Chamber and committees

The real living wage will not stop an exodus.

We know that nurseries are reducing the number of rooms that are available for the service; many are closing; and lots of staff are moving over, so they are really struggling to provide the service. The issue is important, and it is not about “Private good, public bad”—it is about private and voluntary nurseries providing a much more flexible service, which is what the First Minister said was important.

We will all remember the debate that we had on the issue four or five years ago, because a lot of parents spoke out at the time, saying that they needed flexibility to fit care around their work patterns. We are therefore in danger of undermining the objective that the First Minister set out all those years ago by cutting out the private sector and treating people in it as second class citizens. I find it staggering that we have got to this stage.

I commend you for being the first person from whom I have heard such an open explanation, because things have been very opaque up to now. We have now had an open and transparent admission that the system is designed to pay those in the council sector much more than those in the private and voluntary sectors. The situation is not sustainable—we are going to undermine the policy if we carry on as we are.

I am not blaming you for all this, Matthew—you have been sent out to defend it—but it is just not sustainable.

Why are we so bad at getting entitled two-year-olds into the provision? Perhaps Adam Hall could answer that first.

Surely the clue is in the title of your organisation. If we are going to improve things, we should understand the reasons. Is no attempt being made to understand them?

I have one final question. Why is it that some councils do not offer a higher rate for provision of the service for two-year-olds when it is clear that the ratios require more staff and the demands on additional support will be greater than those for the mainstream three and four-year-old offer? Why are some councils not providing a higher rate?

City of Edinburgh Council provides a flat rate across all the different age ranges, but I think that the demands from two-year-olds would be higher. Could I ask you to have a look at that and perhaps follow up with any correspondence that you receive on it?

Does anybody else have any ideas?

We are not really getting to the nub of this. In 2010, there were 1,500 nursery teachers and there are now only 700. Does that not give an indication that we have moved from education to just childcare? That question is for Matthew Sweeney.

As you probably saw, there was quite a bit of debate last week about whether the new arrangements will make the process easier or more difficult. I can understand the motivation for the change, but could it potentially encourage more cross-border placements?

The representatives from the children’s commissioner’s office made the point last week that there would be a disparity between the rights of children coming from England and the rights of those in Scotland. I can understand why you would potentially have to double up the process—that is probably not legal language, either—in order to overcome that, which might create some difficulties for those who come from England. Are you concerned about the difference between the rights of children who come here from England and the rights of those who are already here?

I will push back a wee bit on that. I am not a defender of the Government, but COSLA has accepted that the settlement for the early learning and childcare offer was going to meet the needs. I know that there has been a reduction in funding in the past year and that there has been some rejigging of funds. However, the policy has been funded, so I am puzzled about why there has been such a reduction in nursery teachers over that period when, apparently, there has been enough money.