Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 05 December 2013
05 Dec 2013 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Taking Children into Care
As I am the newest member of the Education and Culture Committee, some might say that I had the luxury of considering the final report without having to undertake the hours of work that were required to pull together such a comprehensive review of the current systems and decision-making processes for determining whether to take a child into care. However, after reading the report and the accompanying documents, I think that I missed out on some useful evidence sessions at previous committee meetings. I was particularly pleased that the committee took the time to meet children and young people who are in the care system, to ensure that their voices were heard and that their experiences contributed to the report’s development.
The committee’s evidence gathering by listening to those young people is the most crucial point and it underpins the theme of hearing all voices in the decision-making processes. Sadly, it is too easy for many young people who are in care to become statistics and to be written off ahead of their time.
When we talk about how we support the most vulnerable young people in our society, we should think about our family, our friends and our loved ones. Looked-after children deserve no less than everything that we would do for our own families without a second thought. Looked-after children deserve no less commitment, no less patience and no less presence of a caring adult in their lives. Perhaps we as a society need to examine our attitude to looked-after children and the system that supports them and their families. Why is care perceived as a last resort or a response to family failure? I prefer to think of it as a declaration by society that every child matters and deserves the best. The system must deliver that.
A child being taken into care does not have to be a last resort. There should of course be concentrated support for families to improve the underlying issues but, as the committee’s convener highlighted, the move towards early interventions to take children into care sooner can—perhaps counterintuitively—be positive if it ensures that the decision leads to more permanence and stability in the child’s life and better outcomes in the form of improved life chances. Sadly, that is still not the case in many circumstances, but it is good that those areas for improvement have been highlighted by the committee’s work during the inquiry. I hope that we will see action on them.
Because of that room for improvement, I am pleased by the increasing emphasis on the need for permanence in a child’s life. Much of the evidence that the committee considered highlighted that, for too many children in care, the difficulties and complexities of decision making when considering outcomes can upset the stability in a child’s life not just at the start of their childhood but as they move into adulthood.
There is no arbitrary cut-off point in a loved one’s life when we stop caring about them or when they stop needing support. As the mother of two grown-up sons in their 30s, I know that only too well. To describe a parent’s relationship with their children in the drily technical language of the sector, it is about establishing a long-term framework of care and love. We support the development of that long-term framework when we want improvements to be made to the decision-making processes for taking children into care.
The Scottish Government has been keen to highlight how the Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill goes some way towards meeting the challenges that are identified in the committee’s report. One of the measures in the bill that the Labour Party will support is the increase in the eligible age for aftercare for young people who have left care from 21 to 26. The permanence that we seek for children in care does not just involve ensuring that they have a roof over their heads. Stability does not mean just a house; it means having a home and friends and feeling valued, not just being accommodated.
One of the challenges of delivering public services is that the system that is in place in Scotland is a network of processes and multi-agency approaches that aims to develop a safety net that will catch and seek to protect the most vulnerable children in Scotland. It is vital that that succeeds, and we cannot afford for any child to slip through the gaps in our decision-making processes. We have guidelines for those vital processes, but a range of organisations expressed concern that the guidelines are still applied inconsistently across the country. Barnardo’s Scotland highlighted that each local authority has its own assessment process for handling risk assessment on taking children into care, which impacts on the potential outcomes for children according to where they live.
The report recognises the impact of GIRFEC and other child protection measures, but it acknowledges that current decision-making processes are not always delivering the best outcomes for children. We do not want to scrap the system and start again, but we need to make improvements.
Many of the points that are raised in the report, particularly about looked-after children, concern themes that the Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill covers. We will work with Aberlour Child Care Trust, Barnardo’s and Who Cares? Scotland to lodge a number of stage 2 amendments to improve the outcomes for looked-after children. However, we know that legislation alone is not enough and that we need a cultural shift in attitudes towards looked-after children. I look forward to working with colleagues to achieve that.
15:15
The committee’s evidence gathering by listening to those young people is the most crucial point and it underpins the theme of hearing all voices in the decision-making processes. Sadly, it is too easy for many young people who are in care to become statistics and to be written off ahead of their time.
When we talk about how we support the most vulnerable young people in our society, we should think about our family, our friends and our loved ones. Looked-after children deserve no less than everything that we would do for our own families without a second thought. Looked-after children deserve no less commitment, no less patience and no less presence of a caring adult in their lives. Perhaps we as a society need to examine our attitude to looked-after children and the system that supports them and their families. Why is care perceived as a last resort or a response to family failure? I prefer to think of it as a declaration by society that every child matters and deserves the best. The system must deliver that.
A child being taken into care does not have to be a last resort. There should of course be concentrated support for families to improve the underlying issues but, as the committee’s convener highlighted, the move towards early interventions to take children into care sooner can—perhaps counterintuitively—be positive if it ensures that the decision leads to more permanence and stability in the child’s life and better outcomes in the form of improved life chances. Sadly, that is still not the case in many circumstances, but it is good that those areas for improvement have been highlighted by the committee’s work during the inquiry. I hope that we will see action on them.
Because of that room for improvement, I am pleased by the increasing emphasis on the need for permanence in a child’s life. Much of the evidence that the committee considered highlighted that, for too many children in care, the difficulties and complexities of decision making when considering outcomes can upset the stability in a child’s life not just at the start of their childhood but as they move into adulthood.
There is no arbitrary cut-off point in a loved one’s life when we stop caring about them or when they stop needing support. As the mother of two grown-up sons in their 30s, I know that only too well. To describe a parent’s relationship with their children in the drily technical language of the sector, it is about establishing a long-term framework of care and love. We support the development of that long-term framework when we want improvements to be made to the decision-making processes for taking children into care.
