 ond at that point, my incident might not have arrived at the first place, so we have to balance that, but I will certainly have a look at all these regulations. The next item of business is a statement by Michael Russell on child protection. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of the statement and there should therefore be no interventions or interruptions. It would be helpful if members who wish to The cabinet secretary has made a request to speak button on. I will give a few more more moments for the front benches to saddle bl bluffed com dijell y byddarnig. Michael Russell, ten minutes. I make no doubt that every member in this chamber is absolutely committed to ensuring the well-being and the happiness of every child in Scotland. That is not so much of policy objective as a model imperative. It unites the vast majority of human kind. Oh technical error히n cyflwr mif Section 84 fwy berthaw 🔥 Hold shop adweliad perthfaith yng anesthes dadd rhyw Llywodraeth o ddo�ardd rydyn ni gadoes yn dweud y rh profPhone fel seicio sydd yn cyllides Жadd y byddwch i'i cy hoffe買l o g foulnegog gyffredinol. Felly rwy'n cependigau hwngwch ar ddiweddarfodaeth yth grayr cychoryniad yn hyfo ar gyfer y bydd, ac rydyn ni ddylo i angו�nau chi gweld gweithrecynt o gweld o'r llythio chi'n cerdwe allwysig Fyllenלor ac yn un lgwlad i gyda my regrets inno該wner lifts. to protect every child in young person from abuse whatever form it takes. Two weeks ago, I delivered the Scottish Government's response to the action plan developed by the Scottish Human Rights Commission, Interaction Process. On that afternoon, I met survivors of child abuse—sexual, physical and emotional— to listen to their demands of government and society. I was very affected by their stories, by their courage, by their commitment and sometimes by their anger. Ond oes� o'ch chi'n fflusio o rai oedd yn gallu'n ei wneud i gyd yn cynnig i chi'n fflusio i chi'n mwy a gyd yn ganwyr. Beth hefyd, ag tunnelau a chyflodau, sydd wedi bod yn cael ei ffordd fel gwneud. Mae hyn yn ceisio ac mae'n cael ei wneud i chi gael, ffordd fel gwneud. Mae hi'n mynd amwylwch yn ei ffordd fel gwneud i chi'n mynd i chi wedi gael maen nhw'n ddweud a adherewyd i chi'n dweud. There can be full accountability surrounded by the best of support and a holistic approach visit to healing. The Scottish Government has accepted the main recommendations of the unique interaction process. I pay strong tribute to Alan Miller, and to the work of the Dankeins Institute of Excellence who has looked after children in Scotland and also to the agencies and the survivors who have taken part in a difficult and unique process that has resulted in a clear way forward. As a result of that process, I can tell the chamber today that we've committed to lead the development of a national support fund for survivors of historic abuse and care, working with survivors and organisations on the most appropriate model. We've agreed to fund an appropriate commemoration after actively engaging with survivors and relevant organisations on the format that should take. We'll give full consideration to the merits of an apology law and continue to work constructively with Margaret Mitchell MSP as her detailed proposals for an apology bill are developed. We've committed to working with the legal profession and survivors to try and understand why there may be barriers around the exercising of judicial discretion in terms of time bar. We'll review the lessons learned of previous inquiries, we'll ensure that the people who speak about their experiences in institutional care as children will have this recounted through the national confidential forums published reports. We'll do so by joining with the survivors and the agencies in taking those issues forward together. As a Government, we'll continue the involvement of the three ministers who have been part of this so far, Michael Matheson, the Minister for Public Health, Roseanna Cunningham, the Minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs and Aileen Campbell, the Minister for Children and Young People, working with me to provide a cross-government team of participants. I use that word advisedly, Presiding Officer. This is not a process that is completed. I've given a strong commitment to ensure that the views and experiences of the survivors is integral to the decision-making and action processes going forward. Government will be part of a wider grouping, ensuring that we deliver, as is our responsibility, but remaining within the process that is much greater than Government alone. That particularly applies to the one issue that is still unresolved from the interaction process. There's been much debate as to whether a further enquiry should take place into historic abuse in Scotland. The interaction process produced a new paper on the matter in August after a special session to consider the issue. This took a clear and unequivocal stance in favour of an enquiry, and I respect that view. However, it suggested a very different type of enquiry from that, which is usually established by statute and by government. I've spent a considerable time in the last few weeks examining that suggestion. I've consulted colleagues and professionals from a variety of areas, including social work, childcare, health and the law. I believe that there are still issues that require to be resolved before a final decision can be made on whether a further enquiry is appropriate and if so, of what type. Some of those issues need continued input by the survivors. Of course, the shore review, which was reported in November 2007, and the care law inquiry, which was reported in May 2009, have already considered some aspects of those matters in Scotland. I have therefore asked the Scottish Human Rights Commission to reconvene an urgent meeting