Careers Service Review
The next item of business is a statement by Wendy Alexander on the Scottish Executive response to the careers services review. There will be time for questions after the statement, so I ask that there be no interventions during it.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Given that we are at the beginning of a new year, I would have hoped that the Executive would have made some new year resolutions. I am concerned about the fact that The Herald today carries most of the details of the statement on the careers service that we are about to hear from the minister—the details are already in the public domain. Will you look at that article and, on behalf of the Scottish Parliament, have a word with the Executive about the practice of giving information to the press before making a statement in the chamber, which is unfair on the Parliament?
I confess that I have not yet seen that article, but I will consider it as you have requested.
I want to make a statement setting out the key elements of the Executive's response to the Duffner committee's review of the careers service. Copies of the report and the Executive's response are being published today and will be made available directly to each member and to the Scottish Parliament information centre.
On 6 October 1999, Henry McLeish announced a review to examine the role of the careers service in Scotland and its future development. I am grateful to Barbara Duffner and the committee for the excellent report that has been produced. The Executive welcomes the report and accepts its analysis, its vision and the overwhelming majority of its 46 recommendations. The remit of the committee did not invite it to look at organisational structures but the committee's report invited the Executive to take up that challenge and we have done so in the response that we are publishing today.
The Duffner committee's report acknowledges the high degree of professionalism and commitment that is provided by the careers service's 1,000 staff across Scotland, but pointed to shortcomings in the current arrangements. Those shortcomings include: the variability in the quality of careers guidance; the lack of a consistent performance framework; the fact that too many organisations clutter the landscape; and the poor information about the skill needs of the economy. Sadly, that analysis vindicates the fears that many of us expressed when the Tories introduced the private company contracting model almost a decade ago. It appears that the arm's-length contractor model is no more appropriate for a careers service than it is for a health service or economic development services.
Our challenge is not just to deal with the poor structures; there is also the clutter. Simply understanding the current organisational arrangements is a task in itself. There are 17 careers service companies, 20 education-business partnerships, 22 adult guidance networks and 22 local learning partnerships across Scotland. This theme of confusion and clutter, inconsistency and incoherence was also highlighted by the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee in its recent report.
The fact is that, as the needs of learners and the economy changed in the past decade, we kept adding to the clutter. The result is that we have too many bodies tripping over each other, leaving school leavers, parents, other jobseekers and employers confused about where to go and whom to go to for help in today's fiercely competitive jobs market. That is the nub of the issue.
The challenge is not simply to sort out the privatised company model that the Tories left us or even to streamline the clutter. The challenge is to stay ahead of the game by recognising how the world of work has changed and how it will change further in the future. None of us can rely on making a choice at the age of 14 in an interview with our careers officer that can carry us into a job for life. Most school leavers today will also make key choices at 16, 18, 23 and a number of points later in life. Some of us in the chamber may find ourselves in need of the careers service after May 2003—personally, I would prefer to delay having to call on its services, but I will leave that to a later date. My strategy to avoid having to go to the careers service at that point is to ensure that the Executive keeps its promise to do more to ensure that every Scot is ready for the jobs of tomorrow. That is what the Duffner committee has asked us to do.
We propose a bold new solution to put Scotland at the forefront of the best careers advice for every Scot, whatever their age, background or ambition. We want all Scots to be ready for an age in which our personal prosperity—what we earn as individuals and as a nation—depends on what we learn. We propose to set up a new one-stop shop for careers advice for all Scots in every area. We will sweep away the clutter to allow one-door access to all the services currently provided by the careers service, the adult guidance networks, the education-business partnerships and the local learning partnerships. There will be a single door in every area: careers Scotland Ayrshire, careers Scotland Renfrewshire, careers Scotland Borders and so on. Each of those 22 local organisations will be part of careers Scotland, which will be a national service with national marketing, a national brand and national standards.
