Roz McCall
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“That restraint and seclusion have been used inconsistently and without parents being told is worrying, and that is exactly what the bill hopes to address. When parents find out what has happened to their child only because of bruises, distress and changes in behaviour, that is not just a failure to communicate; it is a failure of trust.”
“Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger have been mentioned by absolutely everyone who has contributed to the debate, which shows just how much work they have done to contact every single one of us, to lobby us and to highlight how important the legislation is.”
“Further discussion is not needed—decisive action is. The recommendations in the “Strengthening the Safety Net” report talk about having a national adoption practice model, improved training, mandatory data collection, enhanced crisis intervention and a more flexible adoption allowance.”
“Other areas of concern include the robust transfer of post-adoption support from a specialist adoption team to generic children and families services after three years. In theory, that might seem to be administratively tidy, but in practice it fails to reflect the complexity and longevity of adoptive family life.”
“I thank Fulton MacGregor for bringing the motion to the chamber and for continuing to highlight the importance of strengthening adoption support for families across Scotland.”
“My very first debate on this issue when I became an MSP was a members’ business debate on Scotland’s forgotten children, focusing on adoption in Scotland and the urgent need to improve post- adoption support.”
The complete record
Every one of 585 lines we hold for Roz McCall, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 12.
“My constituents Scott and Olivia Lyon recently received the heart-breaking news that their one- year-old son, Blair, has retinoblastoma, which is a rare type of eye cancer that affects young children—roughly 50 children in the United Kingdom each year. Although it can be hereditary, it can also affect a child purely by chance. It cannot be predicted or prevented, and it simply appears as a squint or a glow in the eye. Given the importance of early diagnosis, Scott and Olivia are determined to raise public awareness. Will the First Minister join me in promoting the visibility of retinoblastoma, thanking the incredible national health service teams involved in care for patients across Scotland, and urging families to make an urgent appointment if they think that there are any concerns?”
“We can look at what we control and ensure that what we do supports the people we are charged to work for. If the solutions have been provided and the outcomes are not only clear but will help people to achieve what they want for themselves, and those outcomes will support our economy, grow Government revenue and reduce the reliance on the state, as well as benefit Scotland and Scots alike, I urge the Government to look at them again. 15:50”
“The courses are there and the colleges will do what they can to modify the times and days for teaching—Fife College has done exactly that—but, once again, the double whammy of transport and childcare will make it almost impossible for parents to attend without being financially penalised in some way. It cannot be right that people who want to work are being forced out of taking a job because we in the Parliament do not fix the issues, especially when it is in our gift to do so. We can call on the UK Government to reverse its plans, we can wax lyrical about the injustice, and we can sow yet more division, obfuscate and play the blame game but, all the while, the people of Scotland are being pushed to breaking point. Instead of standing in the chamber mud slinging, we should be looking at what we can do to make people’s lives better.”
“It is simply not possible for parents to get back to a fulfilling position or job if we do not get the basics right. So many jobs start before buses are even running, or shift patterns finish when local transport drops to intermittent services. Pre-7 am shift starts are commonplace for hospitality, retail, warehousing and manufacturing, but getting to work is a nightmare for someone who relies on public transport. That needs to change. Childcare provisions for those jobs are completely useless. Drop-off and pick-up times will simply not accommodate shifts, which adds additional expense and unnecessary inconvenience. That needs to change. Let us say that a parent wants to retrain in a much-needed profession.”
“It is claimed that savings will be made that will impact the Scottish Government’s budget, but we are talking about two different things. That is really important, because we cannot pretend that a saving on the ADP or PIP will help people to get into work. Roz McCall: The cabinet secretary and Mr Balfour have made that point exceptionally well. I am not trying to state that my point is connected to that, but there is a need to look at economic inactivity. Getting parents back into work is part of that. There is a pride that comes from being self- reliant and from providing for yourself and your family. Unfortunately, the holistic approach to moving back to work is simply failing. I call again on the Government to actively make the necessary changes to transport, childcare and education to rectify those issues.”