of the interaction group to focus on those matters that still have to be resolved, with a view to allowing the Government to reach a final decision. I have also heard from some survivors outside the interaction process about this issue, strongly in support of an enquiry, it has to be said, and I will continue to seek and listen to such views as well. It is vital that this issue is resolved properly and positively. We can only see too clearly what has happened elsewhere when Governments have taken an ex-cathedra stance on an enquiry and how it should go forward without listening and exploring enough. There are good examples of much better processes elsewhere, for example, in Northern Ireland and Australia, and we need to look at those, too, and I will therefore return to the chamber on this matter before Christmas. However, the enquiry is only one aspect of this issue. History must not be allowed to repeat itself, so the Scottish Government is equally committed to understanding current threats and criminal activity and how we stand against them. We are working closely in partnership with those across Scotland who have the greatest expertise in those matters, providing national leadership and co-ordination while being guided by those whose everyday work is with children and families in communities across Scotland. That means working with a wide range of people, including the third sector, local government, health service and Police Scotland. All those organisations have worked with us on the first national action plan on child sexual exploitation, which we are publishing today. This work has been informed by the J report into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham, which is one of the reasons why it has taken a little longer than expected. The action plan is not a panacea to tackling child sexual exploitation. There is no single solution. However, the action plan represents a critical milestone, outlining tangible steps for useful action that will move us forward in our efforts to tackle this vital concern. For example, I am pleased to announce today our commitment to work with partners to develop a national awareness campaign on child protection. We will be looking to work with Police Scotland to develop guidance on child sexual exploitation indicators for night-time economy staff, such as taxi drivers and hotel workers, who come into increased first-hand contact with children and young people at especially vulnerable times. The recent establishment of the Police Scotland national child abuse investigation unit is another key innovation that will provide national specialist support on all child abuse investigations that are identified across the country. Police Scotland will have the specialist's capability to investigate and target both current cases and cases where historic accusations of criminality are brought forward. That parallels the establishment of the Specialised National Sexual Crimes Unit by the Crown Office. Improving outcomes for children is a long road to travel. As we take steps here in Scotland to make its change, we will continue to pay attention to the developing discourse elsewhere, and we will ensure that we are well placed to respond to emerging findings and new examples of best practice. We will reflect on how best the experience of others can be adapted to circumstances here. In the summer, ministers asked the Care Inspectorate to update us on the effectiveness of local arrangements for protecting children and adults. The commission's report into child protection was published last week. It is very helpful. It highlights some excellent work, but also potential barriers to improvements in protecting children and young people. That will inform everything that we do. In addition, in the context of the specific inquiries into historic child sexual abuse taking place elsewhere in the UK, in July I commissioned the chief executive of children in Scotland, Jackie Brock, to take an independent look at the working of the Scottish child protection system as developed by recent legislation. The purpose of the report was to examine how robust our child protection systems are and to identify areas of improvement. Ms Brock's report usefully complements that of the Care Inspectorate, considering strategic issues in delivering child protection services efficiently and consistently across the country. It offers 12 recommendations about how the Scottish Government and partners can do that more effectively. I am also publishing that report today. I can confirm that I am supportive of all its recommendations. I will, for example, bring together the chief officers of the 32 community planning partnerships, the chief officers of the shadow integrated health and social care partnerships and the child protection committee chairs in a summit to be held this year. It is fair to say that the vast majority of children will have safe and happy childhoods without the intervention of public services or third sector agencies other than through normal healthcare and schooling. For those other children, however, it is essential that we are able to identify and support their needs from the earliest possible age, and a preventative approach has long been the bedrock of our system. That is best expressed, of course, in GERFEC, getting it right for every child. That is our national approach to improving the wellbeing of children. It is developed across several administrations and in partnership with statutory agencies and the third sector. It is improving our early warning systems. It is helping us to pick up on the signs of need more quickly. It allows services to make appropriate responses to prevent risk-becoming realities. This entire chamber should embrace it wholeheartedly. In conclusion, some dreadful things happened in Scotland over many years to