Hansard

I, too, thank Ruth Maguire for bringing this debate to the chamber—not least because it gives me another opportunity to talk in the chamber about my children. It is always a delight to do so.

One of the most recent innovations in my household is that my 18-month-old daughter has taken to leaving the sitting room and pulling the door closed behind her while saying “Buh-bye”—then, a couple of moments later, a wee smiley face pops round the door going, “Ello”. That demonstrates the importance of play. By doing that, my daughter is exploring language, learning how to use words and, what is more, having a wee laugh while she does it. That encapsulates just how important play is in the development of children.

We are right to talk about the importance of article 31 and children’s right to relax, play and take part in cultural and artistic activities, but the issue is much more important than that, because it is about how our children learn. The insight that children need to play in order to learn goes back to the early 20th century. The importance of play to children’s cognitive and emotional development, to their ability to self-regulate and to their language development has been well demonstrated. The 16 most powerful predictors of children’s academic achievement are based on how well they learn to play, so it is concerning that the area in which children are allowed to range and play unsupervised has shrunk by 90 per cent since the 1970s. The debate is important and we need to talk about the issues because play is not just our children’s right, but what they need in order to learn.

I will talk briefly about an Edinburgh scheme in which I took part last year: the playing out scheme. As a result of frenetic activity and lobbying by a group of parents, a number of roads in Edinburgh were closed for a single day so that children could go out and play. It was fantastic. There was chalk drawing on pavements and bicycle races going up and down the roads, and parents were standing talking, drinking coffee and sharing home baking. There were huge benefits—not just to the children but to the adults and the communities in which they live. This year there will be a five-month-long pilot from April to August. Streets can be closed on five dates in that period. The council has prepared a simple checklist and application form, and it is free for parents to apply to take part. The scheme is a demonstration of a simple thing that addresses many of the challenges. It enables and makes it easy for parents to take the initiative, and it is exactly the sort of thing that we should be considering.

We should welcome the play charter, which sets out a number of great things, but it is key that we ensure that the actions are embedded in policy. The play strategy that the Government has set out is right, but we also need to set out the challenges. One in six children in Scotland does not have access to outdoor space, 85 per cent of children in Scotland say that they do not spend enough time engaged in free play, and more than 1,000 Scottish schools have no access to outdoor facilities. We must just offer warm words and support the actions, but instead set challenges for the Government.

This is a consensual debate and it should remain so, but when we talk about facilities, we need talk about local services and the impact of local funding. We must have some innovation. Schemes such as playing out will come at little cost to local government. We should consider whether we should be opening our schools during summer holidays in order to enable play and to address issues of childcare in the holidays. We also need to talk about local services. If we are to have accessible and stimulating parks in which our children can play, that requires investment in local services.

I thank Ruth Maguire for securing the debate: the topic is hugely important. We should all champion play, but we should also challenge the Government: let us have some action and let us have some investment.