“Not only would parents be earning a living that, statistically, would boost their disposable income and enhance their mental health, but that would add to the Government’s revenue by increasing tax take and reducing the number of those who are dependent on welfare payments. We agree that welfare payments are an investment in our people and that the returns and benefits for society are evident, but part of that investment must be to better people’s lives in all possible ways—and one of those ways is self- sufficiency. There is a pride that comes from being self-reliant. Shirley-Anne Somerville: Does the member agree with her colleague Jeremy Balfour, who pointed out earlier in the debate that the ADP is not linked to employment, and nor should it be? It is about the additional costs of a disability or long- term condition.”
“Surely, it would be better to increase the number of taxpayers and grow the economy, rather than forcing those who are already stretched to pay more. We have already heard comments about economic inactivity and, once again, I find myself speaking in a debate on welfare in Scotland and returning to the Social Justice and Social Security Committee report on parental employment. It is a good report, with a clear direction of travel to help parents back into employment. It highlights three specific areas that the Government could focus on that would help parents to get back into work.”
“That will do nothing to stop their lives becoming harder, nothing to stop them becoming poorer and nothing to reinstall their faith in the decisions that are made by their Governments on their behalf. In the current economic climate, there are simply insufficient funds. In January this year, the Scottish Fiscal Commission estimated that, in 2029-30, the Scottish Government would be spending £1.7 billion more than it received to pay for devolved welfare. Coupled with Labour’s welfare cuts, that has the deficit growing to £2.1 billion. It will be hard-working, middle-income taxpayers who will be made to pay. They will be squeezed yet again to support the ever-increasing welfare state, and it will be done at the expense of everything that they are trying to do to make their lives and their children’s lives better.”
“I am pleased to speak in the debate, and I will direct my remarks to the Scottish Conservative amendment, in the name of Liz Smith. The amendment correctly highlights the concerns of the Office for Budget Responsibility and the Scottish Fiscal Commission “about the projected substantial increases in UK and Scottish welfare budgets, the resulting fiscal pressures, and the unsustainability of these budgets in the current economic circumstances”. That is the fundamental issue before us. Regardless of which Government proposals we are discussing or the tone of the debate—which has been conciliatory up until now—the debating vigour that is displayed in the chamber and even the verbal tongue lashings and contained heckling will not make an iota of difference to the people of Scotland.”
“I seriously call into question the impact that Conservative policies have had on families across Scotland for a number of years. As I pointed out, this is about helping children. Our offer of 1,140 funded hours is guaranteed to benefit three and four-year-olds, but the picture is a little different for children under three. How much those children benefit from early learning and childcare provision is determined by crucial factors such as their family background, the age that they start in ELC, the quality of the services and the balance of hours that they spend between care at home and in ELC settings. We have a number of workstreams under way to increase access to childcare for parents, but I emphasise that we want to get this right for our youngest children and their families. That is what we are working towards.”
“Good-quality, accessible and affordable childcare is essential to addressing child poverty and enabling parents to re-enter the workforce. Thanks to the policies of the previous Conservative Government, as has been stated, the cost of a part-time childcare place has more than halved and the cost of a full-time place has been reduced by 20 per cent. I have been highlighting in the Parliament the issues with early years childcare for working parents for some time. Will the minister agree to examine the implementation of the 1,140 hours of free childcare and adjust the policy to ensure that parents can get back into employment? Natalie Don-Innes: Ms McCall talks about the UK Conservative Government’s childcare policy.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what recent engagement it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding how to ensure the protection of Scotch whisky. (S6O-04512)”
“Yes, it contains an element of risk, but what aspect of life does not? As with outdoor education itself, the risk is managed and mitigated well. Let us therefore be parliamentarians who are as open and adventurous as the wonderful architecture that we are in just now. I encourage all members of the Parliament to do what is right by our young people and support the bill. Decision Time 17:30”
“I am hopeful that we can address them, because there are many teachers who are in unions and the COSLA set-up who are already doing outdoor education. We have to give them the support that they need, because most teachers come back to us to say that outdoor education is the most valuable thing that we can do. I want to finish with a comment that was given to this Parliament at the time of this building’s opening, 21 years ago, when the late Edwin Morgan’s “light of the mind” poem was read. In it he asked: “What do the people want of the place? They want it to be filled with thinking persons as open and adventurous as its architecture. A nest of fearties is what they do not want. A symposium of procrastinators is what they do not want. A phalanx of forelock-tuggers is what they do not want”. My bill is adventurous in more ways than one.”
