Seòmar agus comataidhean

I will use that answer to pose a question to others on the panel. What is the role of the profession in the new body? A lot of the criticism—which also predates the pandemic and has included reports to the committee—is that the current SQA has been hostile to the feedback and input of the teaching profession. How could we structure the new organisation and what could the governance arrangements be in order to address the concern that, at the moment, teachers are not heard or respected by the body?

Peter, go for it.

Convener, is there time for one more question?

It sounds as though the most important response is that of the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills and the minister, which have been broadly pretty warm. You certainly seem optimistic about that.

What do you detect the response from within the system to be? Part of your report is—entirely fairly—pretty critical of elements of the system and of how they communicate and interact with each other. Part of the discussion with the previous panel of witnesses was about the issue that overrides a lot of education reform at the moment—that might be an unfair way of putting it, but you will get what I mean—which is that the people who have been responsible for a system that has come under a lot of criticism are then responsible for changing that system. If they do not buy into and do not accept the premise of the need for change, we can end up with a rebranding exercise rather than the more fundamental changes that are required. What responses have you picked up from those who are involved in delivering the system as it currently stands?

Greg Dempster, do you want to come in on Education Scotland? I do not mean to cut Pauline Walker off if she has a comment on the NQB.

I hope that it will be brief, convener.

On the point that a couple of you have made about local authorities top slicing your budgets, I presume that, for local authorities, the theory behind doing so is that they are able to recruit quality improvement officers and others who can provide additional value to you. However, it does not sound like you feel that you are getting a lot of additional value from what authorities are spending that top slicing on. Is it fair to read that into your comments?

I strongly agree with Janet Brown’s point about the importance of rhetoric and Gordon Stobart’s point about wider communication skills. However, I would be interested in your thoughts on whether those are the kind of skills that need to sit inside a subject silo such as English.

A lot of employers tell us that they do not need to know that somebody was able to get a B grade in higher English; they need to know that that person can communicate with their team, work colleagues and customers. Are those not exactly the kind of skills that Professor Hayward’s recommendations around the diploma could recognise? You can be recognised for your communication skills and your ability to persuade without having done three 50-minute periods of English a week leading up to that exam. Actually, we need to recognise those kinds of skills in a more holistic sense rather than get trapped in the subject silos that lead us to all the issues that were talked about, such as BGE just becoming a diluted version of senior phase.

Thank you for that. Is it the Government’s position that the money that has not yet been distributed through either the recycling improvement fund or other capital investment in local authorities will be sufficient for implementation of the code of practice plus that you are talking about and that the money that has been invested so far should be sufficient for them to comply with the existing voluntary code of practice—obviously, most local authorities are not complying with it, and we will talk about why in a moment—and the money that is still to be distributed will be sufficient to meet the additional infrastructure requirements on local authorities?

Thank you very much. That is useful.

My final point in that area is about fixed-penalty notices for littering and the point that local authorities make around cost recovery there, which was pointed out a few moments ago. The FM assumes that 100 per cent of fines will be paid whereas some local authorities say that it is only 10 to 15 per cent. Again, I am interested in whether you could speak to that a little more and specifically to what conversations you have had with local authorities about why the payment rate for the existing fixed-penalty notice system is so low. Nobody would expect 100 per cent—I am interested in why 100 per cent is in the FM—but 10 per cent to 15 per cent seems to be remarkably low. Presumably, there are specific barriers in place that Government wants to help local authorities to remove.

Thanks very much. What is the timescale for the research that you mentioned, and how will that feed into the strategy? I completely understand why the Government would not want to concede that fines are not being paid, but fines are not being paid. The financial memorandum works on the assumption that they are, so we need to take into account whether the additional measures that you are developing, which the research will, we hope, inform, and which the strategy will deliver on to help local authorities increase the payment rate, will be in place in time for the additional fixed-penalty notice powers coming into place. If they are not, clearly, we will not get close to the 100 per cent payment. It would be good if we understood the timescale for that a little bit more.