Chamber and committees

That is an important point. I engage with parents and I know that, if the kid leaves school or does not go to school—that is perhaps the case more in secondary—it is then very difficult, if the reasonable adjustments are not made, for the kid to go back into school. Quite often, rather than going to school, they will either be home educated or simply not have schooling at all, which can become a real issue.

We also had a discussion on that, Dorry. I do not know what you find in your area.

That is an important point. Although it is about the child, the whole family is impacted. That comes back to Jenny Miller’s point about being as collaborative and as inclusive as possible right at the start; and, as Bill Colley said, it is also about co-production right at the start.

Rob, what is your experience? For me, this is a fundamental approach that we need to consider.

I am the SNP MSP for East Lothian.

I am the MSP for East Lothian.

I have a couple of questions. I looked through the information and wondered about the prevalence of neurodivergences in young offenders. It is really startling that the prevalence rate is 60 to 90 per cent in young offenders. The other thing that was talked about was inequalities. Autistic people are nine times more likely to die by suicide, but the prevalence of communication disorders in the general population is only 5 to 10 per cent. Can we do more in terms of prevention? Are we doing as much as we can in relation to the prevalence figures? For me, that is a really important point. Sixty to 90 per cent is startlingly different from 5 to 10 per cent. Are we doing enough at the start of the process?

Superintendent Gallie, I will come to you at some stage. I met the local command team, and one of the key things that they said is that they almost feel that their role is more social work than policing. Is there something that we can do on the prevalence figures?

Sarah Angus, you talked about people with vulnerabilities and then you moved on to people with communication disorders. Is there more that we can do in that area before it even gets to the stage of people offending? That 60 to 90 per cent figure is absolutely startling.

Superintendent Gallie, I will come to you first on the point about the police, but, more generally, can you comment on that figure? For me, that is the stand-out figure in the evidence.

10:00

I will open it up to others, as I was going to ask about reasonable adjustments, which I think that you almost moved on to.

Does anyone else want to come in? I see you nodding your head, Inga.

We have heard evidence about different policy frameworks across different services, including schools and care settings. Childcare providers, too, have given evidence about the use of restraint and seclusion. Does the bill present a risk of dual reporting in some settings, such as schools with early learning and childcare classes or residential facilities? We have heard from staff at schools with residential facilities. Is there a reporting issue here? What are your thoughts about that?

I know that I am slightly moving our discussion beyond the scope of the bill in asking this, but if that area is outwith the bill’s scope, where do you see it falling when it comes to what happens next? We heard evidence from residential schools about that.

Let me clarify that. We are considering the scope of the bill. You have deliberately not widened it to include residential schools, so how do you see that aspect developing? It is something that we should consider.

Miles Briggs’s point about advocacy came through quite strongly, and you said that you would look at that, minister, so I do not expect you to expand on it. Advocacy also came through very strongly when we met the care-experienced kids.

Gavin Henderson touched on another issue that came through strongly at that meeting, which was aftercare advocacy. In itself, aftercare is fine, but I am asking about advocacy services for children aged up to 16 and then up to age 26. An issue that came through strongly was about advocacy all through those people’s lives. The people who come out of the care experience will come through it in different ways, but there is still that trauma attached to some of them. The importance of whole-life advocacy came through in our meeting.

I come from a local authority background, where we see kids going through the care system and then having kids, who then have the same issues. It is about breaking that cycle.

Can you say a bit more about whole-life advocacy, which came through strongly when we met the group of care-experienced kids? I know that, as you said, local authorities and health boards have to come in, and I know that there is a whole-Government approach, but I would like to hear how you see whole-life advocacy all the way through the system.

Thank you, convener. I want to build on the engagement aspect, because it is important to bring this back to why we are really doing this, which is engagement with children and young people. Could you say a little bit about that?

I joined the committee during the most humbling part of this process: I listened in on our session with the kids. We met with 40-odd care-experienced kids and that was the most humbling experience. I want to bring this back to the most important part of the process. What was your official engagement with children and young people?