Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 02 November 2011
02 Nov 2011 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Looked-after Children
I welcome the debate and the chance to discuss improving Scotland’s adoption service and the opportunities and life chances of some of Scotland’s most vulnerable children. It is appropriate, during national adoption week, for us to discuss the Government’s response to the SCRA’s report on care and permanence planning for looked-after children, as well as wider issues relating to looked-after children.
While the report focuses on the important issue of reducing the time needed to find a permanent home for looked-after children, Parliament is today giving a clear commitment to the importance of permanence and stability for young children, while recognising that that may mean different things for different families. Long-term stability for a child should and can include permanent foster and kinship care as well as residential care as a positive option.
Adoptions, the role of corporate parents and the care of looked-after children have all changed dramatically in recent generations. We have recently seen a dramatic rise—of almost 16,000—in the number of looked-after children, with 9,000 of those children not cared for by their birth parents, yet only a tiny number of those are adopted. Last year it was 218.
While we are doing all we can to support birth parents, there is potential to offer increased stability and a family life to some of Scotland’s most vulnerable children by increasing the number of adopted children. As the Government has stated, a number of steps have already been taken to support agencies, families and children who are seeking adoption. The national adoption register is in its infancy but it has the potential to contribute to a more effective system. I share the minister’s hope that all local authorities will sign up to the register by the end of the year. I was encouraged by her comments about showing leadership to local authorities and expecting them to deliver in this area.
The implementation of the Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007 simplified the legal framework. The centre for excellence for looked-after children, which gave excellent evidence to the Education and Culture Committee yesterday, has an important role to play in improving local practice and children’s welfare.
The SCRA report raises a number of issues about the length of time the adoption process takes. Those delays can have serious consequences and can work against the best interests of the child. As the minister said, bureaucracy should not stand in the way of a child’s future. The two key factors to achieving successful adoption are the age at entry to the care system and the length of time that is then spent in care. Recent research by the University of Bristol shows that every year of delay in the system reduces the chances of the child being adopted by 20 per cent. It is recognised that adoption has the best chance of success the younger the child is placed. There might be truth in that, but it is not always easily realised in the desire to explore all avenues to enable children to stay at home. Getting the balance between those competing outcomes can be difficult.
Shortening the length of time in the system will improve outcomes. The Government’s response to the SCRA report comes forward with practical measures, such as setting strict timescales and more effective sharing of good practice. Those measures are all welcome.
Labour’s amendment highlights some of the issues being raised by Barnardo’s Scotland. Although the identified actions are welcome, it would be helpful for the Government to clarify the timescales for change, how it will measure improvements for children who are furthest from the possibility of adoption and have the most complex needs and challenging problems, and what resources will be available to deliver on the recommendations.
At committee yesterday we heard of the pressure on budgets that deliver for looked-after children and their families. What will be the priorities for the early years and early intervention change fund? The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children Scotland’s briefing for the debate highlights the pressures faced by Dundee City Council, where the trend towards taking more and younger children into care is having a financial impact on children’s services, although nobody doubts that the right decisions are being made. The pressures are projected only to grow.
As our amendment highlights, Citizens Advice Scotland analyses local authority kinship care practice and there is still a gap between the Scottish Government’s ambition for kinship carers and delivery on the ground. There has been a rapid growth in the number of children in kinship care, with an estimate that more than 20,000 children will be living in non-looked-after kinship care arrangements by 2014. My colleague Claudia Beamish will talk more about that group of children. I am sure that the minister will agree that more needs to be done to support those families and provide consistency throughout Scotland.
Since its early years, the Scottish Parliament has been concerned with the care of looked-after children. From “These Are Our Bairns” to Scotland’s adoption register, successive Governments have stated their commitment to raising standards and there is a commitment to all partners taking seriously their responsibility as corporate parents and to the child being at the centre of decision making. All Governments have taken action to try to deliver on those priorities but there is much to do before we are all satisfied that the needs of all looked-after children are being fully met.
Barnardo’s said this week that Scotland, as a corporate parent, is currently failing too many looked-after and accommodated children and young people, which is an evaluation that no minister will hear without a desire to take action. Barnardo’s is an organisation that works on the front line and often deals with very difficult and challenging children and their families. We need to listen when it states:
“The quicker we can make these decisions, painful as they are, the better it will be for the outcome of the child.”
Barnardo’s is challenging the current arrangements and assumptions. It is perhaps a sign of the times that this week it is launching its adoption and placement service. However, it is talking not only about the adoption process but about how we approach the welfare of looked-after children and where the balance lies between birth parents and alternative arrangements.
Barnardo’s promotes the importance of concurrent planning, whereby plans to move a child into a permanent care setting, such as adoption and long-term foster care, are progressed alongside plans to keep a child with their birth parents. That helps to speed up the process once a decision to move a child from their birth parents is made. Of course, all that requires resources: not only money but time.