“As Jamie Greene and Oliver Mundell have rightly said, let us be ambitious for this Parliament, but, even more importantly, let us be ambitious for our young people. I hear time and again from parents, pupils and the centres that, after Covid, there is an awful lot of anxiety around. We owe it to those young people to give them hope and optimism and to give them the skills that outdoor education provides through building resilience, self-esteem and confidence. We must ensure that we do that, and that is the main reason for the bill. Presiding Officer, do I have a little more time? The Presiding Officer: You have until 5.30. Liz Smith: I will return to the issue of teacher contracts. I must take seriously what the unions and COSLA are saying—those are serious concerns, and we have to address them.”
“However, that is the point: it happened, thanks to the school and the people at the centre, some of whom are in the gallery just now. We should be aware that, over time, the centres have become well aware of the need to ensure that they articulate with modern Scottish education. As Mr Whitfield rightly said, that means the curriculum for excellence. There is also a recognition of the need for greater diversity. Residential outdoor education is not all about climbing Munros, kayaking or jumping off a cliff; it is much more diverse than that now. If we are going to get it right for every child, we have to recognise the diversity of our pupils and ensure that we are delivering for every one of them. I do not think that that is too difficult.”
“You cannot just say that it is something that you would— The Presiding Officer: Always speak through the chair, please. Liz Smith: The minister cannot just dismiss that aspect, because her letter suggests that it might be an option that could be considered. On the issue of additional support for learning, there are costs associated with that—I have never suggested otherwise. In that regard, I come back to the excellent speech that Pam Duncan-Glancy made. Additional support for learning costs extra money. Some 40 per cent of children in Scotland now have additional support needs, but, of that 40 per cent, 3 per cent have very complex needs. If we listen to the comments from Nevis, who I quoted in my opening speech, we will hear that the effort and expense to get him to the centre were considerable.”
“Further, we happen to know, from what ministers, particularly the Deputy First Minister, have been saying on other issues, that the Scottish Government is quite rightly looking for models that combine public sector finance and private sector finance, and surely that is something that can help, too. Natalie Don-Innes: Absolutely, and I think that that proves our willingness to work on that point. However, I made efforts to meet Inspire Scotland and others to find out more about how the public trust model could work, and it would be too unreliable for something that would be a statutory entitlement for schools. Liz Smith: With respect, minister, it says in the letter that you sent last night that there are possibilities around decoupling some of this.”
“That is very different from the original intention of pupil equity funding. If it is true that £30 million of the money was spent on public sector teachers pay, I question whether other choices could have been made. The Government has to look at that angle when it comes to affordability, which the minister mentioned. I also hope that the minister recognises that, over quite a number of months, I have provided the Scottish Government with alternative models of funding. There are plenty of examples of places where money can be found, such as public trust money.”
“That has to be measured against the choices that the Scottish Government has made on other policies. That is the important thing. The bill is not unaffordable; there are possibilities for funding it. As I said in my opening speech, pupil equity funding is a valuable concept, which I fully supported when it was introduced. It is a great idea. Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat members have all mentioned it, not just in this Parliament but at Westminster. However, if some of the funding is being put into the next year, that suggests that it is not all being spent in the timescale in which it is issued. It is also suggested that the Government has changed the criteria according to which the funding is being issued; it has gone into a local government attainment grant.”
“However, the fact that the substantial letter from the Government arrived just last night— seven weeks after the Education, Children and Young People Committee’s report was issued and, as two members have indicated, a long period after the bill was discussed—did not do much to ensure that scrutiny in the debate was as good as it should have been. The minister seems to be having a conversation with the cabinet secretary. I ask her whether she will consider the sensible point that Douglas Ross, the convener of the committee, made about the financial resolution. I sit on the Finance and Public Administration Committee. I understand that the Government has issues with the finance relating to the bill, but I believe that those issues can be resolved. I do not accept that the bill is unaffordable, as the minister said.”
