Official Report 1167KB pdf
Education and Skills
The next item of business is portfolio question time. On this occasion, the portfolio is education and skills. I remind members that questions 2 and 7 have been grouped and that, therefore, I will take any supplementaries on those questions after the substantive questions have been asked and answered. There is quite a bit of interest in supplementaries, so the usual plea stands for brevity in questions and answers.
Education Infrastructure Investment
To ask the Scottish Government how much it has invested in education infrastructure since 2011. (S6O-04954)
The Scottish Government recognises the importance of education infrastructure as a foundation for delivering high-quality learning environments, supporting wellbeing and enabling long-term economic and social benefits. That is why, since 2011, we have invested significant funding of £2.8 billion in Scotland’s education estate. That investment has led to the proportion of schools in a good or satisfactory condition increasing from 62.7 per cent in 2007 to a record 92 per cent today. Our funding through the learning estate investment programme is helping to build on that remarkable progress.
I welcome the new, state-of-the-art Currie community high school, which opened at the start of the academic year in my constituency of Edinburgh Pentlands. Will the cabinet secretary outline when young people in the Wester Hailes area will have the opportunity to benefit from the new Wester Hailes high school, which is currently under construction?
I thank Gordon MacDonald for his question and look forward to attending the official opening of Currie community high school in November.
On his substantive point, I understand that the redevelopment of Wester Hailes high school is under way and that completion is expected in autumn 2026. As I mentioned in my previous response, the Government will provide further funding to the City of Edinburgh Council through the learning estate investment programme, with funding of £16.8 million for that ambitious transformation, which will create lasting benefits for young people and the wider community.
There are a number of supplementaries. I will fit in as many as I can.
The cabinet secretary will know about the funding that the Scottish Government has given to Moray Council for a replacement Forres academy. That is very welcome, but there are significant concerns about the siting of the new school. Can the cabinet secretary confirm that the money has been allocated to Moray Council, that the siting is a local decision and that, should the council decide to move the school to an alternative venue, that would not put the funding under threat?
I understand the challenges in relation to the new high school in Forres, and I am more than happy to write to the member on the specifics. I understand that the location is a matter for the local authority, but I will write to the member in due course to give him a specific answer.
In Glasgow, a group of primary school pupils is campaigning because their school is not accessible for people who use wheelchairs and the outdoor shelter has been deemed unsafe. This week, data showed that more than 100 schools have not had their expected five-year suitability survey, which includes surveying suitability under the Equality Act 2010 and suitability of access. In the light of that, will the cabinet secretary say when every school will have a survey, ensure that there is the necessary investment and support, and work with the council to make sure that schools in Glasgow are accessible and that their playground shelters are safe?
The specific issue that the member raises is a matter for Glasgow City Council, as the local authority, in the first instance. However, she also raises a hugely important point in relation to accessibility. I am more than happy to ask my officials to engage with Glasgow City Council on the specifics of her question and to get back to the member in due course.
As a former councillor who campaigned and fought alongside the community, I can report that the new facilities in Currie are quite special. However, the campus is far from complete. Following the demolition of the old building, the ambitious plans to create outdoor learning spaces and first-class sports facilities are under threat. Will the cabinet secretary meet me and parents to understand the need for the ambitious campus to be delivered as promised, following the successful community campaign to keep both Currie and Wester Hailes high schools in the heart of their respective communities?
Ms Webber raises an important point, and I am more than happy to meet her and campaigners. We have provided the City of Edinburgh Council with significant funding for both schools. Since 2021, we have provided total funding of £64 million towards the construction of four new schools. I am more than happy to meet the member and campaigners in relation to the points that she has made.