The minister is certainly right when she says that adoption must be easier to do and quicker. I fully acknowledge the concerns that Gil Paterson raised about the issue and the need for a measured approach. Nevertheless, we need to encourage more people to consider adoption. Professor Ken Norrie sounded a note of caution at the weekend: speeding up the process must be done in the context of the knowledge that many birth parents will fight a decision for their child to be permanently removed. The complexities of the system are, in some cases, unavoidable, but everything must be done to limit the impact on the child.
NSPCC Scotland’s briefing also highlights the New Orleans intervention model, which it is piloting with Glasgow City Council and NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to inform and improve decision making about permanence. The increased recognition of the importance of early years development and strong attachment relationships for later life and of the need for greater early intervention is driving the pilot, which may provide a model to meet some of the challenges being faced by Scotland in caring for our most vulnerable and at-risk children.
There is evidence of improved early decision making and in some cases there is increased confidence about what action needs to be taken. In 2009-10, fewer children came into care than in previous years; however, more children under the age of 1 are starting to be looked after. That suggests improvement in the effectiveness of early interventions. As witnesses at the Education and Culture Committee’s inquiry on the educational attainment of looked-after children made clear yesterday, stable and consistent care placements deliver more positive outcomes for looked-after children and young people.
This is a difficult and emotive subject but decision making can be easier when the child’s needs are put first. We must be challenged to consider the options that will work best in the child’s short and long-term interests. Multiple short-term placements, too long a wait for a permanent home and insecurity all serve to develop or entrench complex needs and can result in a child being taken further away from the solution that might have avoided some of those difficulties in the first place.
As we study the evidence, it is difficult not to become frustrated and overwhelmed by the depth of the challenge. I cannot imagine what it is like for a child in very difficult circumstances, for the professionals working on the front line and for the families, parents and prospective parents trying to find resolution. However, this is a positive debate. If—and when—we get this right, the benefits will be huge. A child will get a proper start in life, will be nurtured and supported, will be encouraged and cared for by a loving family and will learn lessons that they can carry through their lives and into their own families.
I move amendment S4M-01197.2, to insert at end:
“; calls on the Scottish Government to set out the timescales to achieve the actions set out in its response to the report and state how it will measure improvements for those children with the most complex needs and challenging problems; asks whether additional resources will be available to ensure that the report’s recommendations are achieved, and draws attention to a new study by Citizens Advice Scotland that shows that two thirds of the 19 local authorities that it surveyed are still not paying kinship carers the same as foster carers.”
15:01
While the report focuses on the important issue of reducing the time needed to find a permanent home for looked-after children, Parliament is today giving a clear commitment to the importance of permanence and stability for young children, while recognising that that may mean different things for different families. Long-term stability for a child should and can include permanent foster and kinship care as well as residential care as a positive option.
Adoptions, the role of corporate parents and the care of looked-after children have all changed dramatically in recent generations. We have recently seen a dramatic rise—of almost 16,000—in the number of looked-after children, with 9,000 of those children not cared for by their birth parents, yet only a tiny number of those are adopted. Last year it was 218.
While we are doing all we can to support birth parents, there is potential to offer increased stability and a family life to some of Scotland’s most vulnerable children by increasing the number of adopted children. As the Government has stated, a number of steps have already been taken to support agencies, families and children who are seeking adoption. The national adoption register is in its infancy but it has the potential to contribute to a more effective system. I share the minister’s hope that all local authorities will sign up to the register by the end of the year. I was encouraged by her comments about showing leadership to local authorities and expecting them to deliver in this area.
The implementation of the Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007 simplified the legal framework. The centre for excellence for looked-after children, which gave excellent evidence to the Education and Culture Committee yesterday, has an important role to play in improving local practice and children’s welfare.
The SCRA report raises a number of issues about the length of time the adoption process takes. Those delays can have serious consequences and can work against the best interests of the child. As the minister said, bureaucracy should not stand in the way of a child’s future. The two key factors to achieving successful adoption are the age at entry to the care system and the length of time that is then spent in care. Recent research by the University of Bristol shows that every year of delay in the system reduces the chances of the child being adopted by 20 per cent. It is recognised that adoption has the best chance of success the younger the child is placed. There might be truth in that, but it is not always easily realised in the desire to explore all avenues to enable children to stay at home. Getting the balance between those competing outcomes can be difficult.
Shortening the length of time in the system will improve outcomes. The Government’s response to the SCRA report comes forward with practical measures, such as setting strict timescales and more effective sharing of good practice. Those measures are all welcome.
