Chamber and committees

Although it is the responsibility of local authorities to ensure that that information is available, we appreciate its importance, as I said at the beginning, and we want to ensure that people have the information and support that they need.

The launch of the refreshed guidance will provide a really good opportunity for everyone in the care sector to promote kinship care as an option for children and young people. We will ensure that the information on the Scottish Government website, as well as that from the Kinship Care Advice Service, is regularly updated.

There is a lot of work going on. As I said, that is down to local authorities, but the Scottish Government is providing support to ensure that the information is available and accessible, and we will continue monitoring that to look for ways in which we can improve.

Yes, absolutely. I am absolutely confident that there is sufficient funding there to support the roll-out of the recommended allowance. The £16 million figure for the funding was based on the difference between the cost of paying the Scottish recommended allowance or higher and the current local authority expenditure on foster and kinship care allowances, and it was worked out through negotiations with COSLA. It was modelled using current local authority expenditure on children in foster and kinship care, including informal kinship care, and the most up-to-date data from the children’s social work statistics.

In relation to when they will receive that funding, on 18 October, the Scottish Government issued a letter to local authority directors of finance detailing how much funding they were receiving. The letter would enable local authorities to implement the allowance knowing the level of funding that they will receive. The actual money will be transferred from the Scottish Government at the end of the financial year through the local government settlement funding mechanism. As the committee will be aware, that is standard practice.

The £16 million of funding is being distributed on the same basis as the existing kinship care allocation. The distribution has recently been changed to—I have the figures here—35 per cent of children aged zero to 18 in low-income families, 35 per cent of children in receipt of Scottish child payments and 30 per cent of the zero-to-18 general population. That is for the full 2023-24 financial year.

Absolutely. Making decisions based on budgetary practice would go against everything that we are aiming for with the Promise. The answer to Bob Doris’ question is, therefore, yes—absolutely.

Absolutely. I have heard some of the commentary about that. The group that undertook the 2018 national review of care allowances, which was informed by consultation with stakeholders, caregivers and children and young people, decided that the allowance payment rate should be broken into three age groups: 0 to 4, 5 to 15 and 16-plus. Those age bands are comparable with those used in Wales for its allowance.

It is fair to say that the evidence is limited and rather mixed. Some people think that young children—babies and toddlers—are more costly to look after, while others think that older children are more costly to look after. The most recent research that we have seen, which was conducted by Moneyfarm, suggests that, in 2023, it is more costly to support a six to 11-year-old than it is to support a 12 to 14-year-old, and it attributes that to the cost of age-appropriate toys for younger children and the rate at which clothes—including school uniforms—and other such things need to be replaced.

The allowance has only just been introduced. It is a hugely positive move, but we are open to feedback from kinship carers and stakeholders. We will continue to gather that feedback and will consider the issue when we formally review the system’s implementation in the future, as I said.

Absolutely. I would already expect local authorities to do the right thing in circumstances such as those to which Mr Doris referred. However, as I have said, I expect that the refreshed guidance and the on-going work will make the situation much clearer for local authorities. We hope that the guidance will be published by the end of the year. I am very understanding of and switched on to that issue. I have dealt with my own such cases. As I said, we are trying to improve that and to provide more clarity for local authorities.

I am very conscious of the need to ensure that the rights of victims and the rights of referred children are balanced, and I am aware of the concerns around that issue, as I have reflected in my evidence to the Education, Children and Young People Committee and my meetings with individual members. The bill’s provisions seek to balance the rights, needs and expectations of victims, and of the parents or carers of child victims, with the rights of referred children. I assure the member that amendments to further improve support for victims are being considered for stage 2.

The bill will ensure that there is scope for referral of all children to the principal reporter, removing the barriers that meant that children already had to be in the hearings system before turning 16 if they were to get support through that system. Importantly, the bill will also allow referrals for children who are themselves victims within their family home.

I am really sorry to hear about the situation that Michelle Thomson has outlined and I thank her for raising a really important issue. Whether a child’s behaviour is dealt with by the criminal justice system or the children’s hearings system, we must absolutely ensure that we meet the needs of victims and their families. I again assure the member that I am absolutely alive to the issues that she raises. In fact, I have met Victim Support Scotland to discuss the bill and those issues.

As I said in my initial answer, making further improvements to support for victims will be a key consideration during stage 2 of the bill process. I would be happy to meet with the member to discuss that in more detail.

I might bring in officials on whether a legislative route would have to be used. I can see other options, given that we already expect such provision to be available for care-experienced people of a certain age. Our Promise bill, which we have agreed will go through Parliament in the current parliamentary session, will provide an opportunity for legislative changes.

We expect to introduce that towards the end of next year, giving plenty of time for a lot of different pieces of work that are going on, to see what would be included in the bill. However, on the specific question whether the route would have to be legislative or not, I will hand over to my officials.

I may hand over to my officials to talk about the consultation, because we have not finished designing that yet. The bill itself will be based on the keeping the Promise implementation plan, which sets out a vision for delivering the Promise by 2030. There are 14 top-level actions within that plan and about 80 other recommendations, which cut across all parts of Government.

During my time in this role, there has been a much greater focus on managing the cross-portfolio work on the Promise. We are very aware that it cuts across various ministerial portfolios. There is a cabinet subcommittee on the Promise and there is real evidence of us working together to try to achieve our aims. The actions in the Promise implementation plan that aim to reduce poor outcomes focus on poverty, homelessness, poor health—which can often include poor mental health—offending, school exclusion, educational attainment and low employability.

As I said, there are many aspects to keeping the Promise. Many of those will be considered as part of the consultation and any that require legislative change will be included in the Promise bill.

There are a number of points to address in that. On the issue of young people not knowing their rights in this area, in my previous response, I referred to updating the guidance, the intention of which includes ensuring that it is more accessible for young people. With regard to young people being aware of their rights under the UNCRC in particular, I have visited a lot of schools, and that is something that is on the agenda. Children are talking about their rights and are aware of their rights. I do not want to generalise, and there might be schools or areas where that is not always the case, but I can say that the young people in the schools that I have visited are very switched on to the issue. That is facilitated by a number of fantastic youth groups and organisations that are working to promote those rights to young people.

Outwith the Government’s support and aftercare provision, a number of advocacy schemes are currently in operation. There is a national helpline operated by Who Cares? Scotland, which is funded by the Scottish Government, and there is the national children’s hearings advocacy scheme, which was enacted in November 2020. So, there are ways for care-experienced young people to access support. However, as I have said, what I have heard so far is that there are inconsistencies. We know that some sort of change will be required, and it is likely that that will be legislative change, but that will be decided by the consultation and the work that is under way just now. I am more than happy to write back to the committee with further information on that.