Hansard

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 starting point is for us to set out what should be our shared ambition for looked-after children. Having heard contributions from all sides of the chamber, I believe that our shared ambition is that looked-after children should have the same opportunities as every other child in the country. That must be the key driver for our approach to looked-after children, because there can be no second-class citizens in Scotland.

In delivering that objective, the key factor that must always lie at the heart of any decision-making process is of course the need to consider what is best for the child. That must be paramount and it is therefore necessary for each case to turn on its own facts and circumstances—that is to say, these matters must be dealt with on an individual, case-by-case basis. It is self-evident that each child is different and has a unique set of circumstances. Determining what is right and best for the child can be a difficult balancing act. I pay tribute to all those workers who deal with these issues day in and day out, because they provide a magnificent service to children. It is our job to facilitate ways to ensure that they can do even more for the looked-after children in their care.

The whole system must be focused on deciding what is best for the child. That in itself means that we cannot set any arbitrary time limits, as may happen elsewhere, because it precludes the possibility of treating each case on an individual basis. However, that is not to say that improvements to the system cannot be made. I welcome the Scottish Government’s approach in embarking on an ambitious set of plans to secure better outcomes for looked-after children in Scotland.

In that respect, I will focus on three areas of interest. The first, which other members have alluded to today, deals with circumstances in which parental rights are being pursued. In such circumstances, it is inevitable that time—often, quite considerable time—will pass as the legal processes are gone through and a conclusion is reached one way or the other. Therefore, it would be worth considering whether, in certain circumstances, it could be appropriate to proceed with concurrent planning, which has been suggested by Barnardo’s Scotland. As far as I understand its proposal, plans to move a child into a permanent care setting would be progressed alongside plans to keep the child with the birth parents. With such a proposal, one would have to safeguard the rights of the birth parents.

I heard what my colleague, Stephen Maxwell—I am sorry, I mean Stewart Maxwell; I will never hear the end of that—said about balancing the rights of birth parents with what is best for the child. In our legal system, everyone has rights, and we must ensure that our processes respect the rights of the birth parents. The key question is to see what else we can do to facilitate the speeding up of the system. That is an area that is worth exploring, and I hope that the minister will indicate whether the Scottish Government is prepared to do so, together with the relevant agencies.

It is to be hoped and expected, given the positive developments south of the border, that the launching of the adoption register in Scotland will increase adoptions here and speed up the process. That positive move should be considered alongside two pivotal developments. One is that there is to be promotion by the Government of foster carers becoming permanent or long-term carers. I welcome that development, although I suspect that some foster carers will be wondering why it has taken quite so long to get to this stage. The second development, which is also to be welcomed, is that, after a gap of some 15 years, Barnardo’s Scotland is to resume adoption and placement services. That will be a significant development in securing better outcomes in the future.

We have heard this afternoon about permanence and stability. It is clear from the evidence—we have all read the various briefing papers—that ensuring permanence and stability will have a significant beneficial impact on the life chances of looked-after children, so it is vital that such goals are embodied at all stages of the system around looked-after children. I welcome the establishment of CELCIS, which I understand will be focused on ensuring that the twin threads of permanence and stability run throughout the delivery of services across the piece.

There is nothing more important than the future wellbeing of children. Therefore, it is incumbent on all of us—as individuals and as parliamentarians—to do all that we can to ensure that children’s opportunities in life are nurtured and promoted and that no door is closed as a result of any action of, or inaction by, the state. I am therefore encouraged to note the Scottish Government’s ambitious approach to looked-after children.

I hope that, in her summing up, the minister will indicate whether, in her on-going monitoring of the various programmes that are being rolled out, she will come back to the chamber to update us on the progress that is being made.

15:29