Children (Withdrawal from Religious Education and Amendment of UNCRC Compatibility Duty) (Scotland) Bill
To ask the Scottish Government for what reason the Children (Withdrawal from Religious Education and Amendment of UNCRC Compatibility Duty) (Scotland) Bill aims to give school pupils an independent right to opt in, but not opt out, of religious observance. (S6O-04955)
The bill, in its current form, will strengthen the rights of children and young people in Scotland, building on our commitment to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The changes aim to strike a balance between that commitment, parental rights, the wide range of stakeholder views and the practicality of implementing the changes for schools. The approach represents a clear improvement in the consideration of children’s and young people’s views on withdrawal from religious observance. In accordance with current guidance, schools should already take an inclusive approach to religious observance, reflecting the diversity of faith and belief in the school community.
There is a fundamental inequality in that. Although the bill gives school pupils the right to overrule their parents in order to opt in to religious observance, non-religious children will still need parental permission to opt out. That creates a hierarchy of beliefs, with the views of religious pupils being taken more seriously than those of non-religious children and young people. Why is that? Will the cabinet secretary address that worrying bias, or are religious children’s views officially more valid than the views of those who do not hold those beliefs?
I do not agree with the substantive final point of Emma Roddick’s question. I am more than happy to engage with the member on that point. Today, my private office has reached out to all members of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, which will be considering the bill in due course, to offer to engage directly. I met the Humanist Society only last week to hear some of the points that Emma Roddick has raised. The point that I made in my initial response is that it is important that the Government strikes a balance in relation to the rights of parents and the rights of children and young people. We need to be mindful of that balance and of it potentially becoming out of kilter.
The aim of the bill is to ensure that, in the context of the long-standing parental right to withdraw a child from religious observance, children’s and young people’s views are given due weight in that process. I think that that was the member’s substantive point, and the provisions in the bill reflect that aim. It is a technical bill that aims to strengthen our alignment with the UNCRC, and it will put the position in relation to ministers’ UNCRC obligations in this area beyond doubt. As I said, I am more than happy to meet members, and the committee will consider the bill in due course.
“Preaching is not Teaching”
To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the recently published report by Humanist Society Scotland, “Preaching is not Teaching”, regarding concerns that pupils in non-denominational schools may feel compelled to take part in religious worship activities against their own wishes. (S6O-04960)
The Scottish Government welcomes the Humanist Society’s report, which helpfully adds to the literature regarding current practice of religious observance—or RO—and the right of parents to withdraw pupils from it. Evidence shows how inclusive and pluralistic religious observance can support all pupils’ spiritual and moral development. I met with the Humanist Society last week and have asked it to share further information on its examples of RO not being delivered inclusively. Guidance is clear that religious observance should be inclusive for those of all faiths and none.
I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests as a member of the Humanist Society Scotland.
Given that more than 70 per cent of Scottish pupils now identify as non-religious or as having non-Christian beliefs, I am deeply concerned that non-denominational schools are still able to deliver an exclusively Christian programme of religious observance. In the report, one parent explained that their child was pressured to pray out loud and reprimanded for choosing to stay quiet, leaving her distressed and ashamed. Does the cabinet secretary agree that that represents a clear failure to respect a child’s right to their own beliefs—a fundamental human right that is protected under the UNCRC—and that pupils should be given the ability to independently opt out of religious observance?
I, too, am concerned by some of the issues that have been raised in the Humanist Society Scotland report. As I mentioned, I discussed those with the society last week. As I said, I have asked the society whether it can share further information on the examples that the member has cited in order to look at whether more can be done to ensure that religious observance is delivered inclusively in all schools.
The experience of the young person who was mentioned in the question does not sound consistent at all with the guidance that religious observance in schools should be sensitive to all spiritual needs and beliefs and be inclusive for those of all faiths and none. I would be happy for the member to write to me with further details, but, as I said, I have asked the Humanist Society Scotland for further detail in relation to that matter.
As I mentioned, the Scottish Government has engaged with a wide range of stakeholders on the bill’s proposals, and I will continue to engage with members as the bill makes its way through Parliament.
Higher Education Sector (Dispute)
To ask the Scottish Government what interventions it has made to end the current dispute over jobs and cuts in the higher education sector. (S6O-04956)
Although universities are autonomous institutions with responsibility for their own operational and staffing matters, I have continued to encourage university leaders to engage constructively with trade unions and to seek resolution to local disputes in line with fair work principles. That should include meaningful staff consultation on the potential impact of their cost-saving programmes and working together with staff and trade unions to ensure that workers are treated fairly. Compulsory redundancies should be considered only as a last resort, after all other cost-saving measures have been fully explored.
