent change in circumstances.

In relation to any child who became eligible after the change to the national living wage in April 2021 and who has applied for a place to start in August, which is the next start date for children with a birthday between 1 March and 31 August, we wrote to all local authorities in June to request that they use their discretionary powers to allow for the increase in the national living wage.

As the purpose of the amendment is to maintain eligibility, we do not anticipate a significant increase in the number of two-year-olds becoming newly eligible for the provision, and we do not expect there to be a significant impact on local authorities’ ability to fund the provision within the current financial settlement. As such, there is no evidence that additional funding is required to support implementation of the amendment.

However, the impact on uptake will be closely monitored by the Scottish Government and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities through the appropriate mechanism—the ELC finance working group—and appropriate arrangements will be made if uptake is significantly above the level that is expected and local authority costs increase as a result.

We will monitor future increases to the national living wage, and we expect that it will be necessary to uprate thresholds annually to keep pace with the standard of living. We have agreed with COSLA that the current amendment is, and future amendments will be, necessary to maintain a similar profile of eligible children.

I am happy to respond to any questions that the committee has.