We are determined to commit the resources required to make that new all-age guidance service effective. We will provide £24 million additional resources over the next three years, which is a real-terms increase of 25 per cent on current budgets. That includes £9 million to develop the all-age aspect and a further £15 million to support the recommendations of the Beattie committee. Our vision is one of expansion and growth and we will build on the best of the current arrangements.
The main focus of the careers service has been young people in schools. The core purpose of education is the development of the talents and abilities of all young people to their fullest potential. Therefore, careers Scotland must improve the service to schools. Impartiality of advice will be fundamental. Close links to school-age pupils and their teachers will be at the heart of the service. There will be a national structure setting national standards based on the agreed priorities for education, which will mean that for the first time many head teachers across Scotland will know what quality of service they can expect in their school. Schools will also be able directly to influence their local careers Scotland board, which will be obliged to seek feedback from schools and pupils.
The Duffner committee also made recommendations on the need to review the education for work agenda. Jack McConnell and I are keen to take that forward, drawing on the experience of Nicol Stephen as a minister formerly in the enterprise department and now in the education department.
Our careers service was built around the world of school and the world of work. Today, however, for more and more school leavers, the transition is from school to further learning—whether at college or university or through skillseekers—and later to work. Too often, however, those other educational interests, such as colleges, universities, training organisations and community education establishments—the whole learning industry—have been left on the outside when the service was being planned. It does not make sense to cut our educators out of that planning process in an age in which more and more of us rely on learning throughout life, which is why all our educators will have their place at the heart of the new service. That is how we will make a reality of lifelong learning for more and more Scots.
We should not kid ourselves; the lifelong learning agenda is pretty complex and lots of players have a role in it. However, there has been no forum to bring together the key stakeholders so that they can make an input into the development of the careers service. We will provide national leadership through a new ministerial board, which will report directly to me or my successors. All the key stakeholder interests, including local authorities, further and higher education, employers, the Employment Service and the trade unions, will be represented. The local careers Scotland organisations will have their own advisory boards, bringing together those key partners.
I have already stated our commitment to national standards, public accountability and a public service ethic. It is also vital that those who work in the service better understand the real needs of the economy, so that they can better help those who are seeking jobs in the new world of work. That requires expert advice, rooted in a good understanding of the jobs of tomorrow. We therefore propose that the new careers Scotland service be established as a joint-venture subsidiary of Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise.
In each area, the local careers Scotland organisation will work side by side with the local enterprise company. Through that alignment between careers Scotland and the enterprise networks, we will help to ensure that, in future, learning, skills and employability are at the heart of the work of enterprise networks. The enterprise networks have already embarked on a programme of management change to eradicate overlap and bureaucracy and to make the networks more customer focused in their business support operations. Today's proposals deliver a one-door approach for skills.
Realigning 80 organisations into 22 will release resources from the support of a high organisational overhead into direct service delivery. We also envisage new web-enabled services, provided on an all-Scotland basis. For the staff of the existing 80 organisations, the proposed new structure will, for many of them, mean a return to the public sector. All relevant and appropriate staff will become employees of the enterprise networks.
Our plans will provide stability and predictability of funding, which is simply not possible under the current organisational and contractual arrangements. As employees of a national organisation, staff can expect to get opportunities for personal growth and development. The structure has to support the staff to enable the staff to deliver for their clients.
What the Executive is proposing builds on the foundations of the present careers service and on the recommendations of the Duffner committee. It is a significant undertaking. We want to provide 12-month planning, starting with a targeted consultation on these proposals, which will begin today.
There is much detail to be decided. We plan to work through all the details of the transition during the year from April 2001 to April 2002. We recognise the professionalism and commitment of the guidance staff; we want to build on that. Much work and negotiation will be required; that work will take place with the relevant trade unions. We have also invited the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee to help us to determine the detail on the way forward. We have written to the committee, inviting its members to give early consideration to the response published today; we look forward to receiving their views on how to proceed.