I thank the minister for that reply. The University of Edinburgh is our largest university and one of the most prestigious. It is currently in dispute with the University and College Union over job losses and a failure to rule out compulsory redundancies. UCU members took strike action on Friday 20 June and a further five days from 8 September. While senior managers held dispute resolution talks with the UCU on 12 June, ahead of the first strike day, and met the joint unions on 24 July, the university has made no effort since then to meet with the UCU and is instead moving ahead with job cuts through so-called targeted voluntary redundancy. How does the minister believe this fits with the Scottish Government’s fair work first principles and the fair work dimensions of effective voice, security and respect?
I have already outlined what our expectations are around these matters. Richard Leonard paints a picture with a very specific interpretation of what is happening at the University of Edinburgh. He will appreciate that I am not fully sighted on the detail that he has outlined. However, I undertake, through the Scottish Funding Council, to seek to explore the very points that he has made, and I will come back to the member on that.
The signs of stress in the higher education system are clear, as Richard Leonard has set out. Does the minister accept that the current financial model for higher education is broken? Will he set out what discussions he has had with Universities Scotland and others about a potential new financial model?
As Willie Rennie is aware, there have been on-going discussions with the sector about that very point: looking to a more sustainable long-term financial model. In fact, I hope that we will be able to make a joint announcement in the next few weeks that will outline the detail of that.
I offer a reassurance, which perhaps goes to the concerns that Richard Leonard has articulated, that, whatever process is followed and whatever the direction of travel is, trade unions, staff and students will also be able to input to that process, because I absolutely recognise that we need to move to a more sustainable long-term model for our institutions.
Additional Support for Learning (Rural Schools)
To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure that pupils attending smaller rural schools are receiving the additional support for learning that they need. (S6O-04957)
All children and young people should receive the support that they need to reach their full potential. Local authorities oversee the delivery of education and they have a statutory duty to identify the need for, provide and review support for pupils with additional support needs in their local community, including in schools in rural areas. Spending on additional support for learning by local authorities reached a record high of more than £1 billion in 2023-24, and the 2025-26 budget sets out a further £29 million of additional investment by the Scottish Government for ASN.
On behalf of parents, pupils and teachers, I ask the cabinet secretary: what are they to do when that does not happen? In Dumfries and Galloway, resources are being rationed and smaller schools are being disadvantaged, often having a learning assistant for a fraction of the week. I hope that the cabinet secretary, as a former teacher, will understand the pressure that it creates when support is not there for a young person at the time when they need it, which can often be unpredictable.
The member’s substantive point was about how we can ensure that Government money, which has been protected by the Government centrally, is used at the local level to deliver on what we expect.
Some of that work is being undertaken through our relationship with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the education and childcare assurance board to ensure that ASN funding gets to classrooms and to those who need it most.
The Parliament has committed the Government to leading a review on additional support needs. Colleagues from the member’s party were at a round table with me two weeks ago to agree some of the parameters of what that review will look at. I am keen to look at how we can ensure that funding that is protected in the Government’s budget makes its way into the classrooms, where it can make the biggest difference.
My final point relates to school funding. The member might be aware of an appointment that I announced at the start of the term in relation to school governance, school funding and what comes next, in terms of the Scottish attainment challenge and the pupil equity fund. John Wilson, who was formerly a headteacher in Edinburgh, has been appointed to lead hugely important work on those things. We will look at all those matters in the round. I encourage the member to engage with John Wilson as part of his independent review of how we fund our schools, because there is an opportunity through that work to answer some of the challenges that the member quite rightly raised today.
Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with outdoor education centres and schools regarding the financial and staffing implications of the Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill. (S6O-04958)
The Scottish Government has engaged with stakeholders on our outstanding concerns about the bill, which relate to affordability, equity for pupils with additional support needs and the workforce.