“I recognise that there is strong support across the chamber for the general principles of the bill and that some members may question the Scottish Government’s decision to abstain on the motion and not to lodge a financial resolution. I do not shy away from that position. If this were a Government bill, it would face equal scrutiny, and ministers would be challenged on the uncosted elements and the significant data gaps in the financial memorandum. As I have said, I remain open to working constructively with the member in charge to address the concerns. Having listened to the debate today, I would also be interested in working with members from across the chamber. 17:21 Liz Smith: I begin on a note of consensus with the minister—I value the discussions that we have had.”
“My priority has been to engage with Liz Smith to find solutions to the challenges that I and many others have raised. The evidence is clear about the unique role and benefits that are offered by residential outdoor education for the development of our children and young people; I think that we all agree about that. Members have touched on an inconsistency, which is that, although young people from more deprived backgrounds can often benefit most from outdoor learning opportunities, that cohort receives fewer such experiences overall. We know that many schools are using PEF money to ensure that young people have such opportunities, but I agree that it will be important to build a better picture of current levels of provision of residential outdoor education nationally in order to understand better the implications of the bill.”
“The full potential costs of the bill remain unclear but, as introduced, it is unaffordable. It is of course the responsibility of Government and Parliament to scrutinise that, and we must make it clear to Parliament that our concerns have not yet been addressed. It is not clear how equity of provision of any new entitlement could be delivered by the sector, and associated costs have not been considered. Implications for the workforce are significant, and the bill as introduced does not provide solutions to ensure that provision is equitable for all of Scotland’s children. Mr Rennie stated that the Government did not reach out to him and that it needs to come forward with something better. First, I am sorry that Mr Rennie—and Mr Whitfield, of course—feels left out. That was never my intention.”
“The only precedent that I can find is from Monica Lennon’s Period Products (Free Provision) (Scotland) Bill. It was agreed to at stage 1, and the financial resolution was published, debated and voted on later. If the Government chooses within the six-month period not to lodge a financial resolution on this bill, will the minister commit to lodging a motion to allow Parliament to debate and vote on that issue? At the moment, we would vote in the affirmative situation, if a financial resolution were going to be lodged. If the Government is not going to lodge that, can we have a debate and a vote on its position of not lodging a financial resolution? Natalie Don-Innes: I can certainly discuss that with Liz Smith as I continue to engage with her on the bill.”
“To borrow a phrase from a previous joint Scottish Government and SAPOE publication, outdoor education centres have been part of the DNA of Scottish education for 75 years. The Scottish Government values and supports the role of centres in supporting young people to develop their resilience, self-confidence, wellbeing and engagement with learning—many of the benefits that members have spoken about. However, it is clear that we still have some way to go before the Scottish Government could confidently lodge a motion for a financial resolution to enable the bill to proceed, should it pass stage 1 today. Douglas Ross: Will the minister give way? Natalie Don-Innes: Presiding Officer, is there any time in hand? The Presiding Officer: There is very little time in hand. Douglas Ross: My intervention is about the financial resolution.”
“I reassure members that Education Scotland continues to support the Scottish Advisory Panel for Outdoor Education and the Association of Heads of Outdoor Education Centres to develop a quality improvement framework for the sector. Douglas Ross: Will the minister take an intervention? Natalie Don-Innes: I am sorry, but I have to make progress. I look forward to the final report from our Scottish outdoor learning strategic working group, which I have asked to provide me with recommendations on the next steps to improve our overall support for inclusive outdoor learning across the curriculum. As I made clear in committee, residential outdoor centres—the settings that the bill covers— play a crucial role in that wide range of experiences.”
