Committee
Education, Children and Young People Committee 11 February 2026 [Draft]
11 Feb 2026 · S6 · Education, Children and Young People Committee
Item of business
Children (Care, Care Experience and Services Planning) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
I thank Ross Greer for lodging the amendments in this group. The amendments, and Mr Greer’s comments, highlight the impact that estrangement can have on young people who do not have the same family support network as their peers. I have spoken with Mr Greer about my keenness to ensure that we plug that gap, which I recognise exists. However, we need to do so in a way that does not impact on the rights of the care-experienced community.Amendments 152 and 153 would include in the bill children who are, and people who were as children,“cared for or supported as a consequence of being estranged from their family”as having the right to access care-experienced advocacy services, which will be implemented through regulations under section 4. However, it is important to be clear that the reasons for estrangement can be wide ranging and go far beyond the aims and the reach of the Promise and care experience.The regulation-making powers in section 4(6)(a) that will enable Scottish ministers to set out that care experience for the purposes of section 4 can include those who are“cared for or otherwise supported in such circumstances as may be specified”.That means that, if it is deemed appropriate, following consultation and engagement, Scottish ministers can make provision for people who are estranged from their families without express amendments to that effect being required, so far as those people are considered to have been in receipt of formal care or support in some way, such as through arrangements with a public authority. Amendments 152 and 153 would pre-empt the consultation that will inform the regulations, but I can commit to ensuring that consideration is given to estrangement during the engagement that will inform development of the regulations.Amendment 156 seeks to provide Scottish ministers with the power to define by regulations those who are cared for or supported as a consequence of being “estranged from their family”, for the purposes of section 4. That is beyond the guidance-based approach to defining care experience that is being taken forward in section 5. The amendment would set out a stronger position on estrangement than on care experience when the purpose of the guidance is to promote best practice and understanding of care experience and language use in interacting with and supporting people with care experience. I am keen to explore whether there is a suitable way to include estrangement while developing the wider guidance on care experience, and I would welcome further discussion with Mr Greer ahead of stage 3.I am also concerned about the need to define “family” that would arise through amendment 156. We know that the term can have different meanings to different people, and particularly for care-experienced people, so we would need to be careful to avoid setting what could be seen as arbitrary parameters around that.Amendments 162 and 163 relate to the care experience guidance under section 5. The amendments seek to take a prescriptive approach by including in the bill that additional category that must be covered in the guidance. However, that would move away from the flexibility that a guidance-based approach provides. Amendment 164 raises similar concerns.I want to put on record and assure Mr Greer that I am very sympathetic to the intention behind his amendments. I recognise the importance of ensuring that people, especially young adults, who are estranged from their families are properly supported and that public authorities fully understand the difficulties that they can face. That is why I have suggested looking at provisions in the bill relating to child support plans and at whether there is scope to address issues of estrangement in that way. I am happy to confirm my intention to work with Ross Greer and with advocates for estranged young people to develop amendments for stage 3. I therefore ask him not to press the amendments in the group, given the assurances that I have laid out.
In the same item of business
The Convener
Con
Welcome back. The final item on our agenda is day 2 of stage 2 proceedings for the Children (Care, Care Experience and Services Planning) (Scotland) Bill. Ag...
The Convener
Con
Amendment 152, in the name of Ross Greer, is grouped with amendments 153, 156 and 162 to 164.
Ross Greer (West Scotland) (Green)
Green
As the amendments in this group introduce a new topic into the debate, these will not be the briefest of remarks. I promise, though, that all my contribution...
Natalie Don-Innes
SNP
I thank Ross Greer for lodging the amendments in this group. The amendments, and Mr Greer’s comments, highlight the impact that estrangement can have on youn...
Ross Greer
Green
I am grateful to the minister for her remarks, and particularly for her commitment to work with me and others who are interested in the issue ahead of stage ...
The Convener
Con
The question is, that amendment 154 be agreed to. Are we agreed?Members: No.
The Convener
Con
There will be a division.
ForBriggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab)Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)AgainstAdam, ...
The Convener
Con
The result of the division is: For 4, Against 5, Abstentions 0.Amendment 154 disagreed to.Amendment 97 not moved.Amendment 155 moved—Martin Whitfield.
The Convener
Con
The question is, that amendment 155 be agreed to. Are we agreed?Members: No.
ForBriggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab)Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)AgainstAdam, George (Paisley) (SNP)Dunbar, Jacki...
The Convener
Con
The result of the division is: For 3, Against 6, Abstentions 0.Amendment 155 disagreed to.Amendment 156 not moved.Section 4 agreed to.After section 4Amendmen...
The Convener
Con
The question is, that amendment 157 be agreed to. Are we agreed?Members: No.
The Convener
Con
There will be a division.
ForBriggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab)Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)AgainstAdam, ...
The Convener
Con
The result of the division is: For 4, Against 5, Abstentions 0.Amendment 157 disagreed to.Amendment 100 moved—Roz McCall—and agreed to.Amendment 158 moved—Mi...
The Convener
Con
The question is, that amendment 158 be agreed to. Are we agreed?Members: No.
The Convener
Con
There will be a division.
ForBriggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab)Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)AgainstAdam, George (Paisley) (SNP)Dunbar, Jacki...
The Convener
Con
The result of the division is: For 3, Against 6, Abstentions 0.Amendment 158 disagreed to.Amendment 99 moved—Roz McCall.
The Convener
Con
The question is, that amendment 99 be agreed to. Are we agreed?Members: No.
The Convener
Con
There will be a division.
ForBriggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab)Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)AgainstAdam, George (Paisley) (SNP)Dunbar, Jacki...
The Convener
Con
The result of the division is: For 3, Against 6, Abstentions 0.Amendment 99 disagreed to.Amendment 159 moved—Roz McCall.
The Convener
Con
The question is, that amendment 159 be agreed to. Are we agreed?Members: No.
The Convener
Con
There will be a division.
ForBriggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con)Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab)Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con)AgainstAdam, ...
The Convener
Con
The result of the division is: For 4, Against 5, Abstentions 0.Amendment 159 disagreed to.Amendment 101 moved—Roz McCall.
The Convener
Con
The question is, that amendment 101 be agreed to. Are we agreed?Members: No.
The Convener
Con
There will be a division.