Let me conclude by saying what the proposals mean for Scots—at 14, when they are considering their options, at 23, when they are looking for their first job, or at 45, when they are deciding to change career direction. Our promise to all those Scots is that, within two years, we will have a world-class, one-stop-shop guidance service that helps them to discover what they want to do, how to do it and how to use those skills in tomorrow's economy.
If the Parliament endorses the Executive's plans, it will be demonstrating that Scotland is a nation that once again aspires to lead in learning and skills acquisition; a nation that is willing to act boldly in the client's interest, putting that before the provider's convenience; a nation that will commit resources to what matters; a nation that is rising to the challenge of demanding accountability and higher standards; and a nation that is committed to public service. All that will help to ensure that no one is left behind in the new Scotland and that every Scot will be ready for tomorrow's jobs. I invite colleagues to support the Executive's plans.
Before calling Kenny MacAskill, I should point out that a lot of members wish to ask questions. I therefore ask for short exchanges. We will try to get everybody in.
The Scottish National Party broadly welcomes the minister's statement, but I seek clarification on matters from the perspective not so much of the individual as of the national interest. We face serious skills and labour shortages in tourism and electronics, for example. In engineering, 100 years after we were a world leader, we also have a serious deficiency in skills and labour. Will the minister ensure, for our national interest, that the role and remit of careers Scotland will not simply be to find a job for the individual, but actively to identify and encourage youngsters and others to enter into those key, core sectors of our national economy? Although we cannot force them into employment, the new service must be proactive. Will the minister ensure that it is proactive in the years to come in identifying the areas in which we have those key, core shortages?
I whole-heartedly share Kenny MacAskill's desire for us to address more effectively the skills needs of the Scottish economy. The Scottish population is declining and we need to get better at skills matching. The question is who does that. The job of the careers service is to help people to figure out what they want to do. Once they know that, it is then the job of other providers to provide the training. The Scottish University for Industry, once we formally launch it next week, will be a major provider of skills. We have to get better at understanding the skills needs of the Scottish economy, which is something that the enterprise networks also need to do better. We must ensure that careers Scotland and the advice that it gives are impartial.
Our vision is that careers Scotland will help people to figure out what they want to do, that the University for Industry will help to provide people with the relevant skills and that Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise, working with employers, will better identify the skills needs of the Scottish economy. That will improve job matching in the way that we all expect.
I suppose that I should start by congratulating the minister on avoiding the use of the word "rebranding". I welcome her statement and her courtesy in circulating it beforehand, so as to allow us to respond. The Conservatives welcome many of the measures that she has announced this morning. It is a shame, however, that she dismissed the private sector so cavalierly. That always makes me wonder—if it is good enough for National Air Traffic Services, why is it not good enough for the careers service?
We have some reservations about the proposals for the new structure. Given the weaknesses in governance that were recently exposed in the Scottish Qualifications Authority fiasco, exactly what governance role will the specialist boards be expected to play? How will the minister maintain accountability? On measures of effectiveness, what performance measures would the minister find appropriate, and over what time scale?
One of the major recommendations that we welcome is the widening of the client base and the enshrining of the principle of free access to all. We note that, although the Executive accepts that principle, the response does not commit it to providing free access to all; it merely notes that the cost implications need to be established. At what cost level can we look forward to free access for all? To put it another way, is the provision of guidance limited to the £9 million of funding that was announced today?
The first of Nick Johnston's three points was on governance. Careers Scotland will be responsible to the lifelong learning minister, but it is important to bring all the stakeholders together for the first time. That will be done through a national supervisory board. There will also be local supervisory boards. We rejected the option of creating a new quango, judging that to be inappropriate. We also rejected the option of turning people back into civil servants and the option of leaving them all out in the private sector. We think that we have come up with the optimal governance arrangements for the sake of public accountability, but think that those arrangements will allow the new service to work closely with partners and help to make the labour market work more effectively in the interests of the client.
