Hansard

I declare an interest in that my husband is a service manager in children and families social work and is also a registered social worker.

With only a few months of this parliamentary session left, I am sure that we are all reflecting on what has been achieved and prioritised over the past five years—and, with only some 30 sitting days left, on what has perhaps not been prioritised as we would have expected. Indeed, we are reflecting on a period prior to that, going back into the previous session of the Parliament. In the final year of the previous session, the SNP Government asked the Parliament to make a promise to deliver on the findings of the independent care review by 2030. It then fell to the Parliament to progress that in its current session. The former First Minister herself made that ask of everybody in the Parliament and is asking everyone here today to move that forward.

This afternoon, we should begin by reflecting on the evidence on the progress that has been made in the delivery of that promise. Although it is the responsibility of Parliament, it is the current Government that sets the direction, the agenda and the legislative programme in the Parliament in order to drive forward the progress that we would all expect to see. We are all concerned—as we should be—about the evidence pointing to our not being as far on as we should be and not making the progress that we are all committed to.

The third report of the Promise Oversight Board, which marked the halfway point in time on the journey to keeping the Promise by 2030, has made that abundantly clear. The minister needs no reminding that that report was lamentable for the Government in many ways, and concluded that

“Scotland is not halfway towards keeping its promise.”

The report noted that the Promise cannot be kept without the Scottish Government, and that it has taken

“too long to produce a delivery plan and too long to respond to the serious concerns raised in our first two reports.”

It further commented:

“The relationship between Scottish Government and local government is creating unnecessary tension in delivering the promise.”

We have already heard allusions to that with regard to where solutions could have been found—and they were offered in evidence to the Education, Children and Young People Committee in terms of the relationship between the spheres of government and the different sectors that will have an influence on achieving what we all want to see by 2030.

The Oversight Board’s report was unequivocal in its call for the Scottish Government “to redouble their efforts”. That is part of the reason why the bill represents a huge opportunity, although there is a risk to it, too, if it is not able to drive forward the progress that we would want to see.

Interrogating the evidence before us that came through the committee process and that has been presented for this debate, I think that the bill might fall into that category of risk. That is very much of concern, and I am sure that that is lamentable for many of us in the chamber. It has taken more than three years from the commitment to a bill in the implementation plan to reach today’s stage 1 debate. As I said in opening my remarks, we will all be reflecting that we have just 30 legislative days left in this session, and we are considering a bill that is meant to drive us towards the progress that we need to see by 2030. I noted the minister’s optimism in her opening speech, but this is a serious issue. Colleagues are already picking up on that, and we will hear much about it in the debate. What can we reasonably expect in amending the bill within the 30 days that we have left, given that stage 2 will begin its progress next week? That will be a theme this afternoon: that many of the things that we would like to see in the bill might not be achievable in the timeframe that has been provided.

Much of what is in the bill as introduced falls short of what was expected. Stakeholders have been calling for legislation, but they are increasingly frustrated by the approach of the Government. Indeed, in its risk profile for the bill, the most recent oversight report said that it could end up being

“a ready-made excuse to slow the process down and to seek further consultations”.

So far, the Government’s approach to engagement with stakeholders and other parties on what the bill needs to do and how it will be amended exactly meets that warning.

I joined the Education, Children and Young People Committee only after it had concluded taking its evidence on the bill, but I have taken time to go through its stage 1 report. What I find most striking is how keen stakeholders were to talk not just about the deficiencies of what is in the bill, but—in relation to the wider point that I am making—their concerns about what is not in the bill.

We have already heard that stakeholders can see that, unless there is a step change in the bill throughout the stage 2 and 3 processes—in relation to dealing with a cluttered legislative and policy landscape, accountability for the Promise, or early intervention and workforce issues—the bill will not be the significant driver that is required to meet the Promise by 2030.

We on the Labour benches have sought commitments from the Scottish Government on the changes that will need to be made at those stages. However, there has been something of a refusal to elaborate on the detail before this stage 1 debate. That does not fill me with confidence. Our suggested amendments have included measures on aftercare, corporate parenting, advocacy services, reform of children’s hearings and the issues in relation to UNCRC compliance that my colleague Martin Whitfield outlined.

I find it disappointing that the Government has not offered fulsome engagement this week. The minister is shaking her head but, two days ago, the Education, Children and Young People Committee received a letter from her that said that she could not elaborate on many of those details and that we would have to wait until the stage 2 process. I do not think that that is good enough, given where we are in the process.

Throughout this process, the Government has liked to talk about the Promise being owned by the Parliament and about it being ours to keep together. I recognise that we all made a commitment and that we did so based on the assurances that were given by the Government and by the then First Minister about how it would be driven forward. However, this bill exemplifies that there are significant gaps in the Government’s leadership and its engagement to drive the change that is required to meet the Promise by 2030.

Of course one bill will not get us to where we need to be. However, as I have said already, it is a significant opportunity to drive the progress that we need to see. Stakeholders and the care-experienced community in Scotland deserve movement on it, and we want to give the bill the opportunity to be the vehicle that I have spoken about, so Scottish Labour will not oppose the bill at stage 1. However, I am clear that we must see significant movement at stages 2 and 3, in the time that remains in this session of Parliament, to allow the bill to progress past stage 3. We will work constructively where the Government offers its willingness to do that. However, so far, we on the Labour benches have been disappointed with the progress.