I met the Association of Heads of Outdoor Education Centres on 25 February, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on 6 August and trade unions on 25 August. Since the introduction of the bill, officials have also engaged the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland and the national complex needs network. I will confirm to Parliament the Government’s position on the financial resolution for the bill by 26 September.
I am grateful to the minister for that response and for the meetings that were held in February and August, but Government is about choice and the Parliament is the people’s voice of account. Government’s use of process instead of choice is disappointing. What explanation can the minister give as to why process was chosen instead of debating a motion on the financial memorandum, given that meetings were held in February and August and that all the outreach that she has just spoken of could have fed into such a debate?
The question by Mr Whitfield presupposes the outcome of a Government decision on the financial resolution. I remind Parliament that, as I confirmed during the members’ business debate and in committee sessions last week, the financial resolution process is a legitimate and important process that ensures that ministers can exercise our unique responsibility and accountability for appropriate management of the Scottish budget. The process is not unique to the Scottish Government; the Welsh Government, the United Kingdom Government and Northern Ireland Administrations have similar processes.
I am very much looking forward to meeting the cabinet secretary and the minister later this afternoon to discuss the bill. In relation to discussions with the outdoor education sector, what information has the Scottish Government received about my proposals for ways to reduce the cost of the bill?
I have said before that I might not have discussed those exact proposals with the outdoor education sector due to the timing of the meetings. However, I have confirmed to Liz Smith that the proposals that she has made to reduce some of the implications of the bill around affordability and readiness are very welcome and are helping to inform the decision on the financial resolution.
Will the minister outline how the Scottish Government is supporting the delivery of outdoor learning in schools across Scotland?
The bill has provided a good opportunity to discuss and highlight the amount of outdoor education that is already happening in Scotland. Outdoor education is an area of Government focus in our 2023 to 2030 learning for sustainability action plan and in reform through the curriculum improvement cycle. We continue to support investment in outdoor learning through the Scottish attainment challenge, pupil equity funding and phase 3 of our learning estate investment programme.
Nursery Mothballing (Guidance)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its on-going review of the guidance on the mothballing of nurseries. (S6O-04959)
Scottish ministers have committed to updating the advice to local authorities on mothballing that is contained in the statutory guidance for the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010. Scottish Government officials continue to engage with local authorities, parent representatives and other stakeholders as part of that work, and we aim to provide an update to Parliament as soon as possible during the autumn term. While the review is under way, the existing guidance on mothballing remains in place. Decisions relating to the learning estate, including nurseries, are the responsibility of local authorities.
I am pleased to hear that there will be an update this term. However, I believe that, under the guidance from the Scottish National Party Government, nurseries in rural areas are under threat. Parents in the Scottish Borders have legitimate concerns about the mothballing process and the Government’s guidance on it. Does the minister agree that, to address those concerns, any proposals right now to mothball nurseries must be paused until the Government has published the guidance? It seems apparent, if the written answers are anything to go by, that the review on mothballing will find that it is entirely inappropriate action for local authorities to take.
As I said, local decisions are for local authorities. However, any decisions that impact on nursery provision should be made in consultation with local communities and affected parents and families. I have been clear that the mothballing guidance remains in place. We will provide an update on the review in the autumn, which will take the appropriate steps to help to make the process clearer and more effective for parents.
We need to remember that mothballing is an important process for local authorities to manage their learning estate, so a balance has to be struck. I am happy to provide an update to Parliament in the autumn on the review of the guidance, as I have stated.
Construction Sector (Training and Apprenticeships)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on any steps it is taking to expand the availability of training and apprenticeships in the construction sector, in light of reported industry concerns about a growing skills gap. (S6O-04961)
The Scottish Government is committed to addressing skills gaps in the construction sector. As the member may know, we are introducing a new Government-led approach to skills planning to better meet the needs of individuals, employers and the economy. Additionally, the Scottish Funding Council is leading a short-life stakeholder group to better understand industry needs and identify areas for action. In parallel, a working group of the ministerially chaired Construction Leadership Forum is exploring measures to support the sector. Those efforts are part of a broader commitment to creating a more responsive and effective system of workforce development in construction.