“To turn to some of the examples, centres such as the city of Edinburgh’s Lagganlia and Benmore work closely with schools to align activities with learning priorities. Blairvadach centre staff provide city-wide support in Glasgow, including orienteering maps for every school and specialist programmes for care-experienced learners. In East Lothian, young people can access progressive residential outdoor education experiences, starting with a base camp on the school estate for primary 5 pupils and culminating in a full four-to-five-day residential for primary 6 pupils. Those examples are to be commended, but I know that the evidence confirms that we need to make better progress, particularly in upper primary and in secondary schools. I acknowledged that in my letter to the Education, Children and Young People Committee in December last year.”
“There are many examples of our children and young people experiencing progressive and impactful day-to-day outdoor learning activities across the country, including through residential outdoor education, and I will come on to some of those in a second. Liz Smith: Nobody at all is saying that there is not really good work being done in outdoor learning, whether that is in nursery or primary or whatever. The bill complements that work—it is not an either/or. I ask the minister to accept that, because the whole point of the value of outdoor learning is that we are building an educational progression right through young people’s careers at school. Natalie Don-Innes: I concur with Ms Smith, but I would say that I did not feel that tone in Mr Mundell’s contribution. However, I appreciate what Ms Smith says.”
“Despite what she is saying, residential opportunities in most parts of Scotland are diminishing. Natalie Don-Innes: I recognise that. I understand that those decisions have been taken by local authorities, but, as I have said, I am keen on seeing such opportunities grow further, because I recognise the benefits that they can have. Scotland has been a frontrunner and has been recognised internationally for our work in developing a whole-school approach to learning for sustainability. I was disappointed by the words of Mr Mundell in relation to our current outdoor education offering, and I think that what he said does a disservice to our nurseries, schools and staff, who are providing fantastic outdoor opportunities for children and young people on a daily basis.”
“I reiterate my thanks to Liz Smith for her work to raise the profile of and the public discussion on outdoor learning provision, which has been driven through the introduction of her member’s bill. In looking back at the journey that we have been on in Scotland since the publication of the 2010 vision document “Curriculum for Excellence Through Outdoor Learning” by Education Scotland’s predecessor, I believe that there is much to celebrate. As I said to Mr Rennie, I feel that much progress has been made. For example, learning for sustainability, which includes provision of outdoor learning in all its forms, is now a recognised entitlement for children and young people across the three-to-18 curriculum. Oliver Mundell: Does the minister see that there are fewer residential opportunities now than there were 10, 15 or 20 years ago?”
“It is an absolute injustice that that is not afforded to every child in Scotland. 17:13 Natalie Don-Innes: I reiterate my thanks to a number of stakeholders who made important and constructive contributions throughout stage 1 scrutiny of the bill. In particular, I note the contribution of the Association of Heads of Outdoor Education Centres and its members in working with my officials to inform our understanding of the sector’s current capacity. As I have said, I recognise and value the positive and unique role of residential outdoor education in a young person’s education and development, and I wish to continue to see provision of such experiences for our learners as part of a mixed offer of regular outdoor learning.”
“This is one of mine from when I was a snowy owl. We went to Dalguise for a weekend residential outing with our brownies—a rather rambunctious group of young ladies, many of whom had never been away from home before. Along with the complaints that we all had about the standard of the food and the fact that somebody was sharing a bunk in a room with somebody they did not want to share a room with, there was a group of excited but nervous girls who were unsure not only of their surroundings but of themselves. Once they had experienced team- building pursuits such as climbing walls, Jacob’s ladder and the giant swing, we had an entirely different group, and it took only two days. The looks on their faces and their pride in their achievements will stay with me for ever.”
“It all comes down to priorities and what is considered to be important, and it is very disappointing to hear that the bill is not a priority for and is not considered to be important by the Scottish Government. NASUWT put it best when it said: “The proposals contained in the Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill shine a welcome light on the inequality which currently exists in accessing this provision for all pupils in Scotland. There is no dispute that a disparity of access to outdoor education residential experiences currently exists and, further, that our most vulnerable children and young people are often unlikely to be able to participate.” That feeds into the ethos behind the Promise. This should have been the easiest debate in the history of the Scottish Parliament. I want to impart a final memory.”