On the future distribution of resources, we have resisted coming up with a formula for funding the new careers Scotland organisations. It seems to us that, critically, the new supervisory board, with all stakeholder interests represented on it, will want to take a view on how the 25 per cent increase in resources over the next three years should be spent. Indeed, today I will write to those organisations that we envisage will be represented on the supervisory boards to ask them to be involved over the next 12 months in a steering committee to consider resource distribution early on.
On free access, at the moment, if someone who is not 14 or 16 walks through the door of a careers service and asks for advice, almost every careers service in Scotland will, to their immense credit, try to help that individual. We recognise that there are an awful lot of committed professionals who are trying to help all Scots; we will now make it their mission to do so. We will provide an additional £9 million for that function and an additional £15 million to help those who have special needs in the labour market. On costing free access, the answer is that we will seek to help people who walk through the door. However, the real challenge is to encourage more Scots to walk through the door; this is not about whether there is enough money to go around.
I welcome the minister's statement, and in particular the announcement of an extra £24 million for the careers service, which plays an important role in developing our young people and guiding them on their future careers.
I would like clarification on two points. First, the minister said which partners would be involved in the local advisory boards, but who will decide who is represented on the boards? Will the minister decide that or will there be some other mechanism?
Secondly, will all members of staff who are currently employed in the private sector automatically transfer to the public sector or will they have to reapply for their jobs? Obviously, many of those members of staff will be alarmed by today's announcement unless reassurance is given on how their careers will pan out.
I will comment first on the composition of local advisory boards. At the moment, we issue guidance suggesting that the membership of the local boards for the careers service should be split 50:50 between employers and local government. We are saying that in future we want the character of those boards to be tripartite: a third of board members will represent the school education and local authority interest; a third will represent the lifelong learning interest—universities and colleges—which has not hitherto been at the table; and a third will represent employers. In the past, the boards have operated to general guidelines and it will of course be a matter for the national stakeholders to decide whether they need to go any further than simply giving guidance to that effect. I hope that guidance will be sufficient, because I think that the principle of a tripartite structure will be widely welcomed.
The reassurance for staff lies in the fact that more than 1,000 individuals who are currently in the private sector will have the opportunity to be part of a national organisation in the context of a 25 per cent real-terms increase in resources. As the transition takes place over the next year, we will want if possible to avoid a situation in which people have to reapply for their jobs. The details are a matter for the implementation over the next year, but there is no desire to force a widespread reapplication if that is not appropriate, although it may be necessary in some cases.
I welcome the minister's statement. I am sure that it will be welcomed by everybody who is involved in careers development in Scotland. An effective careers service offering coherent guidance for people of all ages is becoming ever more important as the knowledge economy develops. Will the minister expand on what the proposals will mean for the staff of the careers companies? Is it likely that the changes will result in an enhanced career path for them?
I think that the changes represent a very exciting prospect for staff. At the moment, staff are scattered among 80 organisations. One of the tragedies of the past decade, in which there has been an 80-contract model, is that it has been difficult for staff to move between different organisations or for there to be a national structure of continuing professional development. There is no doubt that establishing a national organisation will create circumstances in which the professionalism of staff is enhanced and recognised, and in which continuing professional development is available to allow staff to put more services on the web and enhance their personal mentoring role. The fact that staff will not be spread around 80 organisations but will be focused in a central organisation is an exciting development.
Clearly, every party is giving a general welcome to the proposals. As convener of the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee, I say on its behalf that we agreed yesterday to respond positively to the minister's request for our input to the discussion paper.
I will highlight two points. First, a welcome aspect of the proposals is that, for the first time in a long time, we will have a national adult guidance service covering the whole country. Will the minister consider focusing at least some of the additional funding on adult guidance, which is grossly under-resourced or even non-existent in many parts of the country? In talking about lifelong learning, we should recognise in particular that people aged over 45, who are the hard core of the long-term unemployed, need assistance to find new jobs and training and education.
