Hansard

That is only half the story. Registrations also include children on waiting lists, and they could be on more than one list. Those children do not have the entitlement that they deserve. Registration figures are not an accurate reflection of demand.

Statistics from the fair funding for our kids group, which has spoken to the First Minister about the issue, show that 29 out of 32 local authorities have registrations of three-year-olds that are more than 100 per cent, which tells us that there is a serious problem.

In the 47 partnership nurseries in Glasgow, 873 children out of 1,608 eligible children received their entitlement. In West Lothian, in 23 partnership nurseries only 335 children out of 673 eligible children had their funding. Those statistics, which have been compiled extremely methodically by parents groups, tell quite a lot about the story.

The Scottish Government faces criticism from local authorities, which are clear that they do not have enough money to make the necessary provision for the additional places because the fatal mistake has been made of thinking that costs rise in the same proportion as the additional hours provided. That is incorrect. The local authorities say that the Scottish Government fails to recognise the need for additional staff and infrastructure. They point out that, from August 2015, the definition of a vulnerable two-year-old will change. There is therefore no chance that local authorities will fulfil their statutory duties as set out in paragraph 159 of guidance on the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014, which says:

“Annual incremental increases in funding from the Scottish Government will enable education authorities to increase flexibility and choice on an annual basis.”

That is simply not happening. It has an added detrimental effect, which is that, because many providers are not receiving as much money as they need from the local authority, they are pushing up the costs for the privately funded hours, making it more expensive for parents and, in some cases, defeating the purpose of the policy.

While we are on the subject of choice, can we deal with the myth that private nurseries are making a profit? They most certainly are not. What they are in the business of doing is providing the additional flexibility that state nurseries cannot; for example, they are often open for longer hours and they offer holiday cover. Let us also remember that some families using childminders and nannies are unable to access free hours at all.

However, the real issue for parents is the restriction of choice. East Dunbartonshire Council, East Lothian Council and Glasgow City Council have all restricted the number of places that they fund in partnership nurseries, which means that many parents have had to move their children from one nursery to another if they can no longer get a funded place at the existing nursery. That is why many parents believe that thousands of children are missing out on provision because local authority nurseries are unable to provide suitable hours for working parents. This was a flagship policy before the referendum, but it is some flagship if thousands of children are not getting that entitlement.

There is a marked variation throughout Scotland in the allocation process, which means that parents are often open to a lottery. Local authorities purchase partnership places using different procurement processes, set against different criteria. In Glasgow, for example, geographical lots are drawn that give the most places to nurseries that have the highest rating, which is 5. That has the potential to be a good thing if it drives up standards, but it is not a good thing if the same practice is not applied to other nurseries. It could mean that very good nurseries that receive a rating of 4—which is pretty good, but not quite a 5—in an area of the city with a high number of successful nurseries will lose out. That system is unfair. It comes back to the evidence that has been provided by many parents.

Those issues combined make the current funding arrangements restrictive and unfair. They are happening at the same time as the Scottish Government persists in its perverse logic, which denies all children born in the winter months the same nursery provision that is afforded to those born in the summer months. When the First Minister was questioned on that at First Minister’s question time back in November, she said that her commitment to ensuring that level of childcare was “real, genuine and strong”. So far, however, nothing has happened, so that was patently disingenuous. There is absolutely no equitable defence of that birthday discrimination, and I ask the Scottish Government to have a look at it.

Many times, there has been consensual agreement in this Parliament about the importance of the early years and, therefore, of the policies that surround them. However, we need to translate warm words and manifesto commitments into reality. It is patently clear at the moment that we have the warm words, but we are very far away from a workable policy that would allow all children to access their entitlement. Not for the first time in this Parliament, members have rejected a Scottish Conservative policy simply because it contains the word “voucher”, but let us be clear about the motion. It reflects exactly what is happening in the City of Edinburgh Council, whereby activation of a code given to a parent by the council allows the parent to access the necessary care. It is a virtual voucher, if you like, and it works because it allows the money to follow the child. That model has been patented by an SNP/Labour-led council, so I hope that it will not be rejected on the ground of any dogma or ideology.

The Scottish Conservatives see this as a hugely significant issue—indeed, we will make it a priority manifesto commitment for 2016. Parents must have choice and the system must have the flexibility to deliver the entitlement that has been promised by the Scottish Government.

I move,

That the Parliament notes the recent survey by the Family and Childcare Trust, which stated that fewer than one in six councils in Scotland had enough childcare capacity to meet the needs of working parents; recognises that most council-run nurseries do not provide the flexibility needed by working parents; believes that, in order to help more parents remain in, or re-enter, the workforce, parents need to be able to take up their child’s nursery entitlement at an establishment offering hours that fit in with their working patterns; welcomes the Scottish Government’s pledge to give every three and four-year-old 600 hours of government-funded nursery provision, but is concerned that too many parents are unable to access their entitlement due to the hours or location on offer from local authorities, and therefore calls on the Scottish Government to introduce greater flexibility into the system through a virtual childcare voucher to ensure that all children in Scotland are guaranteed their entitlement by allowing parents to use any nursery that meets Education Scotland’s and the Care Inspectorate’s standards.