Chamber and committees

The Make Space for Girls website talks about how parks and play equipment in public spaces for older children and teenagers are currently designed around the default male, and how we need to start making spaces for girls.

Girls can feel quite intimidated going into a multi-use games area, especially if it has high fences and a narrow entrance and things like that. What are your views on that, and are there any examples of that kind of design working for girls and girls being involved in it?

It is good to know that there is co-design and that people are talking about trust and agency and girls being understood.

You touched on endometriosis and heavy periods, which I suffered from really badly when I was younger. You are absolutely right about the fact that we are not educating young women and girls about what is normal—what they should expect—and when they should seek support, and I completely agree with your points. It was sometimes a challenge for me to get through a full school period, never mind go to PE and jump about. My concern with that is about how we ensure that teachers and support staff are listening to girls and taking them seriously, because, across different portfolios and remits, we repeatedly hear that women and girls are often not listened to. What can you say about that?

There are lots of amazing young people; I could not agree more.

We might want to mention things such as automatic enrolment—that might be helpful.

I do not disagree with much of what you have said. I hear such stuff myself. However, the part that really concerns me, as you know, and as we hear when we talk to practitioners, is that transitions should not be separate but organic and built in all the way through.

I know that North Lanarkshire Council has done loads of great work over the past 12 years. It has been absolutely fabulous and fantastic. However, practitioners have said that legislation is legislation but it is about the quality that is underneath that. We have heard them say that they are worried about the idea of having yet another plan. Plans are piling up on somebody’s desk and it becomes something to be completed. That could be reductionist and could end up being a bit of a tick-box exercise for them as well, so the plan might get in the way of some of the good practice that they are doing and that is evolving.

Would it not be better to focus on the good practice that is happening just now rather than what is specifically in the bill—to look at bringing that forward, really supporting it and bringing in legislation to support it and make sure that it is happening, if there turns out to be a need for that?

Thanks for allowing me to come back in, convener.

Bill Scott made a really important point about scrutiny really making a change in that area. I really appreciate that.

I go back to Ross Greer’s point about practice. For example, we heard about a wee boy who wanted to be a pilot. He was taken along to the airport, and he was as interested in the baggage as much as he was in anything else, so he ended up with a job in the baggage department. Will the bill really be the thing that changes practice? Would that happen for other wee boys? Would it change things for them? That is the nitty-gritty of the issue.

Thank you for being here this morning, Pam. It is great that you have been highlighting this stuff.

What you said about your mum saying, “Now I can be a mum again,” was really quite powerful. That is so important. You mentioned the legislative salad and the fact that none of the legislation is delivering what needs to be delivered. Having guidance, strategies and duties is absolutely fine, but the issue comes down to relationships, advocacy and people feeling that they have agency.

We have heard from young people and families—this has been mentioned in the evidence that has been submitted to us, too—that professionals will often identify “positive destinations” for them but that those do not always reflect the aspirations and interests of young people or the things that matter to them and their families. We have also heard about data and control and about young people wanting to own their own story, to have that agency and control, and to have choices around sharing their data.

I am interested in two specific issues. First, how will the bill bring an approach that is centred around the young person and their aspirations? Secondly, how will it improve their outcomes?

What direct impact would a cut in teacher numbers have on closing the attainment gap?

It is great when people are aware of the fund and they are putting in applications to get that funding, but the spread of awareness seems to be quite uneven. There are people who do not know about it and others who do. Are we getting the balance right, or should the fund be broadened out? Should we look at making it available to everyone? I know that anyone can apply for it just now, but I am talking about whether everybody should have access to it almost automatically.