Labour’s amendment highlights some of the issues being raised by Barnardo’s Scotland. Although the identified actions are welcome, it would be helpful for the Government to clarify the timescales for change, how it will measure improvements for children who are furthest from the possibility of adoption and have the most complex needs and challenging problems, and what resources will be available to deliver on the recommendations.
At committee yesterday we heard of the pressure on budgets that deliver for looked-after children and their families. What will be the priorities for the early years and early intervention change fund? The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children Scotland’s briefing for the debate highlights the pressures faced by Dundee City Council, where the trend towards taking more and younger children into care is having a financial impact on children’s services, although nobody doubts that the right decisions are being made. The pressures are projected only to grow.
As our amendment highlights, Citizens Advice Scotland analyses local authority kinship care practice and there is still a gap between the Scottish Government’s ambition for kinship carers and delivery on the ground. There has been a rapid growth in the number of children in kinship care, with an estimate that more than 20,000 children will be living in non-looked-after kinship care arrangements by 2014. My colleague Claudia Beamish will talk more about that group of children. I am sure that the minister will agree that more needs to be done to support those families and provide consistency throughout Scotland.
Since its early years, the Scottish Parliament has been concerned with the care of looked-after children. From “These Are Our Bairns” to Scotland’s adoption register, successive Governments have stated their commitment to raising standards and there is a commitment to all partners taking seriously their responsibility as corporate parents and to the child being at the centre of decision making. All Governments have taken action to try to deliver on those priorities but there is much to do before we are all satisfied that the needs of all looked-after children are being fully met.
Barnardo’s said this week that Scotland, as a corporate parent, is currently failing too many looked-after and accommodated children and young people, which is an evaluation that no minister will hear without a desire to take action. Barnardo’s is an organisation that works on the front line and often deals with very difficult and challenging children and their families. We need to listen when it states:
“The quicker we can make these decisions, painful as they are, the better it will be for the outcome of the child.”
Barnardo’s is challenging the current arrangements and assumptions. It is perhaps a sign of the times that this week it is launching its adoption and placement service. However, it is talking not only about the adoption process but about how we approach the welfare of looked-after children and where the balance lies between birth parents and alternative arrangements.
Barnardo’s promotes the importance of concurrent planning, whereby plans to move a child into a permanent care setting, such as adoption and long-term foster care, are progressed alongside plans to keep a child with their birth parents. That helps to speed up the process once a decision to move a child from their birth parents is made. Of course, all that requires resources: not only money but time.
The minister is certainly right when she says that adoption must be easier to do and quicker. I fully acknowledge the concerns that Gil Paterson raised about the issue and the need for a measured approach. Nevertheless, we need to encourage more people to consider adoption. Professor Ken Norrie sounded a note of caution at the weekend: speeding up the process must be done in the context of the knowledge that many birth parents will fight a decision for their child to be permanently removed. The complexities of the system are, in some cases, unavoidable, but everything must be done to limit the impact on the child.
NSPCC Scotland’s briefing also highlights the New Orleans intervention model, which it is piloting with Glasgow City Council and NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to inform and improve decision making about permanence. The increased recognition of the importance of early years development and strong attachment relationships for later life and of the need for greater early intervention is driving the pilot, which may provide a model to meet some of the challenges being faced by Scotland in caring for our most vulnerable and at-risk children.
There is evidence of improved early decision making and in some cases there is increased confidence about what action needs to be taken. In 2009-10, fewer children came into care than in previous years; however, more children under the age of 1 are starting to be looked after. That suggests improvement in the effectiveness of early interventions. As witnesses at the Education and Culture Committee’s inquiry on the educational attainment of looked-after children made clear yesterday, stable and consistent care placements deliver more positive outcomes for looked-after children and young people.
This is a difficult and emotive subject but decision making can be easier when the child’s needs are put first. We must be challenged to consider the options that will work best in the child’s short and long-term interests. Multiple short-term placements, too long a wait for a permanent home and insecurity all serve to develop or entrench complex needs and can result in a child being taken further away from the solution that might have avoided some of those difficulties in the first place.
As we study the evidence, it is difficult not to become frustrated and overwhelmed by the depth of the challenge. I cannot imagine what it is like for a child in very difficult circumstances, for the professionals working on the front line and for the families, parents and prospective parents trying to find resolution. However, this is a positive debate. If—and when—we get this right, the benefits will be huge. A child will get a proper start in life, will be nurtured and supported, will be encouraged and cared for by a loving family and will learn lessons that they can carry through their lives and into their own families.
I move amendment S4M-01197.2, to insert at end:
“; calls on the Scottish Government to set out the timescales to achieve the actions set out in its response to the report and state how it will measure improvements for those children with the most complex needs and challenging problems; asks whether additional resources will be available to ensure that the report’s recommendations are achieved, and draws attention to a new study by Citizens Advice Scotland that shows that two thirds of the 19 local authorities that it surveyed are still not paying kinship carers the same as foster carers.”