children who deserved so much better from those in positions of trust. Jack McConnell made an appropriate and heartfelt apology in this chamber in 2004 on behalf of the nation and us all. We must never forget what took place. We need to have an awareness of it that means that it can never be repeated. We need to prosecute those who were guilty so that they can never re-offend. We need to place in permanence the truth about who was accountable so that others never fail again. We also need to help those who suffered to move from surviving to living and thriving. We all need to come together around that ambition to ensure that Scotland is and will, from this time on, be the best place for each and every child to grow up. That work is not done yet. I have reported on substantial progress here today. I will come back to the chamber to report on the outstanding issue of the inquiry, as well as to update the chamber from time to time about how the detail of those processes are being worked out and implemented. We can never do enough for those who have suffered, but by working with them we can at least try to make a difference for the pain of the past, a difference to our practice in the present and a difference to our plans for the future. I am, of course, happy to answer questions on this statement. The cabinet secretary said that he will now take questions on issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow him until about 2.50 for questions. I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for early sight of his deliberation this afternoon. I am also pleased to acknowledge that he is taking the lead in this matter in order that we can finally deliver on the hopes of survivors across Scotland in relation to the very important issue. I am pleased to associate myself, too, with the words of support that the cabinet secretary has offered to all those who have contributed to decisions that he has acknowledged today. However, I would also add individual survivors and survivors groups who have helped so much. I hope that the cabinet secretary will be able to give us further detail of the action plan and, importantly, implementation dates, because too often survivors and others involved in the situation have not known when something was due to occur and when it would be delivered. As the cabinet secretary indicated, a survivor did want to live and thrive, but many of the survivors that I have spoken to also want an answer into how and why the abuse that he suffered was allowed to continue. The answer to that question gives us best opportunity to protect vulnerable children for the future. The cabinet secretary mentioned the initiation of a support fund. I would welcome more detail of who would contribute to that support fund, because there are a number of organisations and agencies who should do well to show a willingness to contribute and fully contribute. The commemoration that he mentioned, I hope that that commemoration would take on board not only those survivors who are living but those who are unfortunate enough to have already taken their own lives in the years that have gone past, unable to contend themselves with the future knowing what they had suffered. Supporting survivors to understand their interaction plan is something that the cabinet secretary indicated in his statement. I have to say that it sounded a deal condescending, and I hope that he will explain that more fully, because I am sure that he did not mean it in the way that it looks in the cold light of the statement. Many survivors will be looking forward to the introduction of a public inquiry. Christmas cannot come soon enough for them, and they believe that a public inquiry will give us a full understanding of why we are where we are and how we can prevent the future from recurring in the way that it seems to have done in the decades that have gone past. I am very grateful that the statement has been made today. There are a number of points that I would respond to, first of all, in terms of supporting survivors. The interaction process is exactly what it says that it is interactive, and therefore it is important that the Government is part of that. However, there is mutual support by all those involved, and there will continue to be. The point about helping survivors to understand the action plan is to widen the impact of the action plan, because not every survivor is a member of the interaction process. In terms of the inquiry, can I commend to the member something that I referred to, which is the interaction survivors event report from the 27th of August, titled, Views on Inquiry. I am happy to make sure that a copy of that is available in Spice. That is an important document. What it tells us is the issues that the interaction process is considering in terms of the importance of things that need to be heard in an inquiry. If I may just quote one or two of them, they are important. Survivor's experience of being publicly heard and acknowledged is an important part of that. Enhancing public understanding of institutional child abuse, giving agencies the opportunity to tell the story of not only what took place, but how they have changed. Helping the mental health of survivors, quantifying the extent of abuse, and very importantly aligning here, which I think that we should all reflect on, justice is more than apology or money. It is ensuring that there is a national record that we can move forward on. That is not a conventional inquiry. Therefore, we need to address it in a very different way. That is why we need to consider how that could be done, given that the legislation, as the member will know, that Surroundings Public Inquiry is very different and focused on very different outcomes. That is why we will take some time to resolve that. Just in terms of the action plan that