Chamber
Plenary, 07 Mar 2001
07 Mar 2001 · S1 · Plenary
Item of business
Regulation of Care (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I want to raise several children's issues that have been identified by the Education, Culture and Sport Committee and by the cross-party group in the Scottish Parliament on children and young people. We welcome the bill's proposals, because children and other vulnerable people should expect the highest standards of care and must be protected from all avoidable harm.
However, it is disappointing that the bill does not contain the kind of statement of the principles and values that should underpin the new regulatory system, such as the statement that we saw in the Standards in Scotland's Schools etc Act 2000. The initial consultation document was very clear that the focus of regulation and registration must be the people who use the services and that the main concern is their quality of life. I hope that the Executive can be persuaded that an introductory paragraph that expresses similar sentiments should be added to the bill.
I also want the minister to comment on the fact that the bill contains no clear definition of a child. Section 2 refers twice to service users as
"being of a young age"
without defining that age. Furthermore, in section 55, a child is defined as a
"person under the age of sixteen years".
The minister will be aware that local authorities currently provide child care and education up to the age of 18 to children who have disabilities. It is not unreasonable to suggest not only that the bill needs a clear definition of a child, but that that definition must be consistent with other legislation, especially the Children (Scotland) Act 1995.
There is concern that the bill does not include several care services that are central to the protection of children's interests. Although we welcome today's announcement concerning sitter services, nanny agencies were mentioned frequently during consultation and it is disappointing that they will not be included. I do not think that it is unreasonable to argue that nanny agencies should be registered in the same way and for the same reasons that it is proposed we should register nurse agencies. Services to adults in their homes are to be regulated—why not all such children's services? If the bill is about ensuring certain standards of service and providing reassurance to people, we need such regulation. To leave out nanny agencies would be inconsistent with the rest of the bill.
As a former social worker, I echo the concern of the British Association of Social Workers and others, that fieldwork services are omitted from the remit of the proposed commission. The argument is that care provision cannot be disassociated from the way in which people get into care. It has been announced that foster care and adoption services will be added, but case management, assessment planning and review—which are carried out by fieldwork staff, in relation to looked-after children—are not covered. If the bill is about reassuring the public that we are trying to keep children safe, those services must also be regulated.
The Education, Culture and Sport Committee heard from young people who are looked after, some of whom are very dissatisfied with their care experience and some of whom have little or no confidence in the current complaints procedure. The Scottish Throughcare and Aftercare Forum is disappointed that there is no clear reference in the policy memorandum to the needs of young people who are leaving care. It is vital—to echo Margaret Smith's point—that the views of young people are sought and listened to at an early stage in the development of the standards, complaints procedure and inspection processes. I hope that the minister can give us an assurance that that will happen, and that working arrangements for engaging young people's views will be put in place.
I conclude on the theme of children's rights. The suggestion that there should be a children's commissioner has been mentioned and has wide support. However, to be effective, such a role needs to be inclusive and to encompass all children and young people. There is now a common view that the bill cannot adequately address that need. Under the current definitions of care services, if the role of the proposed commissioner was confined to the services that are covered by the bill, it would exclude a wide range of vulnerable children, including young carers, children on the child protection register and young people in prison. The interests of the most vulnerable will be the focus of the forthcoming inquiry of the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, and their interests would be better safeguarded by a commissioner who had a wider, more inclusive brief than can be accommodated through the bill.
However, it is disappointing that the bill does not contain the kind of statement of the principles and values that should underpin the new regulatory system, such as the statement that we saw in the Standards in Scotland's Schools etc Act 2000. The initial consultation document was very clear that the focus of regulation and registration must be the people who use the services and that the main concern is their quality of life. I hope that the Executive can be persuaded that an introductory paragraph that expresses similar sentiments should be added to the bill.
I also want the minister to comment on the fact that the bill contains no clear definition of a child. Section 2 refers twice to service users as
"being of a young age"
without defining that age. Furthermore, in section 55, a child is defined as a
"person under the age of sixteen years".
The minister will be aware that local authorities currently provide child care and education up to the age of 18 to children who have disabilities. It is not unreasonable to suggest not only that the bill needs a clear definition of a child, but that that definition must be consistent with other legislation, especially the Children (Scotland) Act 1995.
There is concern that the bill does not include several care services that are central to the protection of children's interests. Although we welcome today's announcement concerning sitter services, nanny agencies were mentioned frequently during consultation and it is disappointing that they will not be included. I do not think that it is unreasonable to argue that nanny agencies should be registered in the same way and for the same reasons that it is proposed we should register nurse agencies. Services to adults in their homes are to be regulated—why not all such children's services? If the bill is about ensuring certain standards of service and providing reassurance to people, we need such regulation. To leave out nanny agencies would be inconsistent with the rest of the bill.
As a former social worker, I echo the concern of the British Association of Social Workers and others, that fieldwork services are omitted from the remit of the proposed commission. The argument is that care provision cannot be disassociated from the way in which people get into care. It has been announced that foster care and adoption services will be added, but case management, assessment planning and review—which are carried out by fieldwork staff, in relation to looked-after children—are not covered. If the bill is about reassuring the public that we are trying to keep children safe, those services must also be regulated.