Secondly, one of the benefits and strengths of the careers service is that it provides advice, counselling, guidance and placement. Will the minister clarify her view on the need to maintain all four services? Will she consider the co-location of careers offices with one-stop shops for benefits and with jobcentres? One of the problems of the careers service, particularly in relation to adults, has been the divorce of the local careers service from the jobcentre and the Benefits Agency.
I thank Alex Neil's committee for flagging up in its report last summer the need to deal with the clutter. I welcome the fact that the committee will participate in the consultation within the tight time scale that we have set.
Alex Neil referred to the all-age aspect of our proposals. In England and Wales, there is a generalised youth advisory service rather than the all-age service that we think is so critical to raise the competitiveness of the Scottish nation and to support all Scots.
Alex Neil also raised the issue of placement. In its 46 recommendations, the Duffner committee has suggested that the placement role should revert to the Employment Service. The Executive has supported that recommendation, but we will keep an open mind during the consultation period and look forward to hearing people's views on that.
On co-location, as Alex Neil will know, one of the exciting developments that is taking place this year is the integration in the new working agency of the Employment Service and the Department of Social Security. It is undoubtedly encouraging that that process is running parallel to the creation of careers Scotland. I think that people on the ground will take advantage of the opportunities for closer co-operation and working.
The minister said that no one would be left behind in the new Scotland. I will test that statement in two ways. First, in response to the various points that have been made about staffing levels, the minister's response has been at best lukewarm. She said that she hoped that no one would have to reapply for their job but could not guarantee that that would not happen. She also said that the career prospects of some staff would be enhanced. That certainly does not mean that the jobs of those staff who, according to her statement, are not particularly relevant will be secure. From her previous life as a management consultant, can she tell us whether jobs are usually added or lost when agencies are joined together? Will the overall number of people working in the service increase or decrease?
Secondly, in October 1999, I asked the minister's predecessor whether national guidance was given on dealing with clients with learning disabilities and whether there were national standards for that. The answer was that the position varied between the various networks. Do the guidelines that are being introduced refer to clients with learning disabilities and special needs? If not, why not?
Dearie me, Duncan—do not be so negative and mealy-mouthed. The implication of arguing that we are scaremongering by saying that there might be some consequence for some member of staff is that we should not change anything. Let me be clear: there are 1,200 members of staff, 1,000 of whom are scattered around a variety of organisations that the Tories created. We are recognising the public service ethic of their work and we are giving them the chance to become national employees once again, with a national career development structure. Moreover, we are adding 25 per cent to the budget over the next three years.
I am absolutely clear that I would like all those people who dedicate their professional lives to the careers service to continue to have a role in that. However, it would be a stupid minister who said to any of the organisations at the moment or in the future that everybody will do the same job as they do now. A lot of careers service work involves lifting information off shelves to try to help people. We can put all that information on the web; when we do so, those 1,200 professionals will be able to offer a different, better and enhanced service through personal mentoring.
On whether I will personally guarantee that everybody's job will be exactly the same, no, I will not guarantee that no job will change, because Scotland needs us all to do different and better jobs. However, I do not expect that the majority of positions will have to be reapplied for. Whether all 1,200 people will do exactly the same job is a matter for the transition teams over the next 12 months; it is not the sort of promise that anyone should try to extract from a minister.
What impact does the minister think that careers Scotland will have at a local delivery level on the adult guidance service and what impact will it have on helping to promote a culture of lifelong learning, especially among those who currently feel excluded from education and training?
We very much hope that by creating an all-age service we will transform adult guidance in Scotland. One of the problems is that no employer knows whether the adult guidance network is going to be around this year, next year or the year after. They do not know whether the education-business partnerships or the local learning partnerships will be around next year or the year after. It is important to bring all those organisations together, to make all-age guidance a statutory responsibility and to ensure security of funding for the long term, which is not the case in adult guidance at the moment.
The minister said that we would have a one-stop shop with career advice for all. However, as we will have 22 local organisations, which is less than one for every council, I presume that the structure will be completely different. Will there be access to the service in every council area other than through the web?