15:01
References in this contribution
Motions, questions or amendments mentioned by their reference code.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Tricia Marwick)
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-01197, in the name of Angela Constance, on reducing the time needed to find a permanent home for looked-a...
The Minister for Children and Young People (Angela Constance)
SNP
Thank you for your generosity, Presiding Officer.As I am sure we are all aware, this week is national adoption week, which aims to raise awareness of the ben...
Rhoda Grant (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Lab
The Parliament welcomed the steps taken by the Government to ensure that kinship carers receive the same benefits as foster carers, but that has not been imp...
Angela Constance
SNP
As Ms Grant is well aware, local authorities are best placed to make decisions about financial support for kinship carers and children at local level. That i...
Gil Paterson (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
SNP
I know that the minister is aware that I adopted a daughter, so I have some knowledge of this issue. Does she agree that time still requires to be taken in p...
Angela Constance
SNP
I am sure that Mr Paterson agrees that we can achieve thorough and timely assessments. I can imagine how adoptions, which birth parents often contest in the ...
Hanzala Malik (Glasgow) (Lab)
Lab
One of the issues facing minority communities, particularly visible minority communities, is that adoptions are not taking place within those communities—chi...
Angela Constance
SNP
That is an example of the type of work that we hope is evident in the adoption and permanence plans that local authorities will have to provide to me by Apri...
Claire Baker (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Lab
I welcome the debate and the chance to discuss improving Scotland’s adoption service and the opportunities and life chances of some of Scotland’s most vulner...
Liz Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Con
There is no greater responsibility than bringing up children—and no greater responsibility for the state than ensuring that children who, for one reason or a...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
I mention to members who will take part in the open debate that we have a little bit of time in hand, so if they wish to take interventions, I will ensure th...
Stewart Maxwell (West Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
I begin by putting on record my admiration for the work that is done by all those people who are involved in caring for looked-after children in Scotland. Al...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
The member should wind up.
Stewart Maxwell
SNP
Thank you, Presiding Officer.Are we searching for the perfect outcome for children when the reality is that no child is brought up, even by their birth paren...
Claudia Beamish (South Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
I welcome the opportunity to speak in a debate on an issue that is close to my heart, and I am encouraged by the cross-party agreement in the area.I want to ...
Annabelle Ewing (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
SNP
I hear what the member says, but I understand that the Scottish Government funds the national advice and support service for kinship carers and that consider...
Claudia Beamish
Lab
I thank the member for that helpful intervention. I completely accept that point, but when we consider the range of services that the Midlothian group and pe...
Annabelle Ewing (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
SNP
I, too, am pleased to speak in this important debate on reducing the time needed to find a permanent home for looked-after children. As has been said, the st...
Richard Lyle (Central Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
I could talk about this subject for hours but, in case the Presiding Officer is concerned, I assure her that I will stick to my six minutes.National adoption...
Anne McTaggart (Glasgow) (Lab)
Lab
I add my support for Monday’s launch of national adoption week, which I am sure every member will support. I also acknowledge the foster carers, kinship care...
Kevin Stewart (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
SNP
I refer members to my entry in the register of interests. The fact that I am a member of Aberdeen City Council will come up in my speech.When I joined Aberde...
Liam McArthur (Orkney Islands) (LD)
LD
Last week, members discussed how we can best raise the ambition and attainment of our children and young people. It is not surprising that much of that debat...
George Adam (Paisley) (SNP)
SNP
As Kevin Stewart did, I declare an interest as a councillor, but with Renfrewshire Council. As with other issues that we have discussed, I never really thoug...
Jean Urquhart (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
SNP
As other member have done, I welcome the debate and the minister’s clear commitment to changing for the better the lives of some of our children. I also ackn...
Sandra White (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
SNP
I have taken part in similar debates in previous sessions of the Parliament, and the issue does not seem to move on. Jean Urquhart mentioned that we have to ...
Jean Urquhart
SNP
I agree with that. That is the point that I had hoped to convey, so I am sorry if it did not come across.Yesterday, the Education and Culture Committee heard...
Mary Fee (West Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
I, too, declare an interest. I am a councillor and for four years—until May this year—I was on Renfrewshire Council’s adoption panel.During my time on the pa...
Clare Adamson (Central Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
I declare my interest as a corporate parent, as an elected member of North Lanarkshire Council.The SNP Government has demonstrated its commitment to all of S...
Graeme Pearson (South Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
It is with trepidation and some humility that I speak in this debate. Trepidation because the subject matter is very important to us all—it is heartening to ...
Derek Mackay (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
SNP
The member makes some interesting points. In a spirit of consensus, Mary Fee, George Adam and others have complimented Renfrewshire Council on its leadership...