is published today, there is detail in the action plan of the timescale. If I can just quote from the action plan itself, timescales for achieving actions on the action plan differ, and a number of already been successfully achieved, some of the longer time frame attached. There is clarity within this document about that. Finally, on the issue of a support fund and commemoration, there are a number of international models, for example the Irish model on the fund. It will require a number of partners to be involved in that. That is a negotiation that myself and my colleagues are going to undertake with the interaction process, and the Government will play a role, both in being part of the fund, but also in making sure that we are able to negotiate a wider involvement. That is what we will do. I, too, thank the Cabinet Secretary for Advanced Copy of his statement. We, too, welcome the response that is made by the Government to the Scottish Human Rights Commission's interaction plan, and we appreciate his comments on my colleague Margaret Mitchell's hard work with her apologies bill. We also welcome his acceptance of the recommendations in the children in Scotland's report, particularly that the focus should be on children who are vulnerable and on the radar—in other words, children who are living at home but are known to children's services. I appreciate the cabinet secretary's explanation as to why the Government does not believe that a further inquiry into cases of historic child abuse in Scotland is necessary at this point in time. If further cases do come forward, which relates specifically to Scotland, will he confirm that such an inquiry has not been fully ruled out? I also ask, as a member of the Health and Sport Committee at the time that the National Confidential Forum for Survivors of institutionalised abuse was set up, what reports he has received regarding individuals coming forward to use the forum, whether he can provide the chamber with an update on its progress, and would he consider now extending access to the forum for children in foster and kinship care? The confidential forum will start taking referrals next month, so that is the timescale, and of course that is established in legislation. Can I just be clear about what I have said on the inquiry, because I think that the statement is clear and I think that the Presiding Officer and I will just misinterpret it slightly. I have indicated that I take no position presently on the final decision on a further inquiry. I have indicated that I think that there is a strong and persuasive case coming from the interaction process, and there are also other cases being made. I have committed myself to continue to listen to that, to have further discussions, the interaction process is coming back together to discuss that. There is work to be done across the whole areas involved in this in terms of a very different type of inquiry from the type of inquiry that conventionally is established, for example, under the 2005 act, and I will come back to the chamber to report further on that. I do not want it to be taken that I have taken a position on it. It is, if the member will read this paper and will consider it, it is a different thing that is being proposed from what has gone before. I do not think that we can undervalue the unique nature of the interaction process and how important it has been, but there are other considerations that need to come in, so I will come back with that. Simply on the action plan, can I just make sure that everybody is entirely clear on that? There is the action plan on child sexual exploitation that is on-going of what is happening now, and that is what we have published today in response to the Petitions Committee, which Mr Stewart will know about. Of course, there is the interaction process about historic sex abuse. There are links between those matters, but let us be clear in our mind about a number of things that are linked by appalling behaviour and criminal behaviour, which are different and require different approaches. Cabinet Secretary, at the Justice Committee on 7 October, echoing Professor Jay, we heard evidence from the Crown Office that it is undoubtedly true that low conviction levels did not necessarily mean low levels of child sexual exploitation. Do you agree that there is a public concern as the extent of child sexual abuse and that information gathering on the subject is vital? I absolutely agree with that member. I think that it is dangerous to make assumptions about the level of abuse of any description. I have seen some slightly careless remarks about whether or not levels of abuse are taking place, for example on what is called a rotherum level. We have to be very careful about that. The police are determined to prosecute and to secure a conviction of anybody who is accused in that matter if they are guilty. We have to be very careful about the assumptions that we have made about the scale of what we are talking about. It is true that a low conviction level does not necessarily mean levels of child sexual abuse, but equally it does not necessarily mean that there are higher levels of child sexual abuse. I do agree with the member absolutely that we have to make sure that there is information available about what is taking place. We have to have our eyes and ears fully open. When I make the point about the night-time economy workers, we need to enlist in this process people across Scotland. One of the many lessons, if you read the rotherum report, is that people find it difficult to take their minds from where they were to what they saw in front of them. We need to make sure that people are prepared to do that. That sometimes requires us to think things that we would rather not think, but we do need to do so. I commend the member for saying that