The Education, Culture and Sport Committee heard from young people who are looked after, some of whom are very dissatisfied with their care experience and some of whom have little or no confidence in the current complaints procedure. The Scottish Throughcare and Aftercare Forum is disappointed that there is no clear reference in the policy memorandum to the needs of young people who are leaving care. It is vital—to echo Margaret Smith's point—that the views of young people are sought and listened to at an early stage in the development of the standards, complaints procedure and inspection processes. I hope that the minister can give us an assurance that that will happen, and that working arrangements for engaging young people's views will be put in place.
I conclude on the theme of children's rights. The suggestion that there should be a children's commissioner has been mentioned and has wide support. However, to be effective, such a role needs to be inclusive and to encompass all children and young people. There is now a common view that the bill cannot adequately address that need. Under the current definitions of care services, if the role of the proposed commissioner was confined to the services that are covered by the bill, it would exclude a wide range of vulnerable children, including young carers, children on the child protection register and young people in prison. The interests of the most vulnerable will be the focus of the forthcoming inquiry of the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, and their interests would be better safeguarded by a commissioner who had a wider, more inclusive brief than can be accommodated through the bill.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Sir David Steel):
NPA
Our main item of business is a debate on motion S1M-1523, in the name of Susan Deacon, on the general principles of the Regulation of Care (Scotland) Bill, w...
The Minister for Health and Community Care (Susan Deacon):
Lab
I am conscious that, as we gather here this afternoon, certain events south of the border may have distracted some politicians and members of the public from...
Nicola Sturgeon (Glasgow) (SNP):
SNP
On consultation, the minister will be aware that concern has been expressed by, I think, everybody who has given evidence to the Health and Community Care Co...
Susan Deacon:
Lab
That is one of the issues that has arisen during early consideration of the bill. I will say more about it later in my speech, but I stress now that, at stag...
Mr Keith Raffan (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD):
LD
Will the minister give way?
Susan Deacon:
Lab
In the interest of time, I will continue, if I may.We already intend to regulate home care for children with disabilities. We now propose to extend regulatio...
Nicola Sturgeon:
SNP
Will the minister give way?
Susan Deacon:
Lab
I regret that, in the interest of time, I am unable to give way. The deputy minister will respond at the end of the debate and will pick up on points that ha...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
I call Mary Scanlon to speak to and move the amendment.
Iain Smith (North-East Fife) (LD):
LD
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Will you clarify for me the reasoning behind accepting the amendment? According to rule 9.6.4 of the standing orders,...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
I commend to Iain Smith and to all members the guidance that I issued on this subject only a week or two ago. The amendment falls completely within the terms...
Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con):
Con
Although we have lodged amendment S1M-1523.1, the Scottish Conservatives welcome the broad principles of the Regulation of Care (Scotland) Bill. We particula...
Iain Smith:
LD
Will the member give way?
Mary Scanlon:
Con
I think that Mr Smith has said enough for today and I would rather keep my contribution positive.
Mrs Margaret Smith (Edinburgh West) (LD) rose—
LD
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab) rose—
Lab
Mary Scanlon:
Con
Alzheimer Scotland does not pay registration fees—Interruption.
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
Order. Three members are asking whether Mrs Scanlon will give way, but it is up to her to decide whether to do so.
Mary Scanlon:
Con
I will give way to Mrs Smith.
Mrs Smith:
LD
The SCRO check payments have been set aside. All parties in the chamber supported that and the Executive has listened.
Mary Scanlon:
Con
I am aware that, between the submission of evidence and today, there has been quite a bit of movement. That is why I say that the points that have been made ...
Shona Robison (North-East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
On behalf of the Scottish National Party, I welcome the Regulation of Care (Scotland) Bill. I also welcome the fact that the headquarters of the new Scottish...
Mrs Margaret Smith (Edinburgh West) (LD):
LD
I begin by thanking the members of the Health and Community Care Committee for their work on the bill. I thank the members of all the other committees that h...
Trish Godman (West Renfrewshire) (Lab):
Lab
The Regulation of Care (Scotland) Bill is part of our modernising programme for government—and rightly so.I say to the Tories that to suggest, even as a joke...
Ben Wallace (North-East Scotland) (Con):
Con
Will Trish Godman give way?
Trish Godman:
Lab
No. I have just started my speech.No one in any political party would disagree that we should safeguard vulnerable people. That means vulnerable people of al...
Irene McGugan (North-East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I want to raise several children's issues that have been identified by the Education, Culture and Sport Committee and by the cross-party group in the Scottis...
Margaret Jamieson (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab):
Lab
I declare an interest in the matter, as a member of Unison and the mother of a student nursery nurse. I do not want anything to come back to haunt me later.T...
Mary Scanlon:
Con
Will the member give way?
Margaret Jamieson:
Lab
No, I am winding up.In particular, I draw members' attention to section 2(2) of the bill, in which reference is made to somebody "being of a young age". At n...