Seòmar agus comataidhean

Of course.

I apologise for going back to something that I raised earlier, cabinet secretary, but it was great to hear the commitment to on-going consideration of whether further resource is required to assist local authorities with their planning processes. Can you indicate whether that is also the case for the Scottish Government and its agencies, particularly Marine Scotland and NatureScot? For example, more resource may be required to speed up the process and provide a greater number of individuals with the necessary expertise. Is that on your mind?

I appreciate that the growth in offshore and marine renewables, in particular, is moving at a pace that is perhaps out of kilter with the time that is required to build up the expertise, so there is a challenge there. I am glad that you are focused on making a difference in that regard.

Before I ask my question, I want to say something—I note that it is anecdotal—in response to what the cabinet secretary said earlier about conditions and wanting to address some of the profession’s concerns about them. Her points on that were really well made. During the pay dispute, the vast majority of the emails that I received as a constituency MSP were about conditions rather than about pay.

I agree that taking the teaching profession with us, so to speak, on reform is so important. I, too, was working in a school when curriculum for excellence was introduced. The anecdotal feedback then was that it had perhaps been slightly rushed, due mainly to political pressure. All of us would be well served, and would serve our constituents better, if we were to keep that in mind. I agree that we should work towards reform at a reasonable pace, but we should do so in a way that considers the pressures on the profession. Those were important points that you made, cabinet secretary.

I turn to the question that I originally wanted to ask, which relates to the fact that reform is not just about practicalities and processes but about approaches and attitudes. We have heard much about parity of esteem through the various reports that have been published and through our discussions and evidence sessions. Achieving such parity is so important in meeting 21st century needs and achieving wider reform in the area. How is the Government ensuring that parents, carers and family members have a better understanding of the various learning pathways and opportunities available for children and young people, such as going into apprenticeships or the workplace as an alternative to further and higher education? How can we change the unhelpfully prejudiced view in our society that some routes are better than others? We have done a lot in that space, but we need to do more.

I agree with that and with your points about the need for consistency—the minister made the same points last week—and for young people to be aware of what is available to them. That is the crucial next step.

What is the projection for 2024-25?

There have been some questions and discussion about the potential reduction in numbers in the 2024-25 budget, but it is important, for context, to consider the provision that there has been in recent years. Cabinet secretary, you said that, in the 2021-22 financial year, a record number of Scottish students were state funded to go to higher education institutions in Scotland. Do you want to put a number on that? We are talking about tens of thousands of young people having a state-funded opportunity in Scotland that is not available elsewhere in the UK. Indeed, it would be useful and interesting for members to hear the numbers for 2022-23 and 2023-24.

Do you have an approximate figure? In recent days, I have heard the figure of between 38,000 and 40,000 quoted in media sources.

As a society, we need to be more comfortable with different positive destinations. I go back to the earlier discussion around the number of university places, which has been part of the public discourse in the past few days. If more young people go into apprenticeships or directly into the workplace because that is the right route to enable them to flourish, we need to be comfortable with the fact that that may have an impact on the numbers of young people who go to university. That is not necessarily a negative thing.

We are at the beginning—well, we are not at the beginning; the situation has developed to a reasonable extent, but we have some way to go in order to get to a place where we, as a society, celebrate whatever a young person thinks is best for them and their abilities, and help them on their journey.

Good morning. Thank you for your time and your submissions.

Before I ask my questions, I draw members’ attention to my registered interest as a solicitor on the roll of Scottish solicitors and as a previously practising, now non-practising, member of the Law Society of Scotland.

This is all about the climate crisis and the biodiversity crisis on a larger scale, but for the constituencies that we represent and the communities whom we serve, it is about quality of place, quality of the local environment and quality of life. What interests me about the wider issue is the question how we make improvements together. I take SEPA’s point about working collaboratively. I have certainly seen that in my constituency at the Seafield waste water treatment works, for example, on which Professor Parsons and SEPA have been engaged. We have seen improvement through collaboration without the need for legal process.

There are questions, however, about access to justice in order to make improvements. I am open-minded about the idea of an environmental court. I know that Dr Fifield has been involved in considerations of the Water of Leith basin in my constituency: thank you for that.

What are the panel’s views on the need for an environmental court in Scotland? Do we really need that? To what extent do you agree with the concern that has been raised by ERCS in its written evidence—that the Scottish Government’s consideration of the issue in the review did not meet the requirements of the UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Continuity) (Scotland) Act 2021, even taking into account that the Government went on to publish a further briefing on the issue and extended the consultation period? Dr Fifield seems to want to answer that question first.