Chamber and committees

I appreciate that, and I understand the point about leaving specific numbers for the targets to the strategy, but do you not recognise the importance of setting out what the ambition is in legislation? It is common practice to define what an ambition is through targets. I take the point about some of the specific language, but should there not be something about targets in the bill, with the level of those targets then being set in the strategy?

I lodged amendment 84 on the back of various different bits of work that I have been doing. When I visited one of the Gaelic schools in Glasgow, I was most struck by the teachers’ explanations about the time that it takes for them to translate some materials into Gaelic in order for their young people to access the materials that they need in order to do the best that they can do in their exams and throughout their education.

On that basis, my amendment 84 would put a duty on the examinations boards in Scotland to provide such materials for GME, so that young people who are learning through the medium of Gaelic have as much support as those who are learning through the medium of English. That is why I lodged the amendment.

I thank the Deputy First Minister for setting that out. This is probably not the time or the place to go through my concerns about that particular body and that bill.

However, I will say that the duty that my amendment 84 would provide is slightly broader than the duty that is proposed in the education bill. In my understanding, the education bill clarifies the existing duty around the qualifications body to consider making materials available—it effectively tidies up that duty for the purposes of the bill. However, in practice, that duty is not enough, because teachers and staff in schools are not made to provide other materials in addition to that.

To strengthen what is required, given how important it is that all the material be available, it is not enough that there be a duty in the education bill—notwithstanding the fact that it has not yet gone through the Parliament. It is not just the exam papers themselves that schools are having to translate, but some of the material that supports young people to do the best that they can in their exams, which takes up a lot of time and, in some cases, money.

On the basis of the clarification that the Deputy First Minister set out, I am content to withdraw amendment 81. I will press amendment 82, which I am pleased that the Government is minded to support. For completeness, we will also support the other amendments in the group.

Amendment 81, by agreement, withdrawn.

Amendment 82 moved—[Pam Duncan-Glancy]—and agreed to.

Amendment 83 moved—[Ross Greer]—and agreed to.

Section 12, as amended, agreed to.

Section 13—Guidance to public authorities relating to Gaelic education

Amendment 57 moved—[Ross Greer]—and agreed to.

Section 13, as amended, agreed to.

Section 14—Directions to education authorities relating to Gaelic education

Amendment 58 moved—[Kate Forbes]—and agreed to.

Section 15 agreed to.

Section 16—Duty to promote Gaelic education in exercising functions under the Education (Scotland) Act 1980

I am minded to support the amendment. I am keen to know what conversations the member has had with further and higher education institutions about the matter and about the implications for their work of explicitly bringing them within that provision.

Just for clarity, would you consider defining targets differently in the bill, or do you think that there should be no targets in the bill?

For clarity, can you confirm that you think that it is important that there are still local approaches to other strategies, giving voice to the views of local people, communities and organisations, and that the intention of the amendments is simply to clarify that there is a national strategy?

I am minded to support the amendments, given the committee’s conclusions on that aspect, but I have a couple of questions. Will you set out why the financial resolution came so late? Why is the power specifically needed in this bill? In the ordinary workings of Parliament, the Government can, through the budget process, allocate finance to whatever it wants, in effect. It would be helpful to have clarity on those points.

The amendments in the group are to recognise that, in Scotland, when we take pride in our teaching profession and in the standards to which teachers work, many of those standards are supported and guided by legislation and by standards set out by the General Teaching Council for Scotland.

As it stands, the bill does not fully recognise those standards. It is unclear how the standards around Gaelic that are proposed in the bill will relate to the way in which the GTCS carries out its functions on the standards relating to education more broadly. Amendments 81 and 82 seek to clarify that.

Amendment 81 sets out the standards of education and training that are appropriate for schoolteachers and the conduct and professional competence that are expected of teachers as per the GTCS standards. Amendment 82 requires the Government to make sure that the General Teaching Council for Scotland is consulted. The amendment would make that explicit; it would clarify and preserve the approach that we have had in Scotland for some time, which recognises graduate professional teachers.

I move amendment 81.

Can the Deputy First Minister make it clear that she is prepared to consider the matter and address it at stage 3?