information gathering is vital. Awareness, perhaps, is a word that I would use, is even more vital. Neil Bibby, followed by Liam McArthur. The cabinet secretary will be aware that Scotland is the only part of the UK that currently does not have an inquiry into historic institutional abuse. That is obviously not a new issue. As the cabinet secretary said, the First Minister, Jack McConnell, gave an apology in 2004. A number of my constituents have been calling for such an inquiry for a number of years, a call that I support. We have already seen millions of pounds spent on reports for months and consultations to look at the best way forward. Given that, could the cabinet secretary list and give more details to the chamber on exactly what he feels needs to be resolved before a final decision on an inquiry can be made? I used the term further inquiry advisedly. There have been two inquiries. There have been a range of reviews and investigations, and there has, of course, been a very active process of prosecution. I am sure that the member did not mean to give the impression that nothing has happened, because a great deal has happened. It rose out of that apology and out of other things taking place, but I would come in to the member the interaction process. This has been a unique process. I regard myself as very privileged as having, although I have only come in towards the very end, very privileged at seeing what has taken place. It has been quite extraordinary how the agencies, survivors and others have come together to negotiate and discuss a careful way forward. I am very struck by the paper that they have produced on an inquiry, which is very late in their process. That has changed my thinking. It is extremely important that we think carefully when we are presented with information and evidence. The issues that need to be resolved have indicated some of them in my statement, but they include whether there is any statutory, any law in existence at the moment that can necessarily underpin this different type of inquiry. For example, in Northern Ireland, the member has referred to what is taking place in other jurisdictions. In Northern Ireland, there was a specific piece of legislation passed that essentially tailored the inquiry to what was needed. It did not fit into the straight jacket of existing legislation. It is fair to say that if you look at the 2005 act, it is very good legislation in terms of inquiring into things in which you can ask a clear and specified question. For example, how did an accident take place? How did a disaster take place? You can ask those questions, but when you are looking at, for example, issues such as the public acknowledgement of wrong and the enhancing public understanding, those are not clear questions to be answered. What we have to do is to discuss through the interaction process how we could shape this inquiry. I also would not commend the approach that has been taken south of the border. There, we seem to have had a decision on an inquiry and its remit, which was announced ex-cathedra and told to those people who were most affected. I do not think that that is the right way to do it. I do not think that that is how the Scottish Parliament would want to do it. Let us take the time to discuss this and to see what the right way forward is. That is what I intend to do over the next few weeks, but I have set a timescale for that very deliberately. I can come back to this chamber before Christmas and conclude one way or the other and explain that conclusion, and to be open to question from this chamber about that conclusion. I welcome the cabinet secretary's statement and the action plan. It is clear that a considerable amount of work has been done by a variety of groups and a significant amount of thought has gone into this complex question. I also commend his suggestion that a strong persuasive case is emerging, possibly for a further inquiry. However, the care inspectorate highlighted serious shortcomings with planning of child protection services, stalled or deteriorated progress and important or major weaknesses in the effectiveness of initial responses. The report also highlighted that social workers who have been in the job as little as one month were having to deal with complex cases. Mr Russell referred to further training for professionals, but does he agree that there is need for urgent action to look at whether or not the correct skills mix within local teams is there to ensure that experienced social workers are paired with or working alongside those who are newly qualified? Yes. I do not have any difficulty with acknowledging that, although there were positive things in the report, there were things that required urgent attention. That is why, when there is a team of ministers involved in this, this is why Eileen Campbell met the Care Inspectorate today at this lunch time, which we are putting in place the actions that are required to take that forward. I assure the member that we want to make sure that, where criticisms exist, we will make sure that they are attended to. I do not believe that social workers with very limited experience should be exposed to the most difficult of cases. I have spent part of this year, in my role as having responsibility for social work, meeting front-line social workers across Scotland in a variety of private discussions that have persuaded me of a number of things. One is the very high quality of social work staff that we have in Scotland. Secondly, the fact that those staff can, for example, suffer from burnout can be placed in positions where they are not able to fully respond. We need to make sure that we are supporting them. Last week, I met a group of directors of social work to take those issues forward as well. The point is well made. We note the objections within the