The minister said that a third of the advisory board would come from the schools sector, a third from higher and further education and a third from employers. One of our biggest needs in Scotland is for retraining. Where are the Scottish Council of National Training Organisations, the Engineering and Marine Training Authority and the other national training organisations in this—are they players or not?
I welcome the opportunity to clarify the structure. We envisage the involvement of the whole learning industry, including learning organisations, schools, colleges, SCONTO and the employers. It is essential to recognise that, while people are educated at school, lifelong learning must be also be represented at the table, which it is not at present, as must employers.
Currently, the careers service is organised according to local enterprise company areas; we intend that that should continue to happen. There are 22 LEC areas in Scotland. The reason why there are 17 careers service companies at the moment is that, in Highland, five LEC areas have chosen to co-operate to attain economies of scale. We are anxious that, during the consultation, those involved in the service in Highland should choose whether they want to be in discrete organisations or to continue to collaborate—in a year's time, there will either be 22 organisations, one for each LEC area, or 17 organisations if those five areas choose to continue to co-operate. We will listen carefully to their representations on what would best suit their needs.
Wendy Alexander has just answered the question that I was going to ask. I welcome the commitment to better links between the careers service and careers guidance teachers; perhaps I can arrange to meet Nicol Stephen to discuss that.
That gives me the opportunity to say that, as I hinted in my statement, the one area in the Duffner report that we are not building into the new careers Scotland is the education for work agenda—what is done in schools to assist young people to understand the world of work. That is an important area, which Jack McConnell and I have discussed. We are so keen to take it forward that we think that it needs a fresh look by a minister. As Maureen Macmillan indicates, Nicol Stephen is uniquely equipped to do that, as he is familiar with the enterprise and the education departments.
My question is about school leavers, who will continue to be major users of the service. At the moment, most pupils just go down the corridor for an appointment with the careers adviser. How easy will it be for them to access that advice via the more remote careers Scotland offices? Can the minister assure schools and pupils that they will continue to be a priority and that no new barriers will be created for young people who are seeking careers advice?
I give exactly that assurance. When we talk about a one-stop shop, we mean bringing together the four organisations, but that does not imply that the location of advisers necessarily changes. Indeed, by bringing together the careers service with the education-business partnerships, we hope to diminish some of the barriers. The most important assurance for school leavers is that at present, in the absence of any national standards, no head teacher, parent or pupil knows what standard of service they have the right to expect, whereas, with the establishment of the national ministerial board, the national education priorities published by Jack McConnell earlier this year will be at the heart of the service. For the first time, teachers, parents and pupils everywhere in Scotland will know what they have the right to expect from the service—it will not be left to the whim of individual private sector companies.
The minister will be aware of the unique structure of the careers service in North Lanarkshire and South Lanarkshire, where the councils provide benefits in kind through facilities and employee support. Will the minister tell us the outcome of any discussion of those areas in relation to the planned new structure?
In Glasgow and Lanarkshire, employees of the careers service have continued to be employed by local government and those local authorities have made a large contribution in kind to the service through premises and other benefits. It is right that the future funding arrangements should recognise the in-kind contributions that some local authorities have made to try to preserve a public service ethos in the service.
The logic of the minister's answer to Duncan Hamilton's question was that, without the web, professionals in the careers service could not provide a service. Surely, if they are professionals, it is because they can bring together information and give advice. I do not believe that the minister wished to demean those professionals. Will she take the opportunity to correct the impression that she gave?
Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to launch the web-enabling service of Grampian Careers, which I commend as an outstanding example of a careers service that has put its information on the web. That means that, at the touch of a key, the information is directly available to parents, teachers and anybody else who comes in, thus freeing the careers service staff to enhance their professionalism by moving into personal mentoring and support for individuals—they no longer have to do some of the tasks that the web can make easier. It would be a sad day if, in talking about equipping every Scot for tomorrow's jobs, we said that we were not going to take advantage of the opportunities that the web offers in providing services.