Hansard

The amendment states:

"almost half of the 30 councils inspected were assessed as weak or unsatisfactory in relation to the assessment of risks and needs".

Eleven were assessed as weak and two were assessed as unsatisfactory. The two that landed in the unsatisfactory bracket will have taken immediate action to address the problems that the inspectorate identified. The 11 that were assessed as weak will take stock of the report, and the professionals who are involved in the care of children will take steps to make their service better. They are caring professionals who deserve our support. They will accept constructive criticism from the inspectors, because it helps them to do their jobs properly—it helps them to improve the services that they offer and to make things better for children in their area.

As my colleague Angela Constance said, we should aspire to excellence in the service. On the indicator "Children benefit from strategies to minimise harm", only one council showed weaknesses and none sits in the unsatisfactory category. That is one of the primary indicators—it is not among the secondary indicators that are mentioned in the amendment.

There might be cause for concern over another primary indicator, on which one council has been assessed as unsatisfactory in meeting children's needs. However, politicians should allow the professionals and inspectors to work together to improve the service. We should wait for the follow-up reports and then take stock. Only then will we see whether the system is working properly.

Resources are available for the services and councils will review their deployment in the light of the reports that they have received so that they can improve their services. I pay tribute to North Lanarkshire Council, South Lanarkshire Council and NHS Lanarkshire for the progress that they have made on the implementation of their GIRFEC pathfinder project. "Pathfinder" is a very appropriate word in that context.

Getting it right for every child is about rebalancing and refocusing support so that it tends towards the child-centric. The one-team support for families, and greater trust and information sharing between professionals, lead to better services for the child. The programme is a framework for developing multilayered service provision in a simple and easy-to-understand way. The initial results have been impressive and significant indications of better outcomes for children are coming from the pathfinder programmes. There also appear to be social advantages; a welcome consequence of earlier child-centred interventions has been that more time is freed up for social workers to do their job and therefore to take on more cases.

The programme is a continuation of work that was begun in 2004 under the previous Administration. We had waited too long for that work, so it was a welcome step when it was begun, and its further development is equally welcome. The cross-cutting work that the programme encourages knits agencies together in delivery. We should acknowledge those agencies' efforts in that delivery. That applies especially to Scotland's councils, which should get credit for helping to deliver the vision of a safe and supportive childhood for all.

No child is an island, but all children are individuals, which I believe is reflected in the GIRFEC ethos. The early intervention that GIRFEC has facilitated and enabled comes from the enhanced capacity of professionals to gather a holistic assessment of the child using the better information that is available as a result of cross-agency working. That early intervention delivers results. There is evidence across all the wellbeing indicators that progress is being made and that children are reaping greater benefits. Some of that might come from one important innovation, which is that the professionals have turned round service delivery, so that they ask the children who are involved for their views and seek to ensure that the children understand the decisions and the options that are given to them.

No longer will parents and children have to try to find a way of negotiating their way around a confusing system; streamlined services will be delivered. We are talking about wraparound care that embraces the child and the family, ensuring that their needs are met. The involvement of all agencies working together will make it less likely that any child will fall through the gaps.

As a Parliament, we have a duty to work to keep our young people safe from harm and to do everything we can to safeguard them. The framework, together with input from HMIE, will give us the clearest and most comprehensive impression of how children's services are performing across the country. With the report in our hands, we can ask the professionals on the ground to use it to improve outcomes for children, through improving service delivery. The mutual respect that is created when professionals in their various fields take a considered approach creates an open exchange and a central role for the children who are involved. That policy shift is welcome; it is long overdue.

Praise is due to the ministerial team who started the work in 2004, as it is to the ministerial team who continued the work after 2007. I am pleased to support the motion.