“placing a duty on Scottish Ministers to prepare and publish guidance on the duty to secure the provision of residential outdoor education” and “providing that the Scottish Government” must “provide funding to local authorities and the managers of grant-aided schools to carry out the duty to secure the provision of residential outdoor education.” As with all things, the stumbling block is the cost, as the minister forcefully highlighted in her opening remarks. However, so much of what we do involves spending money at the crisis point. Mental health issues, physical health issues, violence in our classrooms and disengagement with education are all at crisis points, but the bill will turn that round.”
“If that was not enough confirmation of the Scottish Government’s intent, the minister went on to say: “The Government values the important work that residential outdoor centres do to support our young people’s mental and physical health, confidence, team- working skills, resilience, communication skills and personal development.”—[Official Report, Education, Children and Young People Committee, 27 November 2024; c 15.] That seemed to be a glowing recommendation of the principles of the bill, so I assumed that they would be agreed to unanimously at stage 1. Let me look at the bill in a little detail. Its three main provisions are worth highlighting. They are: “placing a duty on education authorities and managers of grant-aided schools to secure the provision of at least one period of residential outdoor education for each pupil ...”
“The bill should go easily, step by step, through the three stages of the parliamentary process to become law, and it is absolutely shocking that it is being held up. The Minister for Children, Young People and The Promise agreed when she said: “The Scottish Government’s vision is that all children and young people should have the opportunity to engage in progressive and creative outdoor learning in all its forms, regularly, as part of the curriculum.” The bill provides for exactly that.”
“I know that those experiences have been a massive part of making them who they are today. They believe that there is nothing that they cannot achieve, but it seems really unfair to me that my daughters have had that experience of fulfilling outdoor education only because they went to a school in rural Perthshire. Those opportunities should be available to every child in Scotland, as has been highlighted by Pam Duncan-Glancy, Bill Kidd, Carol Mochan and many others. The reasons for that have been well discussed in the debate. I commend my colleague Liz Smith for her tenacity and her determination that all children should experience the benefits that residential outdoor education gives. That should not be an issue.”
“Before members question the outdoor educational benefits of standing on a thin cardboard box with a residue of tomato sauce and melted cheese, I will explain that the pizza box is the colloquial name for a platform that is about the size of a pizza box—about 45cm square—and is situated on top of a 30-foot high, stand-alone telegraph pole. Individuals climb the pole, wearing a harness and holding a rope for safety, and pull themselves on to the platform. My daughter returned confident, resilient and proud. Those were not one-off events, because my daughters, living in rural Perthshire, were lucky enough to experience residential outdoor education through the brownies, the John Muir award scheme, the Duke of Edinburgh award scheme and the Combined Cadet Force.”
“I start by echoing comments that have been made by members from across the chamber about the passing of Christina McKelvie. I offer my condolences to everyone who is dealing with grief. At 15, my youngest daughter went cliff jumping. She was petrified and talked herself out of, and back into, going on the trip countless times. When she returned from that excursion, she was elated and had a new-found confidence in herself and in her abilities, and it transpired that she had jumped off the cliff and into bitterly cold Scottish coastal waters more than once. At 14 years old, my eldest daughter stood on the pizza box.”
“The problem is well and truly on the table, but we need to crack on and get it solved once and for all.”
“The worrying finding of the FAI was that information that was available to the court was not shared with the SPS. Given the shift towards placing young people in secure accommodation, what assurances can the cabinet secretary give the Parliament that the same information-sharing issues will not arise in those secure settings, so that our young people stay protected in that environment? Angela Constance: In many cases, the sharing of information is probably the single most crucial issue, because people cannot act without full knowledge and information. I therefore have to make a call on the NHS, colleagues in the community and the Scottish Prison Service that we must find better ways to share information, and to do so timeously. The Scottish Government is leading on work on that. All the problems and gaps have been identified.”