report to certain things that are taking place, the recommendations for improvement, and we will take them forward. I welcome the national awareness campaign and child protection. As the cabinet secretary knows and most of us know, child abuse often takes place in the family home behind closed doors and with families that are not known to social work. How can members of the public therefore report their awareness that there may be something untoward and to whom should they report it? There are a variety of ways in which that can happen. Let me start with the confines of the children's legislation, where the legislation on the named person gives an opportunity for people to seek help and advice at an early stage. I think that that is an important thing to happen. There are a variety of places. I would suggest that criminal action is always reported to the police. There is no doubt that that is essential and that that should happen. Suspicions of problems and difficulties could also be drawn to the attention of a variety of agencies, including social work and the Care Inspectorate. There is no shortage of people to whom information can be given. The member will know that the important first step is to recognise that there may be something wrong and in those circumstances to be determined to do something about it, not in a negative way. In a way, I outline the statement and the importance of supporting every single individual child. I welcome the national action plan and the proposals for our national awareness campaign on child protection. However, does the cabinet secretary agree with me that schools have a vital role to play in tackling and preventing child sexual exploitation? Can the cabinet secretary outline what preventative education is currently available for our children and young people and what further plans the Scottish Government has in this area? It is important that we ask Education Scotland to consider that as an early matter and that will be done. I think that it is also very important that individual teachers, both in their training and in their CPD, are alerted to those issues. That is also an issue. However, the national campaign that we are announcing in the action plan is about raising the awareness right across society. I would expect teachers and schools to be an integral and central part of that. One of the recommendations calls for the chief officers groups to receive a report from child protection committees on the impact of health and social care partnerships on child protection and wellbeing and to implement an urgent review. However, how will that work in light of COSLA's expectation, as expressed in evidence to the education committee this morning, that only one-third of children's social work and health services will become integrated? The legislation allowed for a variety of different models to emerge and that legislation was passed by this chamber. The reason that there would be a range of different models is that they have to be appropriate to local circumstances. What I have indicated in my statement is that we will bring together all those involved, whether they are in the newly integrated models or not, to do that co-ordination. I have said that we will have that meeting this year. We need to bring together child protection committees. We need to bring together local authorities. We need to bring together those involved in health and that integration so that all parts of the system at that senior chair level and senior officer level are absolutely focused on the requirements. I make the commitment to the member that we will do that. Whether the models vary, we will make sure that everybody is involved, because nobody should be excluded from it. Gil Paterson, followed by David Stewart. I also thank the cabinet secretary for his statement on this very important issue. The chief executive of the care inspector has said that generally arrangements for protecting vulnerable children and adults in Scotland are good, but there is no room for complacency. Can I therefore ask the cabinet secretary to outline how he will ensure that there will be no complacency in this regard? I thank the member for that question, because I think that my entire statement has indicated that the Government has no complacency and that nobody in this who is involved in this issue and that should be every single citizen in Scotland can do anything other than, first of all, recall with horror at what some of the things that have taken place. We all need to recognise that we have an individual role in preventing it taking place in the future, and therefore none of us can rest on this issue. What I have outlined in detail in the statement is a range of actions that can be undertaken and will be undertaken by a range of organisations to make sure that we make progress. Alexis J, memorably observed in the Rotherham report that in an area where everyone is responsible, no one is responsible. What we have to do here is to make sure that it is not everyone who is responsible, it is each individual who takes responsibility. That means that each individual knows that there is action to be taken, and that is what we want to do. David Stewart, followed by Graeme Dey. The cabinet secretary will be well aware that the Petitions Committee, which I convene, provided a comprehensive report into child sexual exploitation, carried out after 12 months of exhaustive inquiry and concluded with 26 powerful and pertinent recommendations. Will the cabinet secretary use our 26 recommendations based on expert testimony across the UK and beyond as part of the national action plan, such as using risk of sexual harm orders more often and developing strategies to disrupt perpetrator activity? I am entirely happy with that. I think that the committee made a very important contribution