Meeting of the Parliament 18 December 2024
I will come on to explain the position that my party will take this evening, and I will allude to the committee’s recommendations.
Reform is essential. Last week, statistics showed that 40 per cent of pupils in Scotland have additional support needs but that, at the same time, the number of ASN teachers has fallen. In addition, they showed that one in three children are absent from school and, far from recruiting more teachers, teacher numbers are falling. On top of that, they also showed that exam results have declined this year and that the attainment gap is the widest on record for highers and advanced highers.
Everything is going in the wrong direction, but opportunities are being denied. It is of huge regret that the bill does not address the scale and reality of decline. It is not just me saying that. The Educational Institute of Scotland has said:
“it is difficult to see how it will provide the necessary separation of functions to deliver the independence, and importantly the perception of independence, required to build professional and public trust in the new body.”
In addition, the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland said that the bill will
“barely move us forward in addressing deeper issues impacting the provision of education”.
Furthermore, in a parent survey by Connect, a parent said that the bill feels little more than a rebrand of the SQA.
In the face of all that critique, I am afraid that the Government’s response to the committee report is disappointing. I welcome the cabinet secretary’s indication that she will work with all parties, but she will need to move on from her response to the committee if that is to be meaningful engagement.
Fundamentally, though, I am concerned that the bill that the Government has introduced fails to deliver on its stated purpose. The Government says that that purpose is to create an organisational infrastructure for education in Scotland that more effectively supports the system. In not splitting the accreditation function from the qualifications body, it does not achieve that aim.
The overwhelming evidence to the committee suggested that responsibility for accreditation should not sit with the new body. The cabinet secretary, in her written response, said:
“The Scottish Government undertook a full exploration of alternative locations for the accreditation function.”
However, the Government has not yet explained why the different bodies considered would not be suitable alternatives. It beggars belief that the Government appears to have come to that conclusion on the strength of advice that was commissioned from the chair of the SQA. The splitting of the accreditation function will be vital if Scottish Labour is to support the bill at stage 3.
The Government also says that the intention through the bill is to support the right balance of responsibility and autonomy between different parts of the system, but the bill does not do that either. The balance is all wrong. Crucial voices are left out of the proposed learner and teacher committees, the charters lack teeth and there is no clear link between the strategic advisory committee and the interest committees. The absence of representation for teaching trade unions on the board of the new qualifications body will risk trust falling before the body is even set up and is unacceptable.