The Scottish Government has been keen to highlight how the Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill goes some way towards meeting the challenges that are identified in the committee’s report. One of the measures in the bill that the Labour Party will support is the increase in the eligible age for aftercare for young people who have left care from 21 to 26. The permanence that we seek for children in care does not just involve ensuring that they have a roof over their heads. Stability does not mean just a house; it means having a home and friends and feeling valued, not just being accommodated.
One of the challenges of delivering public services is that the system that is in place in Scotland is a network of processes and multi-agency approaches that aims to develop a safety net that will catch and seek to protect the most vulnerable children in Scotland. It is vital that that succeeds, and we cannot afford for any child to slip through the gaps in our decision-making processes. We have guidelines for those vital processes, but a range of organisations expressed concern that the guidelines are still applied inconsistently across the country. Barnardo’s Scotland highlighted that each local authority has its own assessment process for handling risk assessment on taking children into care, which impacts on the potential outcomes for children according to where they live.
The report recognises the impact of GIRFEC and other child protection measures, but it acknowledges that current decision-making processes are not always delivering the best outcomes for children. We do not want to scrap the system and start again, but we need to make improvements.
Many of the points that are raised in the report, particularly about looked-after children, concern themes that the Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill covers. We will work with Aberlour Child Care Trust, Barnardo’s and Who Cares? Scotland to lodge a number of stage 2 amendments to improve the outcomes for looked-after children. However, we know that legislation alone is not enough and that we need a cultural shift in attitudes towards looked-after children. I look forward to working with colleagues to achieve that.
15:15
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Elaine Smith)
Lab
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-08480, in the name of Stewart Maxwell, on decision making on whether to take children into care.I call St...
Stewart Maxwell (West Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
Today’s debate comes soon after the stage 1 debate on the Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill. That discussion demonstrated strong cross-party support ...
The Minister for Children and Young People (Aileen Campbell)
SNP
I welcome this afternoon’s debate, which the Education and Culture Committee has brought to the chamber following its recent inquiry. I congratulate the comm...
Neil Findlay (Lothian) (Lab)
Lab
One of the ways to help young children in particular is childcare. Today, we have learned that the Scottish Government will receive £300 million in consequen...
Aileen Campbell
SNP
We have made clear within our bill our commitment to supporting children in their earliest years and we have set out our aspiration with the 600 hours of chi...
Neil Findlay
Lab
Will the minister take an intervention?
Aileen Campbell
SNP
Neil Findlay needs to consider his tone during this debate, which is about trying to work constructively together on this important issue.Improvement of corp...
Jayne Baxter (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Lab
As I am the newest member of the Education and Culture Committee, some might say that I had the luxury of considering the final report without having to unde...
Liz Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Con
I put on record apologies from my colleague Mary Scanlon, who was due to participate in the debate. As a result of the travel situation she has had to head b...
Liam McArthur (Orkney Islands) (LD)
LD
The member will recall the debate that we had in the committee about the fact that early intervention does not relate simply to the early years. Does she sha...
Liz Smith
Con
I absolutely share that concern—I do not think that we could doubt the evidence that was given to the committee on that point. However, we have had other car...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
We now turn to the open debate. At this stage, I can offer speeches of around six minutes, with time for interventions.15:22
George Adam (Paisley) (SNP)
SNP
The debate comes on the back of the Education and Culture Committee’s extensive inquiry into decision making on whether to take young children into care. As ...
Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab)
Lab
I thank the committee for taking on this challenging and contentious subject and for producing such a thoughtful and, I hope, helpful report.Given the broad ...
Liam McArthur
LD
One of the other things that we heard about early intervention is that it is not just about intervening with a view to taking a child away; it is about arriv...
Ken Macintosh
Lab
I entirely agree with Mr McArthur. Although I was highlighting acute need, I will return to that point and the need for quick support, early intervention and...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (John Scott)
Con
As members will be aware, there is quite a bit of time in hand, which will allow for interventions and even the development of themes and ideas. I now call C...
Clare Adamson (Central Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
Presiding Officer, thank you for that challenge at the start of my speech. I begin by associating myself with Stewart Maxwell’s comments about the witnesses ...
Liz Smith
Con
Clare Adamson has pointed to the frustration that I feel, and I do not deny that we have come some way towards addressing the problem. However, one of the mo...
Clare Adamson
SNP
I absolutely agree, and I have had the same experience when listening to such comments. However, we must recognise that the committee’s initial inquiry ident...
Liam McArthur (Orkney Islands) (LD)
LD
The issue of looked-after children and young people and how we improve the life experiences and outcomes for that group has dominated the work of the Educati...
Stewart Maxwell
SNP
I have listened to Liam McArthur’s speech very carefully and I agree with what he says. Does he share my concern about the decision-making process that leads...
Liam McArthur
LD
The committee convener is absolutely right on that point. It was one of the most striking aspects of the evidence that we received. Such situations almost se...
Colin Beattie (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
SNP
The inquiry has in some respects been difficult for the Education and Culture Committee. I for one hoped that, somewhere among the wealth of information and ...
Fiona McLeod (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
SNP
I rise to speak in the debate with little expertise in this subject, but with a great interest in it. That interest stems partly from my years as the chair o...
Ken Macintosh
Lab
Will the member give way?
Fiona McLeod
SNP
I will, but I probably will not understand Mr Macintosh’s point.
Ken Macintosh
Lab
My question is simply this: why would it be helpful for my six children to have a named person?
Fiona McLeod
SNP
I am a parent, like Ken Macintosh, and we never know when we might find ourselves vulnerable as a family. I do my absolute best as a parent, but that is not ...
Ken Macintosh
Lab
Will Fiona McLeod give way on that point?