Meeting of the Parliament 14 January 2026
I think that it will make an improvement, but it is all part of the tone with regard to the Promise that we are making to children and young people. Trust in Government is not great among those people, so we need to be honest. We also need to be honest about the fact that we are not on track to deliver the Promise. As much as we would like to say that we are, simply saying so does not make it happen. We are quite far behind where we should be in delivering the Promise.
I come across too many examples in which we still have crisis-driven care. Rather than acting early to prevent a crisis, all that we are doing is constantly putting out fires. That is in large part because we simply do not have the social work workforce to be able to cope with it all. Those in that workforce are under incredible stress, and we hear evidence at committee time after time that they are simply underresourced. Social work is the first point of contact for an awful lot of young people who are in desperate need of help. I would, therefore, caution that we should tone down the rhetoric. Let us be honest with people about where we are, and ensure that we can fix the system for the future.
Nevertheless, there are some very positive measures in the bill, such as the national register for foster carers, along with the measures on independent advocacy, aftercare post-16—although we need to be mindful of those who may have left care before the age of 16 and would, therefore, not necessarily be entitled to that support—and corporate parenting.
Like Ross Greer, I want to push the Government further on family group decision making. It is very clear in the Promise that we should be taking preventative action and early intervention. It specifically mentions family group decision making and ensuring that the children’s hearings system is more specialised and restricted in its scope in the future because we are acting at an earlier stage. The benefits of that approach are clear, because we might end up with fewer young people in care, and the voices of those who do go into care will be heard more loudly.
However, the reach of family group decision making does not go far enough. I commend the City of Edinburgh Council and Glasgow City Council, as the approach is well embedded in those local authorities, but it should be everywhere. I know that the minister wants to go down the route of organic development—I understand that. However, England is legislating for the approach and progressing down the route of family group decision making. I urge the minister to consider why, if it is such a good thing, we cannot simply state that everyone has to do it and it has to be available everywhere.
Duncan Dunlop has helpfully provided me with some powerful amendments, which I will lodge at stage 2, on the right to return. He cites compelling evidence from North Yorkshire that even simply saying, “We’re there for you when you need us,” while it might not result in an awful lot of returns, leaves the door open to providing support. In addition, guaranteed employment placements for care-experienced people in the public sector and ensuring that we have a premature death register for such people could help to bring greater confidence into the sector.
The other area in which I would urge a bit of caution concerns eradicating profit in the sector. CELCIS, for which I have a huge amount of respect—its representatives have given some of the best evidence in our committee sessions—is urging caution, too, because some of the best providers do make a profit. It is about ensuring that we keep under control the degree of the profit that is made, rather than eradicating profit altogether. If a good service is being provided—and the profits are often reinvested back into the service—we should surely be encouraging those kinds of providers.
Finally, I want the minister to understand that we are with her on this and will support the bill at stage 1. We are looking for further amendments to ensure that we can make the bill the best that it possibly can be. My appeal to the Government is that, in the next session of the Parliament, we need to ensure that we have a structure that gives full support to delivering the Promise. Under the current arrangement, we simply do not have the heft of the whole of the Government delivering what should be one of its top priorities.