Meeting of the Parliament 25 June 2025
First, the bill will not abolish the SQA, which is exactly why we will not vote for it. Secondly, we worked with the Government to try to improve the bill because we know that, if it is enacted, it will have a massive impact on children and young people in Scotland. It is our job as parliamentarians and legislators to scrutinise the Government’s legislation. The Government may not like the fact that we propose amendments and sometimes win them, but I am afraid that that is just how the Parliament works. We did our best to make the bill one that could be supported, but we cannot support a bill that does not abolish the SQA.
For the fullest consideration, there is much more in the letter from Unite the Union that the cabinet secretary has quoted that the Parliament should hear. As well as saying that accreditation staff have endured over four years of uncertainty—not just during the immediate scrutiny of the bill—the letter says:
“As detailed in our evidence submitted at Stage 1, our members’ preference would have been to have an independent Regulatory and Accreditation Body”.
It goes on to say that,
“Given that the optimal position of an independent Regulator has been removed from consideration”,
its members
“believe that further independence”
has to now be achieved
“with minimal disruption”.
The Government’s dither and delay has ground down staff and let pupils down. Instead of abolishing the SQA, the bill will allow the current leadership to transfer wholesale. On whether key functions will be properly separated from the qualifications body, Scotland’s young people are being told, “Not yet”.
We were told that the bill would rebuild confidence in Scottish education, but confidence comes from credibility, and credibility comes from clarity, independent scrutiny and transparency. That is what all the reviews suggested, that is what Professor Muir recommended, that is what the Educational Institute of Scotland told MSPs, and that is what witnesses told the Education, Children and Young People Committee. Incidentally, it is also what the cabinet secretary committed at stage 2 to delivering, but she has not delivered it. After months of scrutiny, all that we have is a review.
We need a qualifications system that is fit for the future—one that respects the efforts of learners, supports the judgment of teachers and earns the trust of employers and universities. We need a curriculum that is broad and inclusive, and we need an inspectorate that can challenge where necessary, but also celebrate excellence. On that point, I am pleased that the Government has delivered on the independence of the inspectorate.
When it comes to reform, this is a job that is unfinished. We should not have needed a review to be put in legislation. That work should have been done in advance—indeed, it should have been done the first time, when John Swinney tried. However, that work was not done then and the current cabinet secretary has not done the work either. We desperately need a system that is transparent, accountable and, above all, independent—one in which the SQA is abolished and scrutiny is protected. The bill does not do those things and that is why we cannot support it.
Education is the first duty of any nation that calls itself just. That is why we lodged constructive amendments at every stage of the process—some with the Government’s support—that were designed to strengthen the bill. Although some of them were accepted, the Government has left reform unfinished with a bill that does not deliver. A review is not a new regulator; a consultation is not a commitment; and action delayed, however well intentioned, is action denied.
Education reform cannot be delivered on foundations that are half built. Therefore, Scottish Labour cannot support the bill. That is not because we do not want reform but because we do, and the bill fails to deliver that. Scotland’s young people deserve better than this.
20:17