and nobody is rejecting that. We have to drill down into each of the recommendations. If I can just touch on the risk of sexual offending, the orders, that is a decision for prosecutors and for the police to take forward. It is based on individual circumstances and I would not want to create a blanket circumstance in which we were saying that is available and should be used in all circumstances. I think that we must be aware of the many variations and circumstances that exist. If the member will accept my support for the conclusions that have been reached and my desire that everybody plays an important role in that, I hope that he will also accept from your view that I would want to make sure that we were acting appropriately in every case and not necessarily applying blanket prescriptions, which might not be appropriate in some cases. The cabinet secretary will be aware that in many cases children do not recognise their own exploitation until some years after the abuse took place. Does he agree that this is one of the biggest barriers that we must overcome to tackle CSE and can I ask him how he feels that it might be overcome? I think that this is a considerable issue and it is in various aspects that one sees it in with particular concern. There are some people who do recover their memories and I use that word not in its technical sense and who are concerned by it who need very strong support and help during that process and that should be available. Of course, the whole idea of the interaction process and going forward is to provide strong support and holistic help for those who have difficulties. That is a very important issue. There are also those people who go on suffering. I was very struck by somebody who told me a story of being taken into care when she was very young and being told that she had no family and then discovering many years later that she had and she had never known that family. That was a continuing abuse throughout her life. We need to recognise that this is not a simple matter and it is not a matter that finishes for many people. In those circumstances we have a commitment as a society for lifetime care for those who are in these circumstances but it is not care that is simply of one nature. I go back to this phrase that I used twice in my statement. The care must also aim to help those to move from surviving to living and thriving and that is what we need to do and all of our actions should be focused on that. Given the importance of the statement, I intend to make sure that the three remaining speakers are called. Claudia Beamish followed by Liz Smith. Can the cabinet secretary give any details of any additional funding for the development of the national awareness campaign on child protection highlighted in the national action plan in relation particularly to training, co-ordination and very importantly as I'm sure he will agree monitoring of such a sensitive and complex strategy? I have given a commitment to support the implementation of this and therefore the cost of this will be met. I'm sorry not to be more precise than that but I do think that it is important that we came forward with the right proposals and then we said let's find a way and a way will be found to support these so I can undertake that that will be done and of course as time goes on I'll attach both a projected expenditure and an actual expenditure to what we've undertaken. Liz Smith then finally Alison Johnson. Thank you cabinet secretary can I ask in your deliberations with the very considerable experts in this field and with the police are you looking at specific models of local authority organisation which are best placed to produce the best practice in this area? That's a very important question from Liz Smith. The answer is I would want to make sure that the most effective models of practice are replicated or imitated and I will want to make sure that there is a broad knowledge of those. That doesn't mean that I would want to impose a particular individual practice on every local authority so what I do want to make sure is that as the work continues and there is much good work going on we learn where that is most effective and we encourage others to take that forward. There is a desire in each local authority to get this right I mean there's no doubt about that but where the practices have not been as good as they should be then they should move forward. We benefit from the work that the care inspectorate has done you know over a period of time at looking at children's services and I think it's fair to say if I can just put it this way we know what doesn't work and we know where we have experienced those problems and the minister has been involved with my support in making sure that we make absolutely clear that that is not acceptable and that there is substantial improvement sort that we also I think do know where good practice exists and will encourage its replication. Alison Donson I thank you thank the cabinet secretary for his statement to to tackle child sexual abuse requires better information is Police Scotland using the new database which allows it has a specific marker which allows accurate identification of individuals who may be at risk and how are other agencies sharing this information. I think I would require to to write to the member about that the issue of Police Scotland databases a complex one there new databases being built and developed I know the police are observing best practice in this but I would want I don't want to answer the member without an absolute knowledge of that and I'll ask my colleague the cabinet secretary for for justice to provide that information so you have it. Thank you that ends the statement from the cabinet secretary on child protection we now move to the next debate which is a debate on motion number 11484