The minister will be aware that we are in a housing emergency. We have a shortage of homes, and we need the skills to build those homes throughout the country. The minister referred to the Scottish Government’s skills investment plan for construction, yet the warning signs about an ageing workforce, declining numbers in key trades and the urgent need to attract young people through schools and apprenticeships were there years ago. How does the minister plan to speed up the process of trying to get young people into the construction industry, making it a viable workforce and an area where young people feel confident that their jobs will be there for life?
The short-life working group that I referred to resulted from a round-table meeting that I convened recently involving the Construction Industry Training Board, colleges, the SFC, the Scottish Qualifications Authority, Skills Development Scotland and the career services collaborative to explore how we can deliver short, medium and long-term solutions to the issue.
I very much welcome the measured and constructive approach by the Federation of Master Builders and the Chartered Institute of Building, especially their recognition that, in order to resolve the challenges that Meghan Gallacher highlights, they need to work more closely with the Government and training providers. I advise members that my officials have invited the FMB on to the short-life working group, because the FMB clearly wants to find solutions of the type that Meghan Gallacher alludes to.
As I have said previously, this is not only about trying to deal with the immediate term, when Brexit, among other things, has had a detrimental impact on workforce availability; it is about the medium to longer term. Front and centre of that is unpacking a situation in which thousands of young people each year enter and, in large numbers, pass construction courses of varying types in our colleges, but only about 15 per cent go on to work in the sector. We need to get to the bottom of that. I hope that that gives Meghan Gallacher a degree of reassurance about how seriously we should treat that.
A number of members want to ask supplementary questions. I doubt that I will get through all of them, but I will do my best.
I have supported the construction skills demonstrations delivered by the Scottish Traditional Building Forum since 2013, and I welcome the construction pathway, including the delivery of a national 5 creative industries pilot at Wester Hailes high school. The nat 5 created parity with academic qualifications, so I welcome that it has been expanded in this academic year to include Currie community high school.
Ask a question.
Would the minister consider meeting the Scottish Traditional Building Forum to discuss a long-term and sustainable model for delivery to help young people across Scotland to benefit from that opportunity?
Yes.
In June, I hosted a parliamentary reception for the National Federation of Roofing Contractors, which was well supported by MSPs from across the chamber. Speakers at the event highlighted the personal challenges for apprentices in getting to college for training purposes, which I have raised with the minister previously. In my South Scotland region, some apprentices are forced to complete a four-hour daily commute to undertake college-based training. Does the minister think that that is acceptable and equitable, and what can be done about it?
I am well aware of the instance that Carol Mochan refers to. From my conversations with the Construction Industry Training Board, which has been very receptive on the issue, there is a recognition that we need to get smaller employers to come together to assure individual training providers—whether they are colleges or the private sector—that they can provide a critical mass of students in a locality and, thereafter, a pipeline of students. If they do that, I know that colleges are willing to consider running courses in more places, but we need both of those things to come together.
What role will construction employers have in setting the number of apprentices, especially in the light of the recommendations in the Withers review?
Employers have input—of course they do—but they do not set the number of apprenticeships.
Why not?
That would be entirely inappropriate, but they can have input to it. However, just for Stephen Kerr’s understanding, 25.6 per cent of the apprentices that were allocated in Scotland in 2024-25 went to the construction and related occupational grouping, so a large number of apprentices are already allocated there.
I do not doubt for one moment that, if we were to increase that number, which we may well do in future, Stephen Kerr would be back in the chamber, if he is re-elected, calling for more apprentices in other sectors. The numbers point to the fact that we very much recognise the importance of construction.
With apologies to members whom I was not able to call, that concludes portfolio question time. To allow the members on the front benches to change, there will be a brief pause before we move to the next item of business.
Air ais
Motion of CondolenceAir adhart
Care (Isle of Skye)