Seòmar agus comataidhean

On the specifics of your point—this might clarify things—some interesting things arise in relation to the Aberdeenshire model of foundation apprenticeships. You might think of there being a pathway from foundation apprenticeships directly into modern apprenticeships and a proportion of young people follow that path. Foundation apprenticeships can help employers to identify people who are the right fit for their business.

An interesting thing is that the Aberdeenshire model is driving up academic performance. Young people go into that work-experience setting and realise that a school subject that they do not particularly enjoy—usually maths—is going to be essential to enabling them to pursue the career that they have now decided that they want to pursue. Anecdotal evidence from headteachers suggests that that has led to an uptick in academic performance, and we are seeing a sizeable number of foundation apprentices going to university. So, although there is a degree of read-across, it is not necessarily the case that someone who does a foundation apprenticeship will go into a modern apprenticeship. The beauty of the Aberdeenshire system is that it is wide-ranging and offers many opportunities for young people across a range of career choices.

The other thing about the Aberdeenshire model is that the council part funds it—there is a large contribution from SDS, but that has been reducing over time. Funnily enough, I am quite drawn to that arrangement because this Parliament’s budget already funds local authorities to educate those young people, and there is some value in having some degree of co-funding if we are to maintain or expand the foundation apprenticeship model. However, as I said earlier, we have been closely examining the vocational offering that is also available in the later stages of school education, because we need to look at both of those aspects if we are going to get the system right.

I should also add that I had a really useful session with the school leaders forum. The innovative, forward-thinking leaders of our schools who sit on that forum have different views on what foundation apprenticeships, or whatever they are to be called, might look like going forward and how we could best introduce them. The situation around that is a work in progress. I am not going to sit here and say that we will do X, Y or Z, but I hope that it is a further illustration of the depth of thinking that has gone into getting the approach right.

Once that is done, we will be able to move at greater pace.

No, but he did say what I have just said, and I would echo it. The SFC has a new chief executive, and we are about to have a new chair. We will transfer across the expertise of the senior staff in SDS who deal with apprentices, and we have an opportunity this year to enhance the board. There are a number of board appointments to be made and that, self-evidently, will involve people with expertise in employer engagement. We will start with some of the evidence that the committee has received, but there are other possibilities, too.

The organisation will be bolstered numbers-wise and expertise-wise, and I have absolutely no doubt that it is capable of dealing with these matters. Indeed, it is committed to doing so. It has been working with the Government over a period and is already looking at what that might look like in practice. Hopefully, the Parliament will pass the bill at stage 1, and we will have a period of between now and implementation to ramp things up at pace.

I understand the point that you are making, Mr Rennie, about some of the challenges in the college and university sectors and so on, and I am not going to pretend that this is not a challenging time all round, but I go back to what I said before. The bill was a good idea at the time—it was well supported, and the principles in the consultation were supported, too—and it remains a good idea. In fact, it is, in some regards, even more important now that we progress the bill.

I do not accept that it is a distraction. It is a necessary piece of work that needs to be carried out to knock the post-16 landscape into the kind of shape that we need it to be in for the future of the country, both for the benefit of our learners and for the needs of the economy. It is an essential piece of work that needs to take place, and we can and will do that while dealing with the day job.

I go back to what I said to you: in the consultation, there was 80 per cent support for the move. We are hearing a bit of a conflation of certain current challenges, which I fully accept are significant, with the need to do this. People fundamentally recognised and were in favour of the need for this move, and they have taken the opportunity presented by the bill to highlight their current challenges and issues. Fundamentally, the need for this bill—and the change that it brings—remains.

I will bring in Andrew Mott to talk about the drafting of the legislation.

I have made a commitment with regard to the Government’s view of the importance of apprenticeships. If, in your stage 1 report, there were a view that you would want to see something in the bill that reinforced that, I would be happy to consider it, convener.

From my perspective—that is, from the position of a minister who is absolutely committed to apprenticeships and who sees this growing, not reversing—I do not see a problem there. If we look at the appetite for earn-as-you-learn models, the move being made in the university sector towards having more graduate apprenticeships and wanting to enhance them, and the needs of the economy, we see that there is a direction of travel. Because of the cost of living crisis, it is more challenging for young people to embark on some of those courses. Therefore, I envisage more of an emphasis on earn-as-you-learn models.

I do not see an issue at all here, but if the committee were to take the view that it would like some reassurance, we would be happy to consider that.

In terms of the money, yes, but in terms of presence in the new SFC, that will be massive, too.

In what sense?

The bill is not about providing leadership for the organisations that currently exist. On the back of the Withers review, we have spent a long time exploring what works well in the system and what does not work so well. The bill provides an opportunity to come at that from a fresh direction.