“Roz McCall: Yes—I thank Paul Sweeney for that intervention, and if I had longer to speak today, I would have raised that as my second point. In conclusion, we like to look back at the history of this esteemed regiment and recount its past achievements, but I want to applaud the work that it does for the youth of Scotland and in looking to the future. 13:22”
“The opportunities that the Black Watch affords to young people are testament to how the regiment views its communities and its neighbours. If any adult fancies joining as an instructor, they can give a little back and join the children. Paul Sweeney: The member is making an excellent speech about the value of our Army cadet forces, in particular those that are affiliated with the Black Watch. Would she also recognise the important contribution that the Army reserve forces make in the area, in particular as they maintain the traditional regimental footprint through the 51st Highland 7th Battalion of the Royal Regiment of Scotland, which has succeeded to the custodianship of the Queen’s Barracks in Perth?”
“While I do not wish to encroach too much on the subject of the second of Ms Smith’s debates today, I note that the range of outdoor pursuits and lifelong skills that our young people can gain from joining the cadets is exceptional. Each battalion provides instruction on many subjects, including first aid, map and compass work, orienteering and fieldcraft, adventurous training and leadership. Those skills are invaluable in boosting a child’s confidence and self-belief. Cadets can take part in on-site experiences and in the Duke of Edinburgh’s award scheme. They have opportunities to travel abroad, play sport and take part in a range of other activities that support their mental wellbeing and physical agility. If music is their thing, young people can join one of two pipe bands—one for each battalion—or the regimental wind and brass band.”
“While other members have mentioned the many laudable accomplishments and historical background of the Black Watch, I would like to bring us right up to date and applaud the work that it has done to empower the young people of Scotland. The Black Watch has a long and proud association with the young people in the area through utilising the Army cadet force. It has two affiliations: one is with the Angus and Dundee Battalion, which covers the county of Angus and the city of Dundee, and one is with the Black Watch Battalion, which covers Perth and Kinross and Fife. Boys and girls can join as cadets from 12 years old.”
““‘In a Highland regiment every individual feels that his conduct is the subject of observation and that, independently of his duty, as one member of a systemic whole he has a separate and individual reputation to sustain, which will be reflected on his family and district or glen.’” It goes on to say that those words “are as relevant today as when they were written by a 19th century Black Watch historian. They lucidly illustrate that The Black Watch boasts a history of honour, gallantry and devoted service to King, Queen and country.” It is that devotion to country and community that I will highlight today. It would not be a contribution from me if I did not focus on the perspective of the younger generation and the Black Watch’s links with young people.”
“First, I congratulate my friend and colleague Liz Smith on securing the motion for debate in the chamber. It gives me great pleasure to be speaking in it. I welcome members of the Black Watch, along with many others, to the gallery. Three hundred years is a fantastic milestone for the Black Watch, and it is only right and proper that we highlight its achievements in the Scottish Parliament. The Black Watch, founded in the Jacobite rebellion, has been a stalwart of Perthshire, Fife, Angus and Dundee for centuries. Its ancestral home is at Balhousie castle in Perth, which, as we heard from my friend Murdo Fraser, is now also the home of the Black Watch museum. I am not unique in quoting a line from the regiment’s website that embodies its ethos, because Alexander Stewart and Emma Harper have used the same quote, but I will say it anyway.”
“Our current focus is on the short term and on rebuilding the capacity. The member asked whether we feel that that extra provision will have an impact on the idea of redundant overprovision. I have made it clear—and it is clearly set out in the Promise—that we do not want to have a large estate of secure care that is not utilised; that would not be good for anybody. Instead, we would want to invest that money in appropriate community alternatives or other interventions for the children and young people. In essence, I do not agree with the member—I feel that extra capacity is required at this moment in time and will help to alleviate the challenges that members have brought to me.”
“What form will these services take, and how soon will they be implemented? Natalie Don-Innes: I was actually able to answer those questions in committee this morning. The first question from the children’s commissioner was about the number of children who have been unable to be placed. As I said in committee this morning, the Scottish Government does not routinely hold case-specific information around that. However, I know that, in instances where the issues of capacity have caused concerns, there have been real efforts between all the different stakeholders involved—whether that is the Scottish Government, COSLA or secure care providers—to come to an arrangement that meets the needs of the child and of the other children in secure care. The commissioner asked another question